Friends of CwG Discussion Board

Theresa you're making these astute observations all over the place here lately, I'm loving your level of objective observation!

I agree, that maybe there are the same number of wars going on, but the level of death/destruction is more widespread as we are now dealing with missiles and air combat on a new level etc.

Good call

Tonia, just trying to be accurate here. I wish my world view to be what is, not what I want it to be. So, if you are correct in your assessment, then I am more than willing to follow your assessment. The math however...

2003 to today = 41 (7 year period) so 5.9 wars a year

1990 - 2002 = 60 (I counted) wars (12 year period) so 5 wars a year

1945 - 1989 = 130 wars (44 year period) so 3 wars per year

1900 - 1944 = 105 wars (44 year period) so 2.4 wars per year

So, I know that the numbers look impressive the way that you look at them, but the math is what I am talking about. As you can see, it goes down as we get further into the past. I counted all the wars on the pages you provided and just divided the years into the number of wars. I was even more diligent...

1700 - 1799 = 67 Wars (99 year period) so 0.7 wars per year

1800 - 1899 = 277 Wars (99 year period) so 2.8 wars per year

1900 - 1999 = 283 Wars (99 Year period) so 2.9 wars per year

So if you break the statistics down, big leap from 18th century to 19th century and we are pretty much on par with the 19th century, a few more though. We are averaging right now:

2000 - 2010 = 57 Wars (10 year period) so 5.7 wars per year so far

My point here is: Progress? Not that I can see...

P.S. Theresa, nice point. If I have the time I may actually look at estimated casualties and I am sure that your view will be a pretty accurate one.

Cheers!

Drew

That gives me a better picture of how you are looking at this. Thank you Drew!

Hmmmm.... progress. What is progress?

Can we do anything but progress?

Does progress mean things become perfect? Or does progress simply mean we experience, learn, experience, learn and so on.

We have had hundreds upon hundreds of wars, and we're still fighting. Does that mean we've regressed? I don't think so. Perhaps the fact that we are still fighting amongst ourselves means we still have so much progress to achieve.

When we are done fighting, we will have the ability to look back and see the progress more succinctly.

For now, we are emersed in the lessons and memories and continue to wage these battles to better understand ourselves and our boundaries and our fears.

Maybe our progress seems minimal at this time, but perhaps through the clarity of hindsight and a wider scope of vision we will understand that the progress we are making is beyond comprehension to us right now.

What's a hundred years in comparison to eternity?

I did adress this in one of my first responses with:



But to clarify:

I think what I am really getting at here is the evolution from a warlike society to a peaceful one. And when I break it down to the 2 overriding emotions, I am really asking if we have progressed from a fear based society to a love based one.



My point here is: Why have you made it mean anything that that guy is going slow? What difference does it make, in the big scheme of things? Why the hostility?

Answer: Because it interferes with YOUR agenda of what YOU think SHOULD be happening to suite YOU. It has nothing to do with them, except that they are now an OBJECT that is standing in the way of what YOU wish to do or be. Which was my point.

Don't get me wrong here, it is REASONABLE to expect that a person follow the rules of the road. Everything has one reason or another. No matter what happens, we can justify it with a reason. The truth is, people don't always follow the rules. So, why be angry about it? Other than going postal, calling the cops, or honking, what can you do? Don't you think that getting angry is a waste of time?

My point here is the NORMAL response is anger at someone interfering with your dynamic. Again, you have reduced a person to an interference rather than allow that people are people and they are as fallible as you are. We seem to be reflecting this personal "righteousness" and intolerance on a global level.

I understand that we create these rules BECAUSE we are retarded and can't get along, and that these rules are made to protect us, but to think that people won't break them is naive. And to continue being retarded just because every one else is doing it, does not progress make.

OK, I am not doing your whole post justice here, though. I have a busy schedule and can only write periodically, so will continue with the rest of your post later.

Thanks Mark! Am having a great time!

Drew

Drew. If I had half your conviction.

Hey Dee.

I didn't say that we have regressed at all. Just that we haven't progressed very much. If we are looking at the progression of thought, then we have progressed a lot from formulating simple concepts to formulating complex ones. This thought progression has opened up much for us and has given us the opportunity to progress as a peaceful (Love based) society. Even having the opportunity, I do not find a lot of people seizing it. We are all still stuck in the fear mindset that holds us to the limiting notion that we have to be "right", instead of accepting what is. I believe that people THINK they are working toward a love based society, but the real proof comes when we are not impatient and angry at the rest of the world for not conforming to what they think it SHOULD be, but, instead, of embracing the world as it is with patience and understanding.

