Thursday, January 19, 2006


This is the second time I wrote a particularly controversial post, pressed 'publish' and the computer went down. This time it was the modem (first time since fixed a few months ago) but either way it forced me to reconsider.

I have, and I'll write the same thing, but not in such a controversial way. I don't really want to frighten the horses.

Anyway, I realised why I get so much stick from a few people for appearing to know it all, and I will explain. I've been accused of this for most of my life, and it seems it's because I have an apparently clearer view of many of the philosophical and political situations in life many others seem to struggle with. It's mainly my intuition plus knowledge to a lesser degree, and as I spent many years training to communicate what I know, I then try and do so as clearly as possible. I just seem to see answers as simple or obvious, and wonder how many clever people seem to have so little ability to see all round these situations. As someone recently said, they have the intellect but not the wisdom. I didn't choose to be able to do this, it's just something I've discovered purely as a comparitive, as until I see the trouble so many others have with what seems clear to me I realise I appear to understand many things beyond what others do. That gets you into a lot of trouble.

Any other natural talent, art, music, whatever, you are expected and encouraged to show what you can do, and criticised if you hide your light under a bushel. But if you're aware, and not being paid for it (as I am when counselling) you're usually considered a smartarse. The internet, especially the blog, has given me my best opportunity to show what I'm made of, and unlike my art which has received a reception beyond what I expected, often when I try and explain concepts many disagree over I get told to pull my head in. Many people are driven by emotion and sometimes religion, which can blind them to many points they'd rather not hear. And opinions and beliefs only exist until we find the truth. Then they disappear as all becomes known. For instance do animals feel emotion? With mainly my intuition I can still say animals have virtually the same emotions as we do, but I can't prove it. But if a cat could talk, we'd know and be able to save years of research that could never be conclusive. I seem to be able to oversee situations, put together all the information, and come to a conclusion which seems pretty simple when I actually do it. Instead of people telling me to lay off, I'd far rather be offered discussion topics so I could see if I could come up with answers to show exactly what I could do. Some boffins get paid a bomb in think tanks and universities to do just this, but when you're doing it as yourself the credit seems to vanish.

There are people who I can usually spot very quickly who can also do this, including some 'spiritual' teachers, such as Prem Rawat and Nick Roach, and others who have taught in education, such as Tommy Boyd and Peter my biology teacher. Once I notice someone's 'got it' I'm rarely let down by them later. On the other side, many people who are the top of their profession come out with 9 year old responses to some issues, which show they may be good at their job but not generally. Just watch something like Question Time on TV to see a panel of bright sparks, and see how long it takes for one of them to let themselves down with a statement that clearly is based on a total inability to understand a point.

Well, I think that covers it, and will conclude with Nick Roach's explanation which would explain exactly why I feel in this position. He says as there's only me here and everything else is my dream, of course I'd know more about it than anyone else as it's all me!
Another technique he recommends the modem forced me to do was to write the same post without the emotion. Same ideas and concepts, but no anger. The system worked.

No comments: