Fat is a type of crazy

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

I respect your opinions, i was just pointing out at the over-simplification in dividing the humans in 2 categories, where my point is that there are infinite ( yes, like God) categories. 

Tomorrow i can be a totally different person from yesterday. 

Even if we look at some theory of natural science, where apparently the cells of our bodies completely renew every 7 years or so....

...so, technically, after 7 years your body is a different body..

Well, if you understand my point, fine, otherwise, fine ????

I am not dividing humans into 2 categories as I already stated above. We can look in or out. 2 things. Don't think there's a third category. 

I had maximum lock down in the world in Melbourne Australia. Feel for others but for me working from home and the simple life will be a fond memory into the future. Luckily working from home is still a thing for two days a week and right now full time due to concerns  of a winter rise. Otherwise everything's open.  

15 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Despite her swearing an oath before god and country to 'love and obey'?

In the west it's part of the marriage contract, if she doesn't like the contract, she shouldn't sign it.

 

If you hire a car and it won't start, do you still pay the rental?

If you sign an employment contract and the employer decides not to pay you, do you still go to work?

 

Marriage in the west is all one sided, the man is expected to fulfil his part of the contract, she has no requirement to do anything.

I don't dispute that you have the right to be a bit peeved. They'll be women who like it year after a year and that may depend a bit on her and the man.

That's why though I am sympathetic when men have affairs after say 10 or 20 years of marriage . Often the woman probably doesn't care as long as he doesn't spend too much. You have just given a reason why I am happy not to be in a long term marriage. 

My key point though is I think if you are feeling your wife, of 20 years or so, is bad or is being sneaky or has used long term cunning  for not wanting to be ploughed 3 times a week despite her feelings, based on signing a contract 20 years before, is a bit harsh. 

1 hour ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I appreciate what you are saying and that marriage should be a two way street and that it could be unfair if she just says no full stop. If you are being nice and gentle and she is just rejecting it out of hand you could have a basis for divorce. 

I think though the nature of sex it can be a wonderful pleasure for a woman but it can easily become something different, unpleasant, and potentially a form of coercive control. Rape at the extreme. 

I thinking the impact on your psyche of fixing the fence or taking her out to dinner is different to a woman having to lie there and feeling she is obliged to get sha gged three times a week. It can sound like she is being  used as a kind of rubber doll and that can't feel good.  

 

Not one of our longer term girlfriends or wives haven't been in the situation where we want a sha g and she doesn't really but she takes one for the team. I suppose though saying it's a right of a relationship, because you bring home the bacon, that she should do that year upon year three times a week just because, is something I don't agree with. 

Just now, mauGR1 said:

Yes, thanks for clarifying .

So in fact you are saying now that every man of woman are different, and extremes are dangerous. 

Ok, it makes sense.

I also don't like very much extremists, persons or ideals, but they exist, and it would be unethical for my principles to suppress them.

Any suppression implies extreme intolerance. 

Do we really want to go there ?

 I find this topic a key issue of life but maybe to others it seems like nothing much. I am talking about the implications of our own actions on our selves. The way to live life. Not whether we should police the actions of others for their own benefit. But I suppose the religious and political view is often that we should. 

I am differentiating too between say the more subtle adverse aspects of drugs in finding your better self as against the adverse bigger effects to your actual life and health. 

11 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I don't recognize myself in your categories. So there are at least 3 categories .

I think you are over simplifying, as I'll get never tired to repeat, our individual consciousness makes everyone, everyone extremely different. 

I'm a bit surprised that you cannot see it.

Btw, which category are you ?

I am not saying we are one or the other but that if there is a part of us to be found, or a certain peacefulness or heart to be found, it may be found through introspection or meditation on the one hand or through lessons learned in an active life on the other, or both. My point then is that extremes on either side are in my opinion less likely to lead to good outcomes. I could be wrong. I think everyone probably uses a bit of both but the more sensitive types might be hurt too much by too much action or indulgence and benefit more from  looking inwards. Hope this makes sense.

47 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

But....... 

It doesn't cost her any money

It doesn't take any of her energy

It doesn't occupy much of her time. 

