We are not equal

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It changes absolutely nothing in how we treat one another by simply understanding this.

If people truly understood this, then they would know that whenever they see other human beings as "inferior", that is just a belief system and doesn't change the reality that everyone is just human (equal).

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

There is no difference between saying one is rich in spirit and one is rich in money, and therefor worth more. They are value judgements made according to arbitrary standards governed by self-appointed moral authorities, taken completely out of context, and therefor irrational.

True.

But, then there are sayings that money can't buy respect or love just like how God never likes to be idolized for it does not really exist. Just like how it not the suit that make the man, or if one wants to get into the feminine context, the shoes then.

Or how Gold can lose its luster, or wine or bread losing its taste.

If one truly believes that all is not equal then one has separated oneself out. The one that is separated out will be suffering from isolation - never feeling as though one fits in.
It is the ego (the divided one) that compares.

What is good or bad about the light? Can the ever presently changing light be better or worse? The light is just playing, moving, it is just scene.

'Who' can be better or worse (not equal) when it is found that there is no one?

If the illusion of 'a separate me' is there then you can be sure you will be struggling with being better and fearing being worse. You will look out and seek those who seem to be worse off to make you feel better. Always seeking to feel better - feeling better happens by just feeling. FEEL what you feel no matter what the feeling is and you will at least FEEL instead of dreaming of being better than another. Thinking better will not make you feel better. There maybe an under current feeling of not being enough which drives one to seek for more. That feeling of lack needs to be gotten rid of and the mind tries so hard to help but the only way is to FEEL it.

If there is a feeling of lack then one will look to the world to see how everyone else appears to be doing. If you are seeking in the world for fulfilment watch and listen. Listening is feeling.

Listening without the mind is feeling. Listening to the mind is feeling.
'Who' is listening???

a reply to: TrenchRun

You can love and empathize with 100,000,000 people and still be incapable of giving them anything of value that they want and/or need.

So not being able to give someone something they need even though you don't have it either means you're not treating them equal? That doesn't make any sense, and neither does your explanation about your previous example. Treating others badly does not mean you want to be treated that way as well, your example still doesn't make any sense in the context of my posts.

Treating others equally has nothing to do with material exchange at all. It has to do with empathy, respect, love, and compassion. Those are not material things yet they show equal treatment to others.

Again, material exchange of any kind has nothing to do with what I'm saying. Material exchange is the antithesis to what I'm saying. Treating people as your equal doesn't involve giving them something or vice versa.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I don't understand... what part of my post was dogmatic? You don't believe everyone deserves equal rights? That includes punishment if they infringe on another's rights just to be clear.

Just because we are different does not mean we are not equal. 2+2=4 and 1+3=4, they are different yet they are equal.

Also, just because the world around me shows people hurting others doesn't mean the victims didn't have an equal right to life as the attacker.

I was only sharing my view, it seems you are the one uninterested in others thoughts and only your own. Your OP is expressed from your own unique mental lexicon. What makes your version any better than mine?

I never said anything about your post is dogmatic. I wasn't even writing about you. I don't know you.

But its obvious my lengthy posts defining my reasoning to you was a complete waste of time.

a reply to: arpgme

If people truly understood this, then they would know that whenever they see other human beings as "inferior", that is just a belief system and doesn't change the reality that everyone is just human (equal).

If everyone is equal, why aren't we?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

If one truly believes that all is not equal then one has separated oneself out. The one that is separated out will be suffering from isolation - never feeling as though one fits in.
It is the ego (the divided one) that compares.

Perhaps in your case you deal with isolation when you use your powers of discernment. To me it is the complete opposite.

'Who' can be better or worse (not equal) when it is found that there is no one?

No one has written this down? These words must have appeared on their own, I suppose. We've argued this a thousand times, and I simply do not think this principle has any meaning.

If the illusion of 'a separate me' is there then you can be sure you will be struggling with being better and fearing being worse. You will look out and seek those who seem to be worse off to make you feel better. Always seeking to feel better - feeling better happens by just feeling. FEEL what you feel no matter what the feeling is and you will at least FEEL instead of dreaming of being better than another. Thinking better will not make you feel better. There maybe an under current feeling of not being enough which drives one to seek for more. That feeling of lack needs to be gotten rid of and the mind tries so hard to help but the only way is to FEEL it.

