ehowton: (Default)

Growing up in the Worldwide Church of God was akin to being in a secret society - no one else understood the things that we understood; during the End Times, we were going to reign over mankind by becoming...gods! We were afforded this luxury through works masquerading as faith - not the stereotypical traditional Christian belief of simplistically accepting Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior, but through following - to the letter - the Old Testament Holy Days. That was the sole path to eternal life through a series of successive biblical resurrections.

Following - to the letter - the Old Testament Holy Days was only half of the equation. The other half was not following traditional faith-based beliefs/behaviors for example the pagan perversion Christmas, and other follow-the-dotted-line activities such as birthdays. If we didn't celebrate the birth of Christ, we certainly weren't going to celebrate (or even for that sake, acknowledge) birthdays. Growing up our own birthdays came and went without so much as a mention because to do so wouldn't honor God (and any fanfare would potentially mark us to be cast into the Lake of Fire from which there was no return).

As I matured and started to question the world around me, many things started disappearing from my priority list - mostly because there were no answers. Its not that I was just super-smart and could out-think or out-reason the answers, rather, there were no answers. At least no answers which made sense, least of all, the very idea surrounding, "faith" as a sustainable course of action. None of this happened very quickly. These types of things rarely do. No, in fact changing one's belief system before one understands how belief systems even work, can take a lifetime. Or in my case, a decade.

To those who are completely devoid of comprehension, why anyone would ever "struggle" with or "question" beliefs instilled in them by another or even ponder the wherewith of the individual doing the instilling (or really, any understanding whatsoever of causation) the entire premise that one's beliefs might change over time due to experience, maturity, or even popular opinion is an entirely foreign concept. Nonetheless, even those in the lowest common denominator are themselves usually capable of taking in new data and processing it. Usually.

So it was of no surprise to me to discover, upon having children of my own, who were going to have birthdays, how I was raised was surely going to conflict with those closest to me. Even my own mother who had since decided all that hooey was just hooey couldn't quite grasp that beliefs which rose and fell during adulthood differed from those which were raised with said beliefs being immutable - which is the problem with beliefs over say, ideas. Ideas can change. We expect ideas to change, to expand, to mutate. But not beliefs. And I'm not talking just religious beliefs. People's worldviews are as fanatically immutable.

So I struggled with changing myself. I struggled with dismantling beliefs which weren't rooted in concrete empiricism, or logic. I worked to dismiss how I was raised from creeping into my decisions and my behavior. Not unexpectedly, it took awhile. I read and learned and questioned and grew and shared all this information with everyone who knew me, from my cult-like beginnings to what I had incrementally overcome. My children never knew the difference in the two me's.

Let's go back to my comments on processing data. Even now, those who were closest to me, and watched firsthand my transformation over nearly ten full years on a day-to-day basis will comment, without skipping a beat, "So now you're celebrating birthdays?"
ehowton: (Default)




I recently made the deductive statement that one's personal values surely changed as one ascended from one hierarchical need to the next, but when asked to back up my claim I found I wasn't immediately able to deduce why that may be the case. After all, aren't values inherent to who we are not only immovably individual, but also collectively cultural? This is what I have set out to prove or disprove.

In starting my search, I first had to define values - aren't they our guiding principles to differentiate between right and wrong and good and evil? Much easier to subjugate when I was younger, but now that I'm older and have my own thoughts about things, not so much. Perhaps maturity modifies ones values? After all, the passing of time allows intervals for experience; experience may yield lessons; lessons afford us the opportunity to learn; learning expands knowledge; knowledge which can be utilized grants us wisdom; wisdom changes us irrevocably. But is wisdom alone maturity?

"Maturity indicates how a person responds to the circumstances or environment in an appropriate manner. This response is generally learned and encompasses being aware of the correct time and place to behave and knowing when to act appropriately, according to the situation and the culture of the society one lives in."* So a learned response! And what is this about behavior all of a sudden, I thought we were discussing values?

People act according to their values which come from beliefs that stem from their worldview.*

So...values dictate to us how we act; behave. Interesting! I suppose one ought to start with their worldview in order to understand how that translates to behavior, because values seem to be affected by the beliefs which are spawned from it. So what is a worldview? James W. Sire, in Discipleship of the Mind, defines world view as, "... a set of presuppositions...which we hold...about the makeup of our world." Ah, presuppositions!

