Equanimity

Perhaps if while you meditate someone is there telling you things. I mean, that is perhaps. In hypnosis you have someone telling you things. Someone utilizes your open state for a purpose.

So you call it proof. When he points out it is not proof but rather an appeal to the authority of some guy who wrote a blog, you now call it a clue.
See, again, this is where one acknowledges the other person is correct.

NOtice what happened. You say you can’t be creative if you have lost control of emotions, then you give examples of extemely creative people who had strong emotions, even to a problematic level. You just slide over the fact that you were incorrect. You move to the next point. They can be creative but it’s a bad tradeoff. Wildly oversimplified, but here’s what you did not do: admit that what you said about creativity earlier was false, even while supplying evidence it was false yourself. Then you could move on to say it was not worth it. You argue without honor.

If you have too much of the left side of the brain you will find it very difficult to operate in fluid, real-time, situations. You would have this need to predict every little movement in the environment which won’t work because real-time situations require quick decisions and deep thinking is slow – it does not occur fast enough. Sure, all else being all, it’s better to be precise in your predictions than to be imprecise, but in reality it is rarely the case that all else is equal. That’s the trade-off. The more precise your modelling of the situation is, which means the greater the number of facts it takes into account, the slower it is. So if you strive for precision and your motto is “the devil is in the details”, you will be immune to manipulation but you will suck at real-time activities (such as social activities.) You will only be able to operate under laboratory conditions. Thinking isn’t all bottom-up and it does not have to be. More facts isn’t always better than fewer facts, clarity isn’t always better than ambiguity, precision isn’t always better than imprecision, reason isn’t always better than intuition and so on.

What do you think is more fundamental?
Ambiguity or clarity?

Our kids are being introduced to this now.
youtube.com/watch?v=C2id2TcfVv8
Happiness and well-being is being redefined as a skill to be developed from early age through the eastern methods of so called mindful mediation (i.e. embracing animal state). The emphasis is not in finding solutions to actual problems but on embracing passivity and withdrawal from external world. This is how the future generation will be solving problems. The message is, there is no problem out there, the problem is in you.

It’s good news for the east, as it will find “validation” and support of its mind-dumbing mysticism through western science.
nbcnews.com/id/37157160/ns/t … ch-effort/

Let me counter you with a question: in the world of competing wills, which one is more important?

Mindful mediation does not make you passive or turn off your emotions. It’s a way to become aware of what is happening. It’s a technique for focusing.

And it’s still attached to Buddhism that was birthed by a foreign civilization, and which so happens, is also in competition for worldwide control. Despite all the claims on attaining awareness, converts seem to remain unaware of this important detail.

This is also like saying that before the West met the East Europeans did not know how to focus and be aware of their surroundings by themselves.

I want to come back to this quote by KT:

That’s how it started and was argued. (And the same thing happened with feminist movement-in that suddenly there was something wrong with being a woman as she was).
Is the West lacking in creativity? No, and history proves it. Does the West need the East to solve its problems? Someone sure wants you to think so.

Left Brain … Right Brain

Is it not a classic example of synergy? … 1+1 = 3

Not in an individual brain yet certainly within a cluster of brains … big or small.

West … East

Does the same potential for synergy exist?

Note in etymology there are many words with loose and a range of meanings, thus context is critical.

You missed the point in the above.
When I pointed out ‘the above prove you wrong’ it meant ‘Phyllo’ view i.e. ‘equanimity stifles creativity’ is wrong because there are alternative views.

I totally agree with the blog post because I have read of various researches to support my point. But for Phyllo it would be a clue and an indication since he is not likely to agree until perhaps convincing research conclusions from credible sources are produced.

Again you missed the point.

A person with a persistent emotional disorder 24/7 is not likely to be creative in any acceptable sense.

However there are people who have mental disorders who has sporadic periods [in minutes, hours or days] of mental disturbances and normalcy.
It is only during those periods of normalcy [with or without some degree of equanimity] that these people are able to exercise their creativity with recalls from the prior experiences of madness.