Once again, perhaps you struggle with being better and fear being worse when you consider your own individuality, and you prefer the comfort of your own good feelings to your reason, which apparently brings you bad feelings, but in my case thinking makes me feel quite splendid. No feeling of lack, no feeling of not being enough, no feeling that I could want more. Actually it's quite the contrary. Thinking has brought me closer to people, more appreciative of them, of myself, and the world around me. To me, the passive, indiscriminate solipsism that you speak of is what detaches one from the world, for in your principle that there is "no one", I wager you do not care more for a loved one, then you would a stone. I do not personally value that type of indiscriminate reason, however it may work quite well for you.

Of course we're not equal. Duh. I don't think egalitarians - or whatever they're named - think everybody is equal on every level. The idea behind the equality movement is to ensure people are free and can prove themselves and aren't turned away because of prejudice or contempt or otherwise for the wrong reasons. It's the spirit of the movement which defines it, not the paperwork. I'm sure the paperwork is much more complicated.

And what of those people who've failed to prove themselves capable? I tend to have a gut reaction when I see people who have not lived up to the expectations placed on them by family and society. My reaction is to immediately feel compassion, or at least curiosity. I do not think people desire to fail or to not meet the standards implicit to daily life. I don't think a drunk, upon exiting their mother and entering this world, strived to drink themselves into oblivion from the very first moment. Things happened, some of which were bad choices on their part. Whether they can be blamed or not doesn't ease the feelings I might feel for them or as result of them. Neither do I think a criminal set out to commit crime from the beginning moments of life. Yes, those who've failed might be blamed for bad choices, yet they're still there, like a monument to all that has failed or ever will.

I feel like we're all part of a tree and what occurs on one part of it can have implications for other parts. We're intertwined.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If everyone is equal, why aren't we?

Because their belief system about "inferiority" causes them to see others as less than human, and so they treat others with inequality because of that belief system.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Just because I disagree doesn't mean it was a waste of time. I read your post but was compelled to reply to that section of it because I assumed you were talking about me. Sorry for assuming, truly.

Everyone has their own opinions, no need to get twisted about it (not directed at you). Agree to disagree.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

tit for tat

Let’s be realistic. Those who seek to put everyone on equal grounds do so in their imagination.

Replace with:
"Let’s be realistic. Those who seek to put everyone on "different" grounds do so in their imagination."

Works both ways, so you can null and void either way in this argument, or just transcend both by agreeing all thought is illusion

a reply to: dominicus

Not really. We can confirm through reason, observation and evidence, or we can just guess, and when we are consistently wrong, just tell ourselves that all thought is an illusion.

Thought isn't an illusion. Thinking is real.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: dominicus

Not really. We can confirm through reason, observation and evidence, or we can just guess, and when we are consistently wrong, just tell ourselves that all thought is an illusion.

Thought isn't an illusion. Thinking is real.

reason itself deduces that reason is limited, for when I enjoy art, am in love, experience the present moment prior to thinking about it, there is no reason in any of that.

observation is limited: Cats see more frequencies of light, whales hear more frequencies of sound, dogs smell more units of smell, and the list goes on. So who are we to say that our observations are correct in the limited fashion that we observe, with the limited instruments that we have?

evidence? We don't have all the evidence and maybe never will as humans. The more we find, the deeper the rabbit hole goes.

If thinking is real, then I'm guessing you'd prefer the thought of a winning lotto ticket, instead of the actual one?

Of course we aren't equal. Nor are we the same. To say that we are one is as fruitless and dishonest as to say we are the other, surely.

My life is of equal value as to any other's. That does not make it the same.
Just my thoughts.
Always enjoy your threads, nonetheless, LesMis.
tetra

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
So not being able to give someone something they need even though you don't have it either means you're not treating them equal?

No, what it means is that when push comes to shove, rubber meets road, gut meets hunger... you can, do, will, and must exhibit discernment. Discernment which requires you to view individuals according to their individual traits and behaviors. Discernment which when looked at honestly, reveals everything about your own internal structure and filtering mechanism for determining the varieties of value.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Treating others badly does not mean you want to be treated that way as well, your example still doesn't make any sense in the context of my posts.

It makes perfect sense, if you are ever willing to move out of 4,5,6,42D existence and come work with us here in 3D. Nobody anywhere in this thread, has said anything about treating anyone badly. You are the one introducing "good/bad" into "can/can't" evaluations.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Treating others equally has nothing to do with material exchange at all.

It does if you want to move outside the realm of words.

You have 10 "Give a damns".
There are 200 "Need a damns".