So why wouldn't she? 

 

Not to mention you're still expected to buy her flowers, give her money, take her out, do all those little jobs around the house. 

 

What you wrote all seems a little one sided to me. 

I appreciate what you are saying and that marriage should be a two way street and that it could be unfair if she just says no full stop. If you are being nice and gentle and she is just rejecting it out of hand you could have a basis for divorce. 

I think though the nature of sex it can be a wonderful pleasure for a woman but it can easily become something different, unpleasant, and potentially a form of coercive control. Rape at the extreme. 

I thinking the impact on your psyche of fixing the fence or taking her out to dinner is different to a woman having to lie there and feeling she is obliged to get sha gged three times a week. It can sound like she is being  used as a kind of rubber doll and that can't feel good.  

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

Thanks for the morning giggle ????

Yes, maybe but maybe not.

Why divide humans in 2 categories?

That's very unscientific imho, even a peasant would raise an eyebrow ????

 

It's not dividing humans but dividing what can be done to find oneself. Either look within or act in the outside world. Not sure if there's a third category. 

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Really? 2 ways to look at life ?

Just look at this thread, which is a sort of microcosm, and you will find all kind of ways to look at life.

In fact, in a way, every man or woman is a species in itself. 

Pls excuse the short post ????

 

I just mean 2 broad categories i.e. if we are to find ourselves in some form, is testing ourselves in the world the way to do go, or can you find it within. The two options could encompass everything from extreme meditation and staying alone, on the one hand, or total indulgence of the senses, or extreme hard work, or extreme sports on the other. Taking mushrooms and such may seem to be in both categories but has its own significant risks. 

I think it is likely a combination of both approaches might be best, but towards the middle, rather than in at the extremes or acting in a way that is logically likely to hurt you or others. 

Maybe finding yourself is just a load of cobblers. 

Warning: Feminism ahead

Some say I expected x amount of sex in my marriage and didn't get it. Thai women did the job.

I just wouldn't hold a bad feeling to the ex for this reason. Though a man may have the right to expect a s hag from time to time it is not surprising that a woman over time, possibly living the life a of a bored housewife or in a boring job, might not feel enamoured with a three times a week sha g where she feels an obligation to satisfy her wonderful deserving husband. She may have had the best of intentions at the start of the marriage but when the man says in so many words  'Lay down it's time for my sha g' 5 or 10 or 30 years into the marriage it's understandable the act may lose it's sense of breathless romance and she may end up withdrawing her compliance. Not really anyone's fault. No bait and switch. Time happens. It might seem obvious but some seem to have a different opinion. 

I did want to note my post above discussing vices was not to indicate the person I was replying to was such a person. Just noting that I feel there are two ways of looking at life. One is a more buddhist approach of finding yourself within. The other is that by pushing boundaries in all sorts of ways you can find yourself. The latter is more appealing but I just find the former to be a more honest appraisal of human nature. Could be based on personality type too and the degree to which such indulgences or risks are done in good faith. 

Ronnie, Talk to Russia - YouTube

Devo - Cold War (Freedom of Choice - 1980) - YouTube

The 80's was cool

1 hour ago, Hummin said:

In late age I got a full screening and psychologist for free, and I got friends who-was quite opened minded who climbed, skydived, white water kayaking, base jumping. Friends who often was spiritual grounded, and we often discussed the meaning of life, maybe because of the nature of the sport being lethal. We lost every year several friends doing what they loved, or sometimes to suicide. ADHD, ptsd, and some bipolar spectre’s with more is not unusual in creative and highly dangerous sports, and I would say in some more challenging involving high risk profession’s, we also have tendencies of same types of personalities who have accepted and willing to risk it all, to do what they are trained for. No statistic of course or proved data and of course many border line types as well.
 

I would say many of the same types  might search for new excitement in life and take risk on other areas in life not involving risk of their life, but high risk in economics. Maybe moving to a new country? Give up and let go of their old life and start a complete new life without safety net, which they should have, or a good plan b. 
 