In essence, living life without an agenda.

I think, ultimately, that we have progressed in our POTENTIAL (thinking about being), but have not yet made the scary leap into the KINETIC (being).

Cheers!

Drew

Then you would be half the man you are. Your convictions are your convictions and that is how you choose to create who you are. A fact of which I am supremely grateful. For without you, there would be less of this discussion and, therefore, less learning for me.

So, thank you!

Drew

Hey Drew,

Before your attitude on anger is set, check out the positive side to anger. In sociology it is said to have two faces. You appear influenced by the biblical sort of fortune cookie like convention. Anger is associated with violence less then you might think and violence often shows up without anger at all, at least that's what some psychologists have found. I guess I'm not on board with your objectification thesis.

Mark.

I am not set in my view here, but I think that we may be communicating at cross purposes. I do not truly think that anger is "bad" in and of itself, but when judging it as progressive (as I have defined it in this thread), I would see it as "bad" or non-progressive.

So, I have been processing and have come up with a few distinctions of types of fear and anger.

First off, I understand that anger comes from fear, but anger can be confused with passion and aggression. It, also, can be either or neither of those. AND I can also see the "good" side of anger and fear. Let me explain the distinctions and perhaps we can understand one another better.

Let me start by defining a few words.

Fear - a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined; the feeling or condition of being afraid.

Anger - a strong feeling of displeasure and belligerence aroused by a wrong; wrath; ire.

Passion - any powerful or compelling emotion or feeling, as love or hate.

Aggression - any offensive action, attack, or procedure; an inroad or encroachment.

Let me further define Aggression for my purpose here.

Aggression is a passionate action that can be either fear based (with malice) or love based (with patience).

OK, now that you know those terms and how I use them, let me tell you about the 2 types of fear and anger that I see.

The "good" fear is the animal response that we have to physical danger. If someone comes at you with a knife, it triggers the instinctive fear for your life. Which in turn causes you to run (fear), freeze (fear) or fight (anger).

The "bad" (or non-progressive) fear is the fear that we create with our imagination, when there is no physical threat. It is a fear that is triggered when we think there is an emotional threat, or a physical threat that "could" be in the future, but has no evidence. This type of fear is destructive due tot the fact that the body and emotions are continually reacting as if there is a physical threat NOW instead of being in a state of readiness, it wants to fight, with no real threat to fight.

What I am saying here is that an emotional attack is NOT a physical threat, yet our bodies treat it like it is, because we imagine that others words can hurt us. And, of course, that is what we have been taught and what we feel. We don't understand that there is NOTHING to fear from an emotional threat. The only reason we feel the emotional pain is that we think of ourselves as "less than" rather than "equal to" others.

It is this emotional imaginary fear which I find destructive, for it causes greed, anger, intolerance, and separation.

This is why I see us as not progressing due to fear.

Cheers!

Drew.

Don't know Drew.

"Fear - a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined; the feeling or condition of being afraid."

Real or imagined? There is something about this qualifier that causes me to pause and think. A 'threat' that is real or imagined. (Just musing here) If I'm walking in our friends backyard in Costa Rica and come upon a Coral snake the threat it posses only becomes "real" after it has bitten me, it seems in every other circumstance the fear would fall under the category of an imagined threat. It seems the emotional response to fear would always be imagined as it is anticipatory. This "by impending danger"; All things 'impending' are imagined as they are... well -impending, have yet to take place.

Further, and just as personal. I have an upcoming dental procedure and have been through this procedure before and it was painful, it curled the arches of my feet, sent my blood pressure soaring and brought tears to my eyes, it was an incredible discomfort that I am in no way looking forward to experiencing again but circumstances being as they are it has become unavoidable. I admit to being anxious and to experiencing distress regarding this impending event, yet it hasn't taken place and as such is imagined. The consequences of not having this procedure done are also impending, they are anticipated as an inferred progression of not having the procedure performed.

What any of this has to do with your thesis I am unsure but it seems to have a lot to do with this definition of fear. That anything could be considered a danger seems like a form of expectation that depends on forward thinking, imagining, possibility and probabilities.

Flight or fight (an avoidance or deflection to an aggression)?

Threat (imagined, anticipated, expected, in reference to a an event that has yet to take place, qualifies it as not yet a reality or real, the very idea of what a threat is precludes it from being a real thing and can not take place 'now' as it's existence is anticipatory) The notion of a 'threat' depends on fear of an event that has yet to take place. The perception of a threat seems like a learned response not an instinctual one.