Presuppositions rest upon that which a person considers to be the truth of what exists. People's presuppositions lay a grid for all they bring forth into the external world. Their presuppositions also provide the basis for their values and therefore the basis for their decisions." ~Francis Schaeffer

Basically, your worldview is what you think the world ought to be. Where have we heard that word "ought" before? SHOULD STATEMENTS – Patterns of thought which imply the way things "should" or "ought" to be rather than the actual situation the person is faced with.

Basically worldviews are manifestations of cognitive distortion! Now we're getting somewhere.

If you deny that your worldview fundamentally affects what you think and do, then you must acknowledge that your behavior is impulsive, reflexive, or emotional at best; ignorant or irrational at worst. Assuming that a worldview can be incorrect or at least inappropriate, if your worldview is erroneous, then your behavior is misguided, even wrong. If you fail to examine, articulate, and refine your worldview, then your worldview may in fact be wrong, with the above consequences, and you will always be ill-prepared to substantiate your beliefs and justify your acts, for you will have only proximate opinions and direct sensory evidence as justification.*

If we are supposed to, "examine, articulate, and refine" our worldview, then by default a change in our beliefs, values, and behavior will follow. Not only does it alter our values, but so does everything connected to it, every single time we reevaluate. And I aggressively reevaluate without provocation.







Like a stack of dominoes, once your worldview is modified, so then are the beliefs which are built atop it - "You want your beliefs to change. It's proof that you are keeping your eyes open, living fully, and welcoming everything that the world and people around you can teach you."* This means that peoples' beliefs should evolve as they gain new experiences, and when a person changes one belief, a multitude of other beliefs seem also to change simultaneously and effortlessly. Dispositionalism suggests that by changing the surrounding beliefs and desires, very different behavior may result.* As we have seen, the link between beliefs and behavior, are values.

If our worldview can and should change as we learn more, which can and rightly should then change our beliefs, then absolutely our values not only can change to match, but also should. This is covered in chapter 9 of the critical thinking textbook, Think where they discuss Lawrence Kohlberg's Development of Moral Reasoning. Development; growth, a process. Not only can values modify themselves, there is an identified, repeatable sequence - it is how we know what values are and measure them. A person's stage of moral development is correlated with his or her behavior.

  1. PRECONVENTIONAL VALUES
    • Stage 1
      • Does only what needs to be done to take care of self and avoid punishment.

    • Stage 2
      • Satisfy own needs first, consider other's needs only if it benefits you.


  2. CONVENTIONAL VALUES
    • Stage 3
      • Put other's needs first, maintain good relationships, conform to peer norms and seek approval from others.

    • Stage 4
      • Respect authority and societal norms; maintain existing social order.


  3. POSTCONVENTIONAL VALUES


Unfortunately less than 10% of American adults ever reach the postconventional level or moral reasoning; values. People with lower levels of moral reasoning tend to come up with simplistic solutions and then are baffled when they do not work. People outgrow their old way of thinking *when* it becomes inadequate for resolving more complex problems. Movement to a higher stage is usually triggered by new ideas or experiences that conflict with their worldview.

Now comes the really interesting part. You don't have to continue living by the same values. You can consciously change them - even radically if desired. You can go from a person who values peace most highly to one whose top priority is success, or vice versa. You are not your values. You are the thinker of your thoughts, but you are not the thoughts themselves. Your values are your current compass, but they aren't the real you. Why would you ever want to change your values? You may want to change your values when you understand and accept where they are taking you, and you realize that what you appear to value right now will not enable you to enjoy the "best" possible life for you.*

Which brings us to behavior. Behavior is the visible portion of our values - which we now understand to be a very fluid thing based on our ever-changing environment and our open-minded incorporation of new data. You cannot be open-minded and remain unchanged. Because of the trickle-up effect we've just outlined, if you find yourself behaving the same year after year, month after month or even day after day you know you are close-minded because your worldview has not changed.

So what are values? Here's a list of 418 of them. The author of that list says, "The next step is to prioritize your list. This is usually the most time consuming and difficult step because it requires some intense thinking." But don't forget our magnificent ability to think we are things we are not! From my Relationships post:

But being honest with yourself is is not so easy. There's a little thing called self-deception that gets in the way.*

I run across this all the time - people who think their values embody something like benevolence and goodwill but who's visible actions denote fear or greed. So while your behavior may be inconsistent with your stated values, there is no such thing as a right or wrong list. Just be aware that someone else's value priority may be different than your own, and this will absolutely manifest itself through behavior.