Of course the result for my struggles both chronicle and my mental health, was heavy medication, offered by the leading psychiatrist. I knew I could live a good life without, because I did function good when I did not have any chronic issues, and now started to learn how to change my life physical and mentally. I had 5 hours only with a psychologist, one month with screening together with a group, and two hours with psychiatrist.

 

what I learned by the group, was how they had narrowed down their options and their possibilities and given up, broken either by the toxic environment they grew up in, or the system they had been placed in to protect them, and had no more will or energy or belief in them self, that they could overcome their struggles. This is people who had function good for most of their life with families and work, but experienced one or more life crises. 
 

Well anyway, have to stop my ramble her, need to go,

 

I am a person who like to do small puzzles and read science and also love the theories about our brains plasticity and how we can manipulate our self, as well how positivity can change you, how you feel, how you see the world, colours, taste smell, and more. 
 

 the moral is, we can do alot for our self, creating our own reality in a positive way as we all maybe already now,, all roads leads to Rome someone said 

If ever I have an opinion that’s against porn or prostitution or gambling or drugs it is not because the people doing it are bad or the act itself is bad but that we have to know our limitations in terms of dealing with stimulus. It sounds like you have had an interesting high adrenaline  life and it might be that going back to a normal life is hard and causes some of difficulties. Same with some of the other stimulus. Not an original thought but it is the one thing that religion might teach that has merit. That we are not as strong or as free as we think we are. We have to work for it bit by bit.

Time to pull out my boring 80’s travel stories. In terms of islands had a good trip from Java to Bali to Lombok to Sumbawa to Komodo to Flores to Timor. Then a short flight to Darwin. Lombok is really different to Bali - Muslim and drier but nice beaches in the south and on the Gili islands. Spectacular mountain. Komodo has the lizards. Flores is large and has a lot of forest. Has a mountain with 3 different coloured lakes. It has a Portuguese Christian influence. Kupang in Timor is a bit different too. 

1 hour ago, KIngsofisaan said:

Sorry you are confused

 

 

You changed your response from 'I don't live in Florida' to 'Sorry you are confused'. It's almost as if .. someone on Asean Now is lying. Can't be. 

3 minutes ago, KIngsofisaan said:

Sorry dont live in Florida

 

 

Fair enough. The other poster was called Issan Farmer or something. Had strong ideas about the same topic and wrote similar posts. You made a reference to Florida in a different post in the last 24 hours. Coincidence. 

30 minutes ago, KIngsofisaan said:

You are so bitter, I think you already learned from your previous mistakes and that is why you are scared to death of marriage and listen to forum advice from people you don't even know to tell yourself it wasn't your own fault.

 

No one with any sense can be as scared of marriage as you. You act like losing money or property is the end of the world?

 

Perhaps that is your issue.

 

I could care less what I have in Thailand and it wouldn't make a difference one bit.

 

Why?

 

Once the money is spent, well that is the time you should have realized it was already lost and out of your control

 

Money is spent, all gone. Didn't die

 

Wake up and put your big boy pants on

 

 

 

 

I think you gave advice on this previously under a different name. Before you went to move to Florida. Your previous comments were food for thought in my case as I am not married but have a long term girlfriend. Due to a range of factors I don't want to marry and have given her total freedom. In fact she has wanted to break up twice in the last six months and I said yes twice but then she came back.

All I can say is different people have different experiences and different ideas of freedom. You may say she or I  have no other choices and it's not fair but she does as do I. Sometimes marriage and some idea of ultimate long term bonded love is just not something that appealing to both parties and we can both be happy and not married. As long as you be fair not being married does not have to be a sign of being unreasonably selfish or of immaturity.  In fact it can be a sign that you are happy with your own life and don't need to be fully bonded to someone else. 

13 minutes ago, 1FinickyOne said:

Sure, sure... but lets get down to the important part... Was she skinny? 

 

We should be able to judge the validity of her ideas by her body mass index. 

It is a stupid name

7 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Right wing means freedom and capitalism. Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

 

Sadly modern day people have invented weird terms to describe nutters and totally forgot what capitalism is.