You accused me not being adept in basic Philosophy, but I am wondering whether you have sufficient depth and width in Philosophy.

Btw, are your aware of the Principle of Charity as in Philosophy?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

If you have sufficient knowledge and awareness, you should be aware of the limitations within a discussion in a forum like this. If you are aware of the Principle of Charity as in Philosophy you would not have make the above accusations and making a meal of it.

There are two primary techniques in meditation, i.e.

  1. Concentration - Samartha - this train the focusing
  2. Mindfulness - Vispasanna - this module the emotions and other faculties to optimal levels.

Emotions are inherent and unavoidable within the brain and mind.
The strategy is to develop or train the inhibitors via mindfulness to modulate the emotions in regulating its pulses.

Note Aristotle again,

The develop the above mental skills one need to rely on exercises in mindfulness and must be supported by steady concentration.

It is very unfortunate for you.

You are not mindful of the terrible fears that are oozing and pulsating subliminally within your subconsciousness that drive you to the above conclusions based on ignorance.

As I had stated before you criticize anything, in this case Buddhism you have to have a thorough knowledge and understanding [not necessary agreement] of Buddhism, meditation, mindfullness and other related knowledge e.g. psychology, neuroscience, and others.

Unfortunately the above view is based on a terrible level of ignorance.

Note in the video the children did an exercise in reflecting on the full experience of eating a raisin. Normally what children do is merely -see raisin, eat raisin, i.e. pure animal instincts which at present is extended to some adults, “see threats/enemies - kill enemies.”

There are tons of research on lack of impulse control.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX_oy9614HQ[/youtube]

One good result from mindfulness is to increase impulse control.

In the earlier video you linked there is a simple mindfulness exercise of eating a raisin where the children are directed to pause, think, experience, think again and keep being mindful of the whole process.
The principle is training oneself to be mindful of all one actions and whatever is going around oneself at all times to the highest degree possible.
What is critical here is the technique of ‘think, pause, think, then act’.
The ‘pause’ in this case a stop gap to enable one to take corrective actions where necessary instead of being hasty without impulse controls leading to lusts and all sorts of extreme unmodulated responses leading to terrible acts of evils to oneself and others.

What is presented in the above are very basic exercises related to mindfulness and they are effective in some ways.
To be most effective, mindfulness in Buddhism is a very serious and extensive subject which require sufficient right knowledge and constant ‘right’ practices.

Somehow you are not sufficiently mindful but is stuck with the fear generating idea of being converted to another belief for worldwide control sake.

Ideally humanity must view itself holistically.
But naturally for various reasons in reality there are the concepts of ‘The West’ and ‘The East’ which has on average relied on different paths to knowledge and wisdom.

The supposedly ‘West’ on average focus more on reason, logic, objectivity and thus enable the advent of Science which is very beneficial to humanity.
The supposedly ‘East’ emphasized on the subject and its experience holistically and spiritually which enable the individual to deal more effectively with the existential crisis.

When Science is focused on the advancement of knowledge and objects it missed out on the existential crisis and the problem of the individual.
When the individual[s] focus on their selves in dealing with the existential crisis, they overlooked the system and organized aspect of knowledge thus limited its advance in terms of scientific knowledge.

Since humanity must be holistic in every aspects, the Science of the West need to be complemented with the spirituality of the East.
It is not only from Buddhism, but there are other aspect of ‘spirituality of the self’ from other Eastern philosophies that need to be complimented with the objective knowledge of Science so that each benefit the other.

In your case, your resistance to the spirituality of the East to complement with organized objective Western Scientific knowledge is sub-optimization thus hindering the progress of humanity.
If your resistance is based on the clinging to the beliefs of a theistic religion, that is a very selfish move merely for one’s own salvation without consideration for the whole of humanity.

All I need to know is that there is no free lunch in this world, and even today’s science (unfortunately) follows the money and selfish agendas.