Me and my values? They are changing all the time. Every time I have a new thought, or leap to a new conclusion, or reach some personal milestone. My values these days are meta-values, those which underpin the kind of peace which can only come from a successful familiarization with one's self. In attempting to compile my list from the 418 options I was shocked I couldn't find my highest priority on there:


Symmetry.




ehowton: (Default)

Recently fellow-blogger/philosopher & aunt-in-law asked in her post:

It is so difficult for me to abide those groups/individuals that try to justify their views without facts or make them up to fit their belief. The "That's just the way I feel" type of thinking. Now, I don't care if they just do this to themselves, but when they try to impact me with their voodoo logic, I often see red...So am I truly open-minded? ~ [livejournal.com profile] suzanne1945

In this same post she embedded a wonderful video 1 discussing the traits of the open-minded and how their nemesis the close-minded attempt to prey upon them using gross misrepresentation prior to following up with accusations of close-mindedness. Sadly, I am wearily familiar with this "tactic" (if you can call it that). As I have stated before,

"Your counterpoint of, Nuh-uh where considering others' opinions which differ from your own is complex and thought-provoking. I'm going to need a little time to digest it all. Your ability to dismiss multifaceted complexity and break things down into simplistic elements is a refreshing gift." *

But with her question also comes the answer:

  1. Being open-minded simply means being willing to consider new ideas.

  2. When I say I don’t believe something, I’ve not said that it can’t be true.

  3. Open-mindedness isn’t about believing things.

  4. A willingness to consider new ideas doesn’t commit you to accepting them unconditionally.

  5. Critical thinking is not incompatible with open-mindedness, rather it empowers an open mind.


After careful consideration, and based on the information provided in the video, she is open-minded. She'd been given a view, correctly applied critical thinking to it, and rejected it. The fact that she even considered another point of view proves it.

Thanks for the exercise!

1 - Transcript Here
ehowton: (Default)

Once I've formed an opinion about something, in an attempt to not live in a vacuum of self-importance, I always ask myself, "What if I'm wrong?" Then I argue with myself about both sides. Of course its better to have this actual conversation with someone who has a different opinion - I can't think of everything - but the problem, the real problem arises when the person I'm engaging *actually* believes that they are right, and I am wrong. At that point they will no longer accept my input to see how it fits into their world view, and I'm suddenly offered nothing usable because of it in return. Which is why I ceaselessly play this game only with myself. Ideally, the practice would make me more well-rounded.


You can't confine open-mindedness to particular subjects or scenarios. You either are, or you are not. Example: Someone willing to discuss the pros and cons of both political parties, but who refuses to entertain the possibility that Christ's divinity was fabricated. Or perhaps worse - someone willing to discuss Christ's divinity but unable to budge on party-politics. Across the board I find bright, smart, curious, people who can seemingly articulate two opposing points of view...until it comes down to something they simply refuse to change on. How exactly does that work?


So trapped I remain. Trapped by being open-minded about being open-minded. You cannot extol virtues of mine that you find conducive to your personal code of ethics without accepting the same ones which may run contrary to it. Its all or nothing. It has to be. Any other way and its impure. Fallible. Yet....where does one draw the line?


Without boundaries, anarchy. But if we're the ones who have defined society, why can't we control it? Its not that I don't care, I simply feel that sometimes I'm too passive, too malleable. Yet I suffer at my own hands. Its not enough to think it, you have to do it. Push the envelope with your person, feel its texture on your fingertips. Otherwise how would you truly know? Its absolutely essential to test and retest with each nuanced variable, for without is real chaos. Chaos and anarchy borne from both extremes. One lifetime with too many boundaries, and one with not enough. Wherein lies true balance?


Surely somewhere in the middle.


ehowton: (Default)





Above all, know thyself. No, its not the biblical term for masturbation. I mean the apparent phenomenon that many people don't actually know themselves well enough to anticipate their own reactions to any number of random stimuli. Or worse, the same stimuli under different circumstances. Yes, I run into this on a near-daily basis. I even have a helpful reverse-idiom of sorts at the ready for times I encounter it. Its my get out of jail free card. I ask more or less, "Is my request the first of its nature?" I ask it to anyone who's job it is to perform a very specific function, yet who appear genuinely surprised * when its my turn to ask it of them.