 

 

 

Have you read Ayn Rand. The Fountainhead. Atlas Shrugged. Hugely big in the states. Or was. Many of the ideas are a bit abhorrent from where I sit now but the books kind of changed my life at the time I read it on the benefits of capitalism and freedom. I say abhorrent because I don't now think extreme capitalism is freedom because people are born with huge advantages over others and to be free there has to be some accounting for this. 

She came from Russia and could see the stark contrast between communism and capitalism. She was an atheist and kept politics out of personal lives and believed in science absolutely but still managed to be the darling of many Republicans. That's the side of Republicans that I can have some respect for, even though I am in the Australian centre of politics, which you will probably agree is a fair way to the left of centre in the states.

But most of what right wing means today seems to be about some distorted cynical christian judgement, helping the rich and placating the poor,  and not believing and following real science and that's not freedom.  

Not bad. The setting would make you think they are making fun of the left but the topic i.e. accepting the reality of proven scientific theory is definitely more applicable to the religious right. 

One of few practical links to the left is on the trans debate. 

It would be good if trans people could say ' I was born in a male body but feel like I am a woman. I am not sure of the science of it or why I feel this way but I would appreciate if you could let me live how I like.'

The non trans could say ' I don't know that you are a woman in any scientific sense but if you prefer to live that way no problem'. 

On those rare occasions  that can potentially affect trans and non trans alike, e.g. toilets or sport, we can just try and have a sensible discussion so there is a fair outcome. No need to make it such a big deal. 

9 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

The truth is that it's not easy material.  It's challenging, but not overly so.  I'm not the sharpest tool in the box and I have no problem in general.

I've given a lot of thought to presenting the concepts Seth lays out into easily digestible form but the devil is always in the details.  And the details are profuse.  Simple, but profuse.  Easy to understand but again, profuse.

Seth's information is not so much a better way of thinking, such as in a self-help type of way . . . think positive, for instance.  Rather his entire aim is to expose the true workings of reality.  And that can't get any more transformative.

For instance, if I wanted to be brief, to the point, and absolutely succinct in stating an absolute truth I could repeat a cornerstone of what he espouses:

You create your own reality.  There is no other main rule.

Now this cannot fly more directly in opposition to what most people believe.  That truth is rather shocking to people and more often than not it is a totally unacceptable premise based on lived experience.  Tell that to anyone who has just suffered a serious loss of one kind or another and you'd best run for cover.

Now I've often used Mark Twain's wonderfully astute observation that “What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so." as a warning that most actual truths are diametrically opposed to the "truths" that most folks subscribe to.  Another one of his quotes, at least arguably attributed to him is "it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."  This is also an astute observation that warns that once a person is convinced that something is true it's almost impossible to convince them it's not.

Another cornerstone of Seth's revelatory insights is contained in Jane Robert's 1963 essay entitled "The Universe As Idea Construction."

Both of these concepts, if understood and accepted, radically change the "rules of the game."  But these truths needn't just be accepted without evidence.  The evidence that this information is absolutely valid can easily be obtained by any individual who seriously desires to know it.  But the resultant changes in thinking, and behaviour, are absolutely transformative and the benefits cannot be overstated.

Take the idea that everyone creates their own reality.  Which means that no one else can create within one's reality.  Unless consent is given of course, which is usually done unconsciously.  No longer can one feel that they are a leaf at the mercy of the wind.  In fact, just the opposite.  For perhaps for the first time in one's life one can truly become the captain of their own ship, as they were meant to be.

On the other hand, as long as one believes that others, God or otherwise, or chance, luck or fate is the determinative force in one's life then one will more often than not short themselves and deny themselves the fulfillment of their desires and kneecap their given abilities and talents.

So you see, it's not about a better way of thinking, or a better way of living, but rather an awakening to the truth as to what the real rules of game are and what the actual laws of reality are.  For we all know that if we try to operate on laws which are in truth fictitious you can rest assured that trouble will follow in one form or another.  You don't see or hear of many people jumping off of tall structures in the hopes of flying.  Why?  Because most everyone by now understands the physical law of gravity.  In the same sense if other as yet unknown laws are just as well known and understood the effects would be massive for not only the individual but for the world.