You can "emotionally" treat them all equally... but when it comes time for you to actually distribute your limited quantity of "Give a damns", whether it's money, a role in a play, an hour talking, an acknowledgement of existence... you are going to have to pick and choose which .5% are going to receive your "Give a damns".

It's easy to "Give a damn" via words to "nobody in particular" aimed at "everyone in general". Yet when it comes time for someone who actually needs an hour of your time, there will always be 50 more who could also use the exact same time.

When I walk down my local "clubbing street" and spend an hour or two with a homeless person hearing their stories, offering my experience, and understanding their life path... there are 100 more in line at the homeless shelter.

Yes, I'm willing to be "equally" open to them... however depending on *their* behavior and depending on proximity, time, etc... I may or may not allocate my completely non-material exchange of time, attention, and affection. At the end of the day, I'm still choosing who gets it and who doesn't.

You do it too, unless you are one of those "beings" I've read about who doesn't actually exist here in 3D merely offering electronic disassociated advice from a realm of existence that is ultimately as naive as a rich kid is relative to a trailer park kid's experience.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
It has to do with empathy, respect, love, and compassion. Those are not material things yet they show equal treatment to others.

Walk down to your local homeless shelter and exude empathy, respect, love, and compassion and nothing else and see what that gets them. NOW... take 10 pairs of shoes and distribute it among 100 people. Then come back a week later and talk to the 6 people who are shoeless again, the 5 people who are wearing the shoes you gave others, the 3 people wearing one shoe and the 3 people they shared the other half with and are all now walking with a limp that will harm their posture, and the 1 person who has 2 pairs of shoes.

Put on a play for "joy" and "compassion" and have 3 people try out for the lead role. When you turn down two of them and one of them hugs you and thanks you for the chance, and the other gets a lawyer and sues you for racism, sexism, ageism, or whatever... treat all 3 of the people who auditioned equally.

You can try your best to be "equally respectful" despite "unequal reactions", but that won't be true and you know it... and you have no control over the person suing you perceiving your every effort to be "respectful" declaring your efforts "disrespectful" and misrepresenting your words as evidence for shutting your entire volunteer theater down because it's "somethingist".

Yes, you can at a highly detached level say "You are all expressing yourself as you are, and I respect you all for who you are"... but when it comes time to ACT as opposed to speak/think... you are going to exercise discernment and treat them unequally.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Again, material exchange of any kind has nothing to do with what I'm saying. Material exchange is the antithesis to what I'm saying. Treating people as your equal doesn't involve giving them something or vice versa.

You are focused on material exchange. I've done my best to leave it open to material, time, attention, verbal tone, whatever. The only thing I emphasize is that at some level, an "exchange" happens. Either an opportunity, or an hour, or a dollar, or a look, or a word, or a hug, or whatever. If you are here in 3D... you ARE and MUST be discerning between person A and person B.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Thinking is real.

You only thought you were thinking! YOU FOOLED YOU!

Your existence only exists because it is a useful contradiction to your non-existence.

'yer me!

originally posted by: arpgme
Because their belief system about "inferiority" causes them to see others as less than human...

Some people's belief system of equality causes them to see everyone as less than human.

You can see someone as an inferior opera singer without viewing them as less than human.

However if we are all to be equal, we are all to be constrained by the lowest possible denominator.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The narcissism is strong in this one.

I think by the rhetorical comment "we're all equal", people really mean to say, "we all deserve an equal chance at life". What we do with that chance determines our worth as human beings; not our social/cultural status which, for many, is out of our control until well into adulthood.

We can't pick our origins... but we can decide our own fate - that's what being human means. Sure, we all inhabit the same cosmic ether - and in that sense we're all "One", or we all come from the same source of being. But we all manifest our being's existence in unique ways. To me, "we're all equal" means we're all human beings - we all have to face the same hardships of conscious existence, so we all deserve the same basic rights and access to the same basic help in that regard. What's so bad about that? To take the rhetorical statement "we're all equal" to mean "we're all the same in every way - literally" is... well, just plain silly.

But what the hell do I know about anything?

a reply to: dominicus

How did you come up with and express the notion "thinking is an illusion" without first thinking about it? At some point you must have thought about this. Perhaps you are dictating cue cards. Very strange, in my opinion.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I think you missed the context of it. I could be wrong but the way I have always understood it is that "we are all equal before the law". This means that every man must be responsible for his actions.