An "animal response" (instinct) would seem to be lacking in the cognitive capacity to understand that the "knife" is the danger. The fear experienced in that situation is a learned or conditioned response based on prior experience or empathy with someone having had that prior experience.

An others words can hurt us emotionally which can manifest as physical harm. If an individual is consistently emotionally denied acceptance they are more likely to act out with physical aggression. They will seek out to control physically because of there inability to exercise control of there internal emotional experience.

"The only reason we feel the emotional pain is that we think of ourselves as "less than" rather than "equal to" others."

We learn this response as result of the experience of emotional tribulation. We are social creatures (for the most part). Feeling accepted within a social system is a wholly internalized experience that manifests through emotional channels. Emotional neglect will not foster feelings of being accepted within a social construct. We learn to feel emotional pain before we learn to process thoughts of "less than" or "equal to". In my case, I wasn't physically abused but the differences in the way I think and process information did not give rise to feelings of being accepted in a social system. The evidence lead me to feel I was not accepted.

I remain on shore with regard to your thesis. Fear is not the issue. I do not progress as result of this emotional retardation which is learned from the internalized mental state of emotional experiences. I believe it begins in the womb long before there is the cognitive capacity to comprehend or even respond to notions or ideas of threats or fears. Fear is a symptom of emotional stunting not a cause of that stunting. The cause of the lack of progression is the emotional stunting.

Mark.
Nice points!

I agree that what you are saying about imaginary fear is true. Perhaps I should have differentiated more. How about fear without immediate supporting evidence.

Like you said, the coral snake is real and tangible and it is a logical and helpful imaginary fear that can prevent you from getting to close, based on information that "snakes could hurt you". Likewise, if someone were coming at you in an aggressive manner with a knife, the same could be said. One can logically reason that there IS a very high probability of danger in these situations and allows us to act accordingly. Even if the man with the knife wasn't coming after you and the snake wouldn't have bitten you, there is no possibility that they might, if you avoid them. This imaginary fear is relatively short lived and interferes with our lives very little. The other imaginary fear that I speak of interferes with our lives quite a bit.

Ok, you have had a dental procedure that was very painful and must go through the same procedure again. You must not avoid the surgery because the avoidance is more disastrous than the solution. In this instance, however, you KNOW that there is going to be pain, so why fearfully worry about it? Seems to me that the imaginary fear you are feeling about this is causing you a great deal more imaginary stress than you need to have. I am not saying that adding this stress to your life is bad, I just see it as one more thing on a pile of stress that is, really, unnecessary. Accept that there is going to be pain and get on with it. We, as cognitive adults can really start releasing the stress that the "fear of anticipation" brings. The procedure hasn't even happened yet, but you are stressed. AND I am not even mentioning that the anticipation of your impending surgery will probably AMPLIFY the pain.

This is the type of fear that we have every day in our lives. It is so commonplace that we don't even know we have it. It is an imaginary fear that keeps us in a constant state of worry and agitation. It is like a background noise that is so common, that it can't be heard anymore, and it controls the way we interact with each other on a daily basis. I see it every day. The makeup that we put on to impress others. The telling people about our achievements so we can get some praise. The constant fear of how others will treat us or look at us because we are afraid to really be and express ourselves and because we judge ourselves so very harshly. This is a lot of background stress and to add the fear of the inevitable just makes the pile higher.

I see us dancing this dance every day. It shapes us and moves us all the time and we dance to it's rhythm. Not a bad thing at all. Just what we are doing. I am not angry about it, just moving myself a little out of the beat of it, for I see another alternative. A way less stressful one. I accept it for what it is. I accept that I am a part of that dance and I contribute to it. I then do my best to change the beat of my dance, so that I am conscious of what I am choosing, rather than let the music choose my steps for me. I choose to create a different dance. One that is far more relaxed and stressless.



Hmmm, having been emotionally abused for the first part of my life, I can identify with your view. You may well be right that it does start in the womb. Even if it does, why does it matter where and why it is here? It's here. If we identify with the emotional stunting, then we are in affect manifesting that. And since the emotional stunting is causing the fear... You see where I'm going with this?

It seems that you are saying that the emotional stunting is the cause of the fear, right? But even in the womb, our mothers were continuing a cycle of emotional stunting and reacting from their fear, yes? I look at it as a cycle that is started from fear, as opposed to the emotional stunting being the root. I,of course, may be incorrect. If you could flesh this out for me a bit more, perhaps I can grasp what you are saying better.

Thanks Mark!

Drew

Hey Drew,

I was speculating without reason. Think instead I'll just let natural selection run its course.

Have a great one. And thanks for humoring me.

Mark