STUDY - Technical - New Dacian's Medicine
Human's Life - The Adult (8)
Translation Draft
I don't think I have much
time on this day (probably all week to come)... Let's see what
else we can talk about!
In one of the previous posts, we discussed the fact that everything that "guides" our inner manifestation (which goes up to the cell and genetic information) and externally is based on beliefs. But beliefs have as their starting point perception (reception and interpretation of external stimuli). And after a sum of perceptions it will invariably reach the building and then strengthening beliefs. So here we come to the need to discuss perception.
The first thing to remember is that the perceptive image is an object image (i.e. the image of an object), primary (i.e. it is constituted as a result of the direct action of stimuli on the receptors/analyzers), synthetic and integral (i.e. reflects the objects in the unity of their characteristics).
"Recognition" of what an individual perceives is done by reporting all observations/information obtained through perceptions to a perceptual scheme or a standard model, preserved, of course, in long-term memory.
If the standard model is individual, the perceived object will be recognized in its specific identity. If the standard model is categorical, the object will be identified by reporting and inclusion in the classroom, based on the characteristics common to all objects belonging to that class.
For example, by listening to a set of distant sounds, first you will realize if they belong to an animal or a human, then, as the distance decreases, you will complete your perception with more and more precise identifications: sex (e.g. the voice belongs to a woman), age (identify that the person is young), emotional state (happy smile), until the expected woman is clearly identified...
People with optimally developed perceptual schemes perform virtually instantaneous recognitions, based on the updating, from memory, of the information recorded in the standard models, whether they are individual or categorical. Even in situations where perception is more difficult, if the threshold of cognoscible minimum is exceeded, identifications are possible thanks to the functions of internal reconstitution of absent properties or attributes and correction of those wrongly noticed or represented.
Obviously, the functional patterns of perception must be formed in a certain way, must be the product of a process of processing information received from the environment by the senses, a process that has a beginning.
The most confirmed theories claim that the human body has an innate ability to organize perception according to certain rules. These rules or laws of organization are not acquired in the process of child development, but there is potential, in his psyche, from birth. It is as if the brain is specially designed to perceive a gesture or "good form", operating for this purpose with similarities (similar elements tend to be perceived grouped), proximities (neighbouring elements are considered together), closures (an incomplete figure tends to be constructed without a default), continuities (defined figures that allow one or more symmetry axes are more easily recognized as good shapes).
To all this is added the latest theories that place before any form of "acquisition" a "deposit" already transferred through the genotype and, in particular, through "previous accumulations and debts" (transmitted at the level of spirit, ego, or similar).
So, knowledge through perception becomes a particularly complex process, controlled by so many factors that, even after all, come to flesh out the first "bricks" of the edifice represented by our way of perceiving the world. But, what do you do with applying such constructed standards, what do you do with the ability to "replace" the missing elements of information at the level of the mind (and I could continue with such questions)? This is where several functioning "elements" of the mind come in.
First of all, we cannot recognize any need or quality in the other if we do not possess that characteristic (although the microcosm in each person reflects the macrocosm, that is, all of all human qualities and characteristics – it is as if every man contains all mankind within him).
This seems to be due to the fact that, of the hundreds or thousands of inner features, a few are fully developed, some are being shown, while others are still in latent stage, expecting suitable conditions to germinate. These seeds (especially with reference to psychological ones), at a potential stage or developed to certain levels, allow us to identify, like the standard models in the case of perceptual processes, the characteristics, desires or emotional feelings of those around us.
Then, as I said in previous posts, all the elements of knowledge (direct perception or "processed" perception, passed through the higher processes of functioning of the mind) come to concreteize beliefs (here I do not mean beliefs like Christian, Muslim, etc., although they also have their "intervention").
I refer to those such as "I consider wine the best medicine", "I know that Jews are "so" and cannot be otherwise", racist or discriminatory beliefs, etc., which are constituted in ways of radically changing any element of perception and "righting" towards the support of the constituted faith, with effects of the most unsuspected possible because all these are substituted or "maintain" cultural beliefs , social, family, etc.
And, speaking of beliefs, it would be good to "talk" about one that has permanently troubled me from my earliest childhood: "Why would there be hell (inferno, etc.), that ugly place full of the strangest "presences"?".
My opinion (it is true that it took decades to reach this conclusion and, anyway, I do nothing but render those written by a somity in the study of perception, its processing, etc., Adrian Nuta, in his book "Shadow"), "expressed" in the sense of this post is that hell should not be sought somewhere after death , is not a special place arranged by the Creator for the sinners of this world.
Hell already exists within every divided person. Hell is a state rather than a place, it being studied by any science outside of geography. Hell is within every human soul, in the dark pantries where unwanted energies were banished and closed, the beginnings that did not live up to expectations, along with associated feelings of guilt and shame.