One can look out into the world now and see the misery, death and destruction resulting from a perpetrated false reality built on a foundation of lies.  It ultimately collapses upon itself under the weight of it's own deception.

 

Concepts such as the universe as idea construction, for instance, are not simply superficially addressed.  Seth goes into granular detail as to the mechanics of how thought is transformed into physical reality.  No, it's not light reading.  But I guarantee that it will challenge as nothing has ever challenged you before.

Topics include everything from religion to animal consciousness to time to evolution to early man to All That Is (God, if you prefer) to Jesus Christ to past civilisations to reincarnation to alternate realities to how freedom works.  Seth's works comprise the most comprehensive explanations of who and what we are and the reality we find ourselves in from the perspective of someone who has participated in earthly reality and is now in a more expansive reality from which he can view ours.

If I knew of a way to make short script of so much knowledge I'd be more than happy to.  But I don't.  So I'm forced to produce long posts.  Then again, there are those who truly want to know and there are those whose curiosity is merely casual.  For those who truly want to know there are no complaints about lengthy reads or taxing one's brains.

None of what Seth brings to the table is theoretical and distant.  And all of it can be directly explored by anyone who so desires.  The proof is yours for the asking.

 

Thanks for explaining that. I don't quite get how we create our own reality or what it would mean in practical terms but I accept that I can't expect his many musings to be summarised in a few lines. 

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

LOL.  Congratulations on a well written post that pretty much nails it, Sunmaster.  I admit that I have grappled for a long time with the question of why even the most common sense ideas fail to connect with people.  Whether it's politics or beliefs about life.  One would think that proper information and explanations, backed by logical and rationale reasoning, would suffice.  And again I admit that that has failed me time and time again.

I recall an early experience I had with a friend of mine.  I had been turned on to Castaneda's works by another friend just before I was introduced to Seth.  Once I started reading Seth I was deluged by an avalanche of insight.  I turned to this friend of mine, who had also read Castaneda's works, and excitedly gushed some of the new ideas I was now privvy to.  The response I received was as shocking as it was unexpected.  He quite vehemently and violently let me know that he didn't want to hear another word from me on the subject.

He explained that his life was going exceedingly well and he had no intention of mucking up his good fortune by changing any of his ideas.  He was on a roll which he felt was pure fortunate chance and he wanted to ride it out for as long as it lasted.  After that I learned to keep my mouth shut about what I knew.

Fast forward to a point in my life where I felt comfortable enough to successfully argue the validity of what I knew to be true.  I've attempted to use facts and common sense in the political arena and quickly found that most people, on any side of any aisle, were unchangeable in their thinking.  Not only that but even when winning an argument there was an impenetrable wall of pure dishonesty preventing any admission on the part of my opponent that he was wrong.  It was the ultimate exercise in futility.

Coming to this thread I believed that people would be much more open to genuinely discussing those ideas which have been a major driver in my life.  And to much benefit, I must add.  I believed that there was common interest here.  But I'm finding that my experience in the political arena extends to here as well.  As you say, people believe what they believe and they're not quite so ready or willing to change their beliefs, even if you can point out detrimental ideas and explain beneficial ones.

You are correct.  The initiation of change must come from the individual himself.  No amount of prodding or enticement will do the trick.  I should have long ago listened to myself regarding the fact, which I just recently posted here, that everyone who comes into this world comes with their own unique challenges.  The ideas they hold and subscribe to are the ones that are necessary to fulfill their own journeys.

Now I'm not one to experience depression often but I do find sometimes that traveling on the paths least traveled there is a yearning for companionship.  That companionship I've found to be rare.  Every once in a blue moon I'll bump into a stranger who is more family to me than my biological family is.  The last time it happened was in a seaside open bar in Sam Yoi Rot.

It's a nice story so I'll retell it.  The bar was in walking distance to the bungalow we were staying in.  I had traveled with my wife and young daughter and a lady friend of ours plus her little girl.  I went in advance and they were coming to meet me after putting the girls to bed.  As the sunlight faded the bar become filled with young European tourists, whom I engaged in conversation.  I got on well with one young Brit in particular and the conversation spontaneously veered into the direction of Sethian related subject matter.