China’s soft power and the role of Buddhism:
youtube.com/watch?v=U5uoTT8uMyo

youtube.com/watch?v=vtMr1T9WrXI

(And nature does abhor vacuum).

Seriously??! I think you need to lay off your raisin meditation because it’s making you oblivious to how the world really works.

There is also no free lunch for you to say
“All I need to know is that there is no free lunch in this world.”

You are not mindful and not putting much effort in your hastily ‘shaft down the throat of others’ views and videos above.

The default of Science by its own nature is very neutral.
If there is any political abuse of Science, it is not Science per se but the corrupted people involved. It is due to ignorance that you are blaming Science.

Not sure what is your message re the above videos.
The Chinese Government is Communist thus do not believe in religions but at present allow the freedom for their citizens to practice religion with some limitations.
Those Buddhist conferences are organized by Buddhists and not the government.

Buddhist conferences are held all over the world by different Buddhist organizations with their belief in the core principles of Buddhism. There is no way those Buddhist conferences will convert all Buddhist to Chinese Buddhism which eventually will favor the Chinese government. If Buddhism can influence government politically, Tibet, India, Thailand and other more Buddhist Nations would have made that move.

If you can provide justifications that such exercises are useless then I will reject it.

I am well aware of how the world really works at present and a lot of improvements in required in all aspects of life. It seem you are not aware of how the world really works and more so, you are not even reasonable aware of how your own mind works, especially all those unwarranted fears that is oozing out of your brain.
I believe meditation and mindfulness are one of the useful tools to facilitate those improvement for the individual and collectively for humanity toward the future.

As you will note your lack mindfulness is represented by throwing out views without reasonable justifications but based mostly on ignorance.

The emphasis is on attaining emotional stability which is the first step towards solving problems that are out there.

Detachment and the subsequent indifference isn’t necessarily a bad thing and in many cases it is actually the right choice. There can be no ability to prioritize, to separate the relevant from the irrelevant, without such a process.

Also, “the problem is in you” mentality is the left brained mentality (of which you are more than guilty.) The West is individualistic, so it sees the cause of all problems within an individual.

I already answered that question. All else being equal, it’s better to be precise than imprecise. But in reality this “all else” is not equal. There is a trade-off. Precision makes you slow, speed makes you imprecise. So you need both.

Americans are clearly too scientific and individualistic. Also lacking in humor. Do they need the East to save them? Noone is mentioning the East except for you.

Watch the second video again, the one by CCTV (by Chinese government). It admits that its using Buddhism as a form of soft power to expand its connections around he world.

And on China’s soft power agenda: youtube.com/watch?v=R6nkFbQ_3LY

I describe the world as I see it, while you look at it through rose tinted glasses. You’re an idealist who wants to achieve utopia [slavery] through a collective lobotomy. Your descendants will be the easy pickings. They will honor and serve foreign culture and its values (at best).

Prismatic brought Buddhist notions of equanimity into the discussion (on page 3), and I spent the last few posts countering it. The Buddhist concept comes from a lie, and leads back to it. Because it is a political/religious movement it sould not be considered as an option. (Just as Islam should not be looked to and imitated in order to solve West’s problems). All these things have strings attached to them and I believe that they will serve to be self defeating in the end.

Some of your thoughts on left/right brain differences and possible autism spectrum reminded me of a curious observation.
Japanese people (who are prediminately right brained) appears to have a difficulty with a concept of irony (or sarcasm).
I have actually lost a Japanese pen pal on that account (many years back), which was very puzzling to me at a time. I made a joke in one of my letters (it was one of those wink-wink jokes), and for some reason he felt that I was attacking him. He even asked me if I was being ironic, to which I said it was just a joke. Anyone else that I knew would have laughed at it. But I guess he felt too hurt by it, and I thought he was being unusually too sensitive…oh well.
Anyway, it seems a little bit on autistic spectrum to take jokes so literally (and personally), so maybe autism is not necessarily just left brained.
On the other hand, Japan also came up with haikus, so why is it so difficult for them to understand irony and jokes?!