The Judeo-Christian systems of belief would have you believe that the meek are going to inherit the earth. Not meek as its defined now, as it was. To mean gentle, yielding. As in turning oneself over to the service of the Lord and not fighting against His Will (Thy Will be done). I've sat through many a sermon agonizing over and studying the original Hebrew dialect in order to gain understanding of the word choice first used by King David in Psalms and later by Christ in Matthew. After all, who doesn't want to inherit the earth?


Unsurprisingly, I feel differently. Not that I don't want to inherit the earth - I do, but that I alone shall inherit it. At least, myself and those of my ilk. For its not the meek who will do so, rather the open-minded; those who can integrate new information into their belief system and exceed the limitations of their programming. The funny thing about close-mindedness as an ethos is that it has a way of proving itself ineffective through active rejection of newly discovered knowledge. So if the close-minded can claim that they shall inherit the earth through close-mindedness, I can certainly claim otherwise - and I have a whole lot more confidence in the unprejudiced, unbigoted, and impartial than the millions of monotheists out there who would disagree with me. Close-mindedness just seems like such a dead-end way of life despite their unsubstantiated claims to the contrary.


I personally learn through a process of doing - hands on experimentation. Succeeding and failing both. If the outcome is not as expected, I change a variable and try again. Some people give up entirely upon their first failure and see any further attempts as fruitless defeatism. Others try and try again, but miss completely the learning portion of the lesson by refusing to change any variables. In this case, I feel that I am with what I have presumed is the majority - those who persevere no matter their ideology, and that I can at least respect.


Changing, growing, can be as difficult as attempting to define something as elusive as love. Some make lists of things they do which prove love, or have ideas about another's actions which would run contrary to that list, thus disprove it - after all, we all see the world differently. Myself? I only know the depth of my feelings of affection and devotion - without lists. The moment I've written it down it runs the risk of limiting me - slowing me down from experiencing something which may greatly add to my exposure. Lists can get confining fast, and most of us aren't into limiting our expressions of love, but growing them - exceeding both the expectations of others, and expectations of self. Think Old Testament versus New Testament. In the former "works" were required for blessings, in the latter only Grace.


And speaking of sweeping theological changes, ever since Christ said so then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot I will spue thee out of my mouth, I've been walking the narrow path between two camps of hotheads everywhere I go. No matter what the subject of conversation is, NO ONE WANTS TO BE SPEWED FROM JESUS' MOUTH. They therefore run full hot, or full cold, under the assumption that one is more important than the other, never bothering to question why, and only seeking council and advice from like-minded folk which is nothing more than egotistical validation. These people are incapable of feeling shame, replacing it with pride and calling it humility. How can I combat that?


I was a teenager when my mother explained to me that I needed to get to know myself. I thought she was an idiot - I was me for goodness sake - how could I not know me? Of course I discovered what she meant during the months I spent in near-isolation the first time I left home. 5,130 miles from home to be precise. And have since learned that there are other activities in which to acquaint yourself with...yourself. The same tools used in character-building can also illuminate autognosis if you allow it, as its something which requires nurturing. And despite my own series of scenarios of how I would behave in any series of circumstances, even I'm surprised by my own emotional reactions at times. Except that by adding that knowledge to my data-set then helps me in anticipating it in future outcomes, thus strengthening my armament for dealing with whatever life throws at me. Perfect? No. Better than being continually (and more often than not negatively) surprised by life? Absolutely.


I told a young man once what my father told me when I was a young man, "The severe polarity you feel righteously about is common amongst youth. As you grow, learn, experience and mature, you'll start to question everything. And when you do, you'll find you become more moderate in your views as you discover the truth, which always lies somewhere in the middle." I explained to this young man that my father's words were true because it was just as I had experienced it, and I wanted him to experience it as well. This freedom from a lifetime of ignorance. The youth said I was stupid for being so weak to turn away from [whatever the ideological conversation was at the time].


So go forth and be meek. Or not. Run hot and cold. It doesn't matter, you're not going to inherit the earth. I am. I will outlast you. I will try and fail and learn and succeed. My dizzying array of hands-on empirical activities will trump your hibernation because I am infinitely flexible. Entropy destroys that which is unchanging - like those principles you put so much stock into - but has a difficult time feeding from that which grows and I am on a path of personal growth. I'll get mine in the end, and this is why.