Now this chap had never read Seth but he excitedly expressed the most similar ideas.  For all intents and purposes it was only the two of us in the bar.  My wife and our friend had at sometime unknown to me made their way into the bar and seated themselves at one of the bars outer tables.  Once I noticed them I came over to greet them but quickly returned to the intense discussion I was having with this newfound brother of mine.  We could have talked the night away and almost did so.  The comradery was devine.

Yeah, I'm still surprised that my offering didn't elicit a single response.  Perhaps I'm too wishful in my thinking.  Perhaps I've yet to struggle a while longer thinking that the words I offer could serve as a catalyst for some.  I should best give it up, though.  My apologies to anyone who took offense.

Again, Sunmaster, thanks for your astute post. 

 

The honest truth is it was somewhat interesting but a bit hard to read. If your aim is to  communicate a better way of thinking, or of life, consider talking in terms of practical applications and keep it brief.

I castigate myself sometimes for longer than necessary threads. I read them the next day and think <deleted> that was long boring and obvious.  But that's me.

Find a way to say 'OK you are retired in Thailand with a nice Thai lady, enjoy the odd beer, worry about finances sometimes, this is a practical way that Seth's message can apply to your life. Otherwise it can seem theoretical and  distant. 

59 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Similar to scam tv preachers. Like "some" politicians they get rich off the poorly educated.

I think there's a bit of that but I'll give an example.

Taking on something new like a business franchise or starting property purchases, with the aim of getting rich, can be hard and daunting and risky and part of our nature can say 'Better not'. Some people who want to do that need hype, need someone who can tell them that life is about taking risks and they can become rich, etc. Some crash and burn but I've know people who have seemed over the top, with maybe an inspirational message taped to the wall,  but now own 20 properties. 

I am a bit of a slow and steady type and I see what he's saying as obvious, and almost embarrassing, and not worth the huge fees. But a government worker waiting for retirement in a few years is not the target audience. 

I used to see his ads on TV late at night after going out and they are as hypey as one might expect. . There's an example on youtube where people burnt there feet at one of his seminars walking on coals. It's supposed to show mind over matter. In fact if done right there is no risk of burning your feet but they got it wrong. Though it can all seem a fraud I have a bit of sympathy for those, who if  there trying to pick themselves up from something or have dreams of success that they see as  non negotiable, might feel they benefit from a mentor like him. 

Truth in what you say. You can become a bit safe in life and talking to those who are getting out and doing stuff can probably inspire. I like not to try if possible. It's a bit of a life philosophy. Just let life flow. 

Tony Robbins is a bit hypey for me but probably does well to inspire those who need it like salesman and those who just respond well to that stuff.

29 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Yeah right. 

I guess you believe also that the government is working for your well being, and all the scientists work for knowledge and wisdom. 

Good luck with that.

 

 

I work for the government and most people around me are looking to do a good job. I do see things, serious things, I would change that I think would improve Australia. Some decisions are made for cynical reasons or are just plain bad judgement.  I see most doing what's best for themselves and most do a good honest  job at work. Cynicism of things including 'the Government' can be lazy. 

I think scientists are the same - a combination of looking out for themselves and trying to do a good job. 

The key point I think you discount is that most scientists love to prove another scientist wrong and prove themselves correct. Fame and money and well deserved plaudits come from that.

Then a different scientist will try and do the same. It's that intellectual desire and passion for success that keeps science honest in the big picture. You will find scientists who used fake data etc but it is statistically very likely to be found out as a different scientist attempts to replicate the findings. 

So when I think there's a much higher chance of evolution being correct than intelligent design, it's not because I prefer one or the other, or think there's no chance of an error, but because the evidence clearly points in one direction, and if someone can put forward an alternative theory WITH PROOF they will.  If there's a gap they admit it or they'll make fools of themselves as a different scientist takes them to task - it appears the gap between apes and man is thinning all the time based on a google search.