Any tendency that opposed something took refuge in the abyss of the submask (in the prison of the subconscious), hoping for better times. There is hell, the seat of misunderstood and repressed energies, the dark pole of the soul.
If systematic repression leads to personality fragmentation, what effects will contrary processes of integration have?!? So repression is the highway to hell, integration is the way to heaven. Relatively unified people, those who manage to express their energies harmoniously, regardless of the material (existential) conditions in which they live their way through this dimension, already live in heaven (they are already in the Creator's Kingdom).
Returning to characteristics (beliefs) incompatible with what we want to be or become, they allow us to recognize them from others, while informing us about what we were or could be, at some point in the future.
For example, a criminal you recognize as such doesn't contain anything different from you. Otherwise, how could you identify his aggression or ferocity? If intellectual identification is accompanied by intense emotional experiences, such as aversion or fear, this is the unmistakable sign that these characteristics belong to you.
The difference between the two of you is that you manage better what's inside you, at least for now. Your emotional reaction shows that you haven't integrated these issues and you're just keeping them under control, which he doesn't. When you are integrated with them, you will be able to relate to this man without judging him as a person, even if it would be abnormal to tolerate his behavior, but only to accept him as a person because, previously, you were able to accept the same thing within yourself.
The killer you develop rejection for simply mirrors you. It's not him inside you, it's the characteristics that drove him to a certain behavior. You don't have to be the same.
Maybe you're not violent with other people, but with yourself (you kill yourself slowly by wasting yourself in pointless activities, possibly just as slowly, through smoking, etc.). Maybe you're not violent with other people, but with animals, insects, etc. Maybe you just slowly kill those around you by simple verbal aggression, or by constant criticism (the parent who "kills" his child by criticizing any initiative, the coarse aspect of this crime being brutal censorship and the refined one being hyperprotection)... And the presentation of these "impostasies" would continue amazingly long.
In other news, how do you know you wouldn't have behaved the same way if you'd grown up just as he grew up? Don't rush to judgment as long as you're not in his shoes! The rejection you spontaneously feel shows that you have those characteristics and you could have manifested them if the circumstances of your life were different. It is also possible to move them in the future in certain contexts, such as a war, a borderline situation of self-defense, etc.
Demons that you can't look at others, that cause you anger, disgust or fear, are your own demons, representing an aspect of your experience that you haven't accepted, that you can't look inside yourself.
The law is inexorable: what you can't look inside yourself, you can't look calmly, detached lyceus lye. The demons you cast out in your under-mask greet you outward, emotional rejection indicating vulnerabilities, showing where you need to take responsibility.
In one of the previous posts, we discussed the fact that everything that "guides" our inner manifestation (which goes up to the cell and genetic information) and externally is based on beliefs. But beliefs have as their starting point perception (reception and interpretation of external stimuli). And after a sum of perceptions it will invariably reach the building and then strengthening beliefs. So here we come to the need to discuss perception.
The first thing to remember is that the perceptive image is an object image (i.e. the image of an object), primary (i.e. it is constituted as a result of the direct action of stimuli on the receptors/analyzers), synthetic and integral (i.e. reflects the objects in the unity of their characteristics).
"Recognition" of what an individual perceives is done by reporting all observations/information obtained through perceptions to a perceptual scheme or a standard model, preserved, of course, in long-term memory.
If the standard model is individual, the perceived object will be recognized in its specific identity. If the standard model is categorical, the object will be identified by reporting and inclusion in the classroom, based on the characteristics common to all objects belonging to that class.
For example, by listening to a set of distant sounds, first you will realize if they belong to an animal or a human, then, as the distance decreases, you will complete your perception with more and more precise identifications: sex (e.g. the voice belongs to a woman), age (identify that the person is young), emotional state (happy smile), until the expected woman is clearly identified...
People with optimally developed perceptual schemes perform virtually instantaneous recognitions, based on the updating, from memory, of the information recorded in the standard models, whether they are individual or categorical. Even in situations where perception is more difficult, if the threshold of cognoscible minimum is exceeded, identifications are possible thanks to the functions of internal reconstitution of absent properties or attributes and correction of those wrongly noticed or represented.
Obviously, the functional patterns of perception must be formed in a certain way, must be the product of a process of processing information received from the environment by the senses, a process that has a beginning.
The most confirmed theories claim that the human body has an innate ability to organize perception according to certain rules. These rules or laws of organization are not acquired in the process of child development, but there is potential, in his psyche, from birth. It is as if the brain is specially designed to perceive a gesture or "good form", operating for this purpose with similarities (similar elements tend to be perceived grouped), proximities (neighbouring elements are considered together), closures (an incomplete figure tends to be constructed without a default), continuities (defined figures that allow one or more symmetry axes are more easily recognized as good shapes).
To all this is added the latest theories that place before any form of "acquisition" a "deposit" already transferred through the genotype and, in particular, through "previous accumulations and debts" (transmitted at the level of spirit, ego, or similar).
