Help
Sign In
bridge
March 2009 
What bridge would you like to build in your life?
Posted on Nov 4th, 2008
by 
profundity
profundity
This is in Response to the Questions and Reflections for November 04, 2008:
I would like to build a bridge between insanity and lucidity, two dynamics of a similar perceptual framework. The average person does not realize that the reason that they are average is because they do not know what geniuses know ... that the average person is effectively insane and incapable of understanding the complexities that are necesary to be aware of in order to see true reality. Otherwise why would SOOO many people actually consider voting for someone like McCain? Because they are effectively insane. For that matter anyone who thinks that a vote actually has ANY effect upon their lives is also effectively insane. Anyone who thinks that laws have any meaning to the people who print or otherwise bring new money into existence is effectively insane.
On the other hand, the lucid people who understand all this are considered to be insane by the average person so how do we build a bridge between these two dynamics of insanity? By doing what I am doing now by understanding the concepts of Spiral Dynamics Integral (SDi) and by participating in Integral Dialogue to elucidate the darkness and allow the blind to truly see.
On the other hand, the lucid people who understand all this are considered to be insane by the average person so how do we build a bridge between these two dynamics of insanity? By doing what I am doing now by understanding the concepts of Spiral Dynamics Integral (SDi) and by participating in Integral Dialogue to elucidate the darkness and allow the blind to truly see.
Access: PublicTagged with: QaR, connection, bridge, bridging, insanity, insane, genius, complexity, complexities, Integral Dialogue
Albert wrote:
> Well, beeing on Don Becks Yahoo list since the beginnings and participating
> actively I saw many healthy pro McCains voices too. This Interview with Don Beck
> done by Jessica Roemischer, shows clearly: its not easy to say in a concrete
> and responsible way who is insane. Transpartisan thinking has starting points
> in conservatism, pragmatism, liberalism and any other already existing orbit .
Albert, quoting other people's works does not demonstrate awareness and understanding of those works “by you.” So-called transpartisan thinking that begins with an “ism” demonstrates an initial insanity. Granted, that insanity may be transmuted by the “elimination” of such isms through Integral Dialogue but to “have” an ism is to have an insanity, it is not simply a point-of-view, it is a “stuck” point-of-view. A “starting point” for further dialogue and potential “healing,” yes. The article that you quoted deals with “polarization” which has absolutely NOTHING to do with my post as BOTH sides of any polarization is “insane” and was intentionally instigated as a means of FORCING people to be that way, forcing people into a particular contextualization of their view WITHOUT Integral Dialogue.
Please refrain from commenting upon my posts until you have thought the issue over carefully and are free from any intoxicants.