[HappytheStripper]

"Thought" I would throw this question in here ...

In a world full of question - where people struggle daily to answer, how does one balance the mind? The mind has 2 sides - left side/right side. Opposite sides of thinking???

What would be the result.. if life was without question and the TOE was non-existant???

Your help in answering this question (lol) would be much appreciated...

Thanks

Ashley

[harmonygirl]

Hey Ashley, I think that it is not only the mind that needs to be balanced. Balance between mind and body, balance between soul and mind and body (assuming you believe in a soul, that is), balance between self and other, balance between spiritual certainty and this reality. For the most part, meditation gets my vote. This translates into awareness, which tends to be balancing (or so I find). I guess I think that life is without question (but wouldn't this be an aspect of the TOE?). If the TOE didn't exist, the search for it would still be useful. Life is the journey, not the destination...(I sound like a fortune cookie!)

[Guille]

There is no need for balance in the mind. Sometimes we use one side and sometimes we use the other. Sometimes ( but less) we use both, but msot of the time not at the same proportions. And the ideas we get when we think with both sides at the same ammount aren't better ideas or the big ideas. Einstein had the idea of space-time being the fabric of the universe using his spatial intelligence and his mathematico-imaginative brain. Not the rest.

[HappytheStripper]

So what happens when all the questions we ask daily are answered like TOE for example .. does that mean we have acheived a level of conscious awareness ... would the mathematical equation be one of balance??? What would be the benefits of TOE if not balance?????? I'm taking refresher courses in maths so I can better understand and participate ...

[harmonygirl]

Hey HtS, I think balance is important but also a question of perspective. As noted in other threads, equality in nature simply doesn't exist. I prefer the Mandelbrot notion of 'becoming' rather than 'equalling' as this appears to me to be more true (and ultimately balancing!)

[mkirkpatrick]

Ashley my toequest buddy,I see there is a misnomer here in evidence,and so far no one has seen it,except me of course????There are no sides to mind,
left or right,the brain has,BUT,the mind is NOT the brain,the mind exists,
outside of the continuum as we know it!And is not contained within the
head.The mind activates the brain,and although the brain could beseen as a
physical representation of the mind,they are seperate,the brain dies at
physical death,the mind however continues upon its way.Hope that has brought balance to the post?



kind regards michael.

[HappytheStripper]

yes thank you michael it has .. hope to chat soon ..

Ashley

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by HappytheStripper yes thank you michael it has .. hope to chat soon .. Ashley

Thank you Ashley.balance is my middle name!When a person
hasa mental breakdown here,in the UK,it is often referred to as "its all in the mind" usually meaning that they are thought of as nuts?It should really be
called "it is all in the brain"?Wonder why this occurs!
kindest regards michael.

[Guille]

If we see (metaphysically speaking) the body as positive mass and the mind as negative mass, then we can say that the 'communication' between the two is the compensation to make the values equal, so our total existence of what we have is zero. If we burn our hand, our mind will hurt, therefore the mass that is added to the things that happen to the body (that it burns) is equilibrated by the mass that is added to the things that happen in the mind (that it hurts). It also works inverse (from mind to body). Now, as the total number of what we have, of what we occupy, is zero, in order to really exist to the external 'other' we must have communication with it. And this is what we do. This is art, in language, in sound, in image. This is expression (art) and impression (philosophy). Observation (science) has no place here, that is, it is not about the entity and the other, it is about the entity's 'other' and the 'other's' entity. So, in contrary to what capitalism (liberalism), traditionalism (conservatism) and state-people theories (socialism) tell us, having is not being, for being is doing. And this is an honest principle which we should follow and learn from the theory of some theologies. I'm an atheist, but not stupid to know the value of that principle.

[harmonygirl]

actually, Guille, being is being, not necessarily doing.