So, knowledge through perception becomes a particularly complex process, controlled by so many factors that, even after all, come to flesh out the first "bricks" of the edifice represented by our way of perceiving the world. But, what do you do with applying such constructed standards, what do you do with the ability to "replace" the missing elements of information at the level of the mind (and I could continue with such questions)? This is where several functioning "elements" of the mind come in.
First of all, we cannot recognize any need or quality in the other if we do not possess that characteristic (although the microcosm in each person reflects the macrocosm, that is, all of all human qualities and characteristics – it is as if every man contains all mankind within him).
This seems to be due to the fact that, of the hundreds or thousands of inner features, a few are fully developed, some are being shown, while others are still in latent stage, expecting suitable conditions to germinate. These seeds (especially with reference to psychological ones), at a potential stage or developed to certain levels, allow us to identify, like the standard models in the case of perceptual processes, the characteristics, desires or emotional feelings of those around us.
Then, as I said in previous posts, all the elements of knowledge (direct perception or "processed" perception, passed through the higher processes of functioning of the mind) come to concreteize beliefs (here I do not mean beliefs like Christian, Muslim, etc., although they also have their "intervention").
I refer to those such as "I consider wine the best medicine", "I know that Jews are "so" and cannot be otherwise", racist or discriminatory beliefs, etc., which are constituted in ways of radically changing any element of perception and "righting" towards the support of the constituted faith, with effects of the most unsuspected possible because all these are substituted or "maintain" cultural beliefs , social, family, etc.
And, speaking of beliefs, it would be good to "talk" about one that has permanently troubled me from my earliest childhood: "Why would there be hell (inferno, etc.), that ugly place full of the strangest "presences"?".
My opinion (it is true that it took decades to reach this conclusion and, anyway, I do nothing but render those written by a somity in the study of perception, its processing, etc., Adrian Nuta, in his book "Shadow"), "expressed" in the sense of this post is that hell should not be sought somewhere after death , is not a special place arranged by the Creator for the sinners of this world.
Hell already exists within every divided person. Hell is a state rather than a place, it being studied by any science outside of geography. Hell is within every human soul, in the dark pantries where unwanted energies were banished and closed, the beginnings that did not live up to expectations, along with associated feelings of guilt and shame.
Any tendency that opposed something took refuge in the abyss of the submask (in the prison of the subconscious), hoping for better times. There is hell, the seat of misunderstood and repressed energies, the dark pole of the soul.
If systematic repression leads to personality fragmentation, what effects will contrary processes of integration have?!? So repression is the highway to hell, integration is the way to heaven. Relatively unified people, those who manage to express their energies harmoniously, regardless of the material (existential) conditions in which they live their way through this dimension, already live in heaven (they are already in the Creator's Kingdom).
Returning to characteristics (beliefs) incompatible with what we want to be or become, they allow us to recognize them from others, while informing us about what we were or could be, at some point in the future.
For example, a criminal you recognize as such doesn't contain anything different from you. Otherwise, how could you identify his aggression or ferocity? If intellectual identification is accompanied by intense emotional experiences, such as aversion or fear, this is the unmistakable sign that these characteristics belong to you.
The difference between the two of you is that you manage better what's inside you, at least for now. Your emotional reaction shows that you haven't integrated these issues and you're just keeping them under control, which he doesn't. When you are integrated with them, you will be able to relate to this man without judging him as a person, even if it would be abnormal to tolerate his behavior, but only to accept him as a person because, previously, you were able to accept the same thing within yourself.
The killer you develop rejection for simply mirrors you. It's not him inside you, it's the characteristics that drove him to a certain behavior. You don't have to be the same.
Maybe you're not violent with other people, but with yourself (you kill yourself slowly by wasting yourself in pointless activities, possibly just as slowly, through smoking, etc.). Maybe you're not violent with other people, but with animals, insects, etc. Maybe you just slowly kill those around you by simple verbal aggression, or by constant criticism (the parent who "kills" his child by criticizing any initiative, the coarse aspect of this crime being brutal censorship and the refined one being hyperprotection)... And the presentation of these "impostasies" would continue amazingly long.
In other news, how do you know you wouldn't have behaved the same way if you'd grown up just as he grew up? Don't rush to judgment as long as you're not in his shoes! The rejection you spontaneously feel shows that you have those characteristics and you could have manifested them if the circumstances of your life were different. It is also possible to move them in the future in certain contexts, such as a war, a borderline situation of self-defense, etc.
Demons that you can't look at others, that cause you anger, disgust or fear, are your own demons, representing an aspect of your experience that you haven't accepted, that you can't look inside yourself.
The law is inexorable: what you can't look inside yourself, you can't look calmly, detached lyceus lye. The demons you cast out in your under-mask greet you outward, emotional rejection indicating vulnerabilities, showing where you need to take responsibility.
Wellness days, full of
understanding, love and gratitude!
Dorin, Merticaru