* http://ehowton.livejournal.com/322402.html

ehowton: (Default)

I love having conversations with open-minded people, even those who lack the breadth of travel and experience I have had - it doesn't matter because they're so open minded they understand even things they've never experienced. I admire these people because I'm their opposite - I learn through empirical testing. That being said, I really do hate talking with close-minded people. Interestingly enough, I've met very few who are as well traveled or well experienced as I am. Travel and experience seem to be one of the pivotal turning points between the two. Its hard to be close-minded if you're well traveled. Unless you are a creature of politics or religion.

Its complicated, really; two of the three things you're not supposed to talk about is the basis for the close-minded type - what they want/expect to be known for. By their own choice it identifies them. And even if you remove the third taboo subject - money - these days you can add sex because of its many and varied combinations. What a clusterfuck!

I've been cataloging this for awhile now and I'm pretty sure that the majority of extremely brilliant open-minded thinkers I've met have neither strong political nor religious underpinnings. They simply transcend it - that which would hold a lesser person back from experiencing the world with eyes of wonder and curiosity. Sadly, the opposite is also very, uncomfortably true: If you are overly political or overly religious, I've found you prohibitively close-minded. Hysterically enough, the latter would also argue the point with me. As if I would care what they had to say to me on the matter.

And yet there are those who have traveled much more extensively than I have. Those who are way smarter than I am. Those who are older, and those who have done so much more and different things. It all seems to boil down to religion and politics. If you're dyed-in-the-wool, born-again, and/or hold a single-party political viewpoint, you can't even understand what I'm talking about - your limitations limit you.

I was you.

In every way possible.

With one divergence.

I questioned everything.

And that has made all the difference.


"Whether we are feeling happy or unhappy at any given moment often has
very little to do with our absolute conditions but, rather, it is a
function of how we perceive our situation, how satisfied we are with
what we have." ~ Dalai Lama


ehowton: (Default)

The time draws near when I will once again unzip my Eric suit* and shrug out of it to dally; to pull the skeletons from my closet and polish them for playtime; to swim the warm waters of sins of the flesh. Each seemingly meaningless passing milisecond compounds with many others to create entire whole seconds which then gather up together amongst themselves in multitude before exploding into a full minute - the pressure exerting on the pistons of life, forcing the crankshaft of time to turn slightly. The clock ticks once again. Precious distance covered as the minute hand sweeps over the landscape, turning the present into the past in the blink of an eye. A lifetime stretches in both directions laid before you and behind you. Time is an engine fueled by an inexhaustable supply of hopes and dreams and happiness, spewing out toxic byproducts of grief and anger and hatred.

Too many place their lips around the hot pipe of exhaust in a debasing show of ingratitude, attempting to suck life everlasting from the cock of mankind, not caring if death rises in its stead. They cling too tightly to their convictions - their untested, unproven, unchallenged morals which are blindly followed. This! This is the definition of close-minded, one who sticks to their principles. One must absolutely be able to prove to themselves before they can prove to others why they believe what it is they believe, and without the understanding that the knowledge they process is colored through expereinces which modify their interpreation of information, they are doomed to ingest those byproducts which metabolize into confusion and unhappiness. Unsuck, and challenge first yourself! Marvel at what you discover, and put it into practice forthwith. Give back to those who have given you so much through their patience and understanding, and judge not those who have yet to accept knowledge as their personal Board of Behavior.

The time draws near when I will step out of my Eric suit and leave its crumpled facade laying at my feet. I will stretch forth my arms as if I were a mighty bird and flex the tight muscles of my back, tight with the burden of responsibility, tight with righteousness. Tight with the oppressivness of accountability. And like the phoenix, I shall rise and roar. A mighty roar of cleansing fire. Expelled from reborn lungs. And when all is quiet I will turn my back on the world and rechallenge my own convictions in alphabetical order; immerse myself in them wholly; drink them in with all my senses and roll them around my tongue.

The purgatory I create for myself when I turn from these Earthly desires, these...urges - I live a blameless life of virtue without sin nor vice - is sustainable excepting a single season, for its cost is high and the piper's payment nips at my heels annually. If a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound? If I hide my visage from the known world and frolic with angles for a time, are the sounds I will invariably make be heard?

I have a date with myself. A veritable lustfest planned. I'm going to focus on me for just a little while, and deny myself nothing. When I emerge in 2011, I'll be filled with the glory, majesty, power and authority before all ages, now and forevermore to once again regain my throne and take care of those I have been given dominion over to the best of my ability, without regret.

Where's my wine?



* - 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009

July 2025

S M T W T F S
   1234 5
6 7 8 9101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags