Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
Being aware of our personal limitations gives us the collective potential
to seaf ourselves to live much fuller personal lives
than we do not acknowledging our personal limitations.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 FINDING: All humans require seafing to live optimally in complex human orgs. Special seafing will be required to uplift our dysfunctional humankind to a viable humanity.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 All humans are severely dysfunctional, relative to what needs doing, much of which we don’t yet know (what needs doing), so learning that – is what we most need to be doing. Those most functional in their life notch may be the most in need of seafing. Not because of what they are doing (which most likely is making things worse – indirectly), but because only they have existing knowledge/competencies to start their new learning/development so as to be prepared to begin actions to eventually turn everyone around; yet they are often the most resistive to real change.
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 There is no blame. Each person is where-they-are-at by their particular mix of Nature/Nurture-over-time, with a little personal agency that seldom was significant. Recognizing and taking advantage of a rare opportunity is probably the type of personal agency most powerful. Who we are is more a matter of chance, than choice. Drive is not agency, but a Nature/Nurture developed tool that can be used by agency. Drive doesn’t always lead to the best actions.
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 Human persons emerge by their brain’s OS organizing the outcomes of events in their lives, most of the events not being chosen. When some persons get to a point where they can partly determine their events, the set of events from which they can chose has been very severely limited – and they are not free to chose events outside this narrow set. The set, itself, is seldom, if ever, chosen.
¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 FINDING: No one can change significantly by themselves. Our over dependence on personal agency and conscious will is detrimental to the viability of human social/societal/cultural systems, and the survival/thrival of humankind/Gaia.
¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 Of course, it all depends on how we define “significantly”. In a sense, the statement is a tautology when “significantly” is defined as what is beyond the competencies of the individual person to comprehend on their own.
¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 This is a “finding”, in that scientific evidence could be assembled that demonstrates how individual persons are significantly limited in their accurate perception and comprehension of all that may be relevant to their lives and future well-being, from their available stimuli and without seafing/helping http://nuet.us/2016/08/24/seafing-and-helping/ by others.
¶ 12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 HELPing is action taken in the Here&Now in response to needs (perceived and comprehended) present in the Here&Now. Much helping is hard-wired, in mammals and is essential in nuturing young. The Mutual Aide with tribes is helping.
¶ 13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 SEAFing is action taken in the Here&Now consistent within strategies of actions based on temporal analysis of complex situations, relating Here&Now conditions to cyberspace accessible data, information, and possible assistance by coordinated teams & persons.
¶ 14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 Within close groups of intimate persons, seafing and helping are integrated. Seafing intimates involves considerable subconscious analysis of the other in terms of the person’s own needs – with intention to CHANGE the other, which makes it seafing.
¶ 16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 INSIGHT: Deep seafing refers to seafing when the seafed person’s deep psychology is used, along with the deep psychology of close associates, friends, co-workers, colleagues as well as analyzed futures scenarios/strategies that may involve the future changes for seafed person.
The “personal rights” of a person being deep seafed is a topic what needs extensive exploration. Should the person being deep seafed be provided access to all (or limited) information about him/er self and the process? Should they be assisted in comprehending the information, if requested?
In the context of this doc, persons can never be “totally free”(a delusional myth in the ideology of individualism). As infants they were subject to the whims of others; all through life they encounter unanticipated others, events, circumstances, and opportunities. Their development of cognitive skills for navigating life is also mostly out of a person’s agency.
Yet, the societal/cultural entity that will have seafing as a subsystem must be carefully secure against invasion by destructive forces.
Mini Semfields for Mutual Aide
¶ 21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0 This is an exploratory topic. It relates to possibly soon to be created, teams of persons, who mutually explore their deep psychology, involving a private semfield for the team, and a mutual seafing system.
¶ 25 Leave a comment on paragraph 25 0 There is a human propensity to chose between alternative actions – essential for quick survival decisions. This propensity to treat alternatives as competitive causes serious difficulty when planning or strategizing future actions.
¶ 26 Leave a comment on paragraph 26 0 “Complementarity” is a relationship between alternative perspectives that was found necessary in Quantum Physics. You may know it as the wave/particle duality. Light and matter can be observed as a wave (field) or particle, depending on the situation; but only one at a time, when observed. I have generalized this to claim that reality (whatever “it” “is”) cannot be comprehended by one, single, logically consistent, explanatory scheme.
¶ 27 Leave a comment on paragraph 27 0 Human persons as (1) having “free” conscious agency and (2) being determined as components of social systems are in a complementarity relationship, they are not competitive. Free/Determined is analog to Wave/Particle, in complementarity.
It is not nature OR nurture, but nature AND nurture. It is not mind OR heart, but mind AND heart. But, the AND may not imply a kind of total integration as in everyday metaphor.
When a person acts in belief of their conscious will, that action is REAL in terms of their effects on the processes within their brains/wrlds. They can WILL (not always achieved) their inner wrld to change to meet their desires; even if their inner wrld is conflicted with evidence (they could perceive, but don’t) with an intersubjective (consequential) world. WILL can often have strong so-called, sub-conscious components.
The so-called REAL WORLD, that OBJECTIVE REALITY (that bites us in the ass when we ignore it) IS REAL (consequential), but our knowledge of IT is never direct and always hypothetical within our inner wrlds.