Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bill Gellermann on November 18, 2011 at 4:29pm

As I understand it, the core of the 99% worldview is that each of us is simultaneously "me" and "we."  For me that recognition (literally re-cognition or re-knowing) means I listen to both my intuition (spirit) and my ego and then follow my intuition.  After doing this for a while, I am finding that the two are aligned more and more of the time.

Imagine what life would be like if we all cared about "we" and "me."  As I see it, Occupy (Wall Street, the U.S. and around the world) may being nudging us in that direction.  [I would love to hear if others share that view -- or see our lives differently.  Brevity would be helpful.]

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Eggleton on November 18, 2011 at 7:01pm

"Imagine what life would be like if we all cared about 'we' and 'me.'"

And further, if 'we' meant all beings, whole and 'me' meant all that I am.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill Gellermann on November 19, 2011 at 2:43pm

So -- imagine what life would be like if we all cared about... and experienced ourselves as...

      "we" (all beings whole) AND

       "me" (all that I am)

[All my life I have experienced myself as "me" but not "we."  Re-cognizing my identity as one with all has involved a major paradigm shift -- and I am still in process. [How about others?]

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Eggleton on November 19, 2011 at 6:07pm

"Occupy (Wall Street, the U.S. and around the world) may being nudging us in that direction."

Yes, they may....or may not.  The more bystanders who step in and find their voices are valued, the more it will be true.  The external pressure for demands must be met with sincere invitations and follow-through:  Let us care about and for you, you may care about and for us.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lindsay Newland Bowker on November 21, 2011 at 7:15pm

Hi Bill,

 

I love how you have described, no doubt witnessed from your own expereience,   that process of alignment of me and we..That with practice over and over  the intention of trying to make choices that are "we".(.stewardship for others, for the earth, for the future earth, its peoples and creatures)  eventually becomes automatic . That is my experience.

The initial intention shift is pretty hard work as you say.

In any moment I think it might be possible  to put on "me" simply by picturing in our minds why we are inclined to choose "option a" ( it's newer, it goes faster, it makes the task easier, etc) and then "drop" it into the heart , the space of "we" with no analysis, no list..simply think "we" as it "drops" into the heart..maybe without even making a list or the heart giving us a list we end up not choosing option a.

The mind often overrides or hides the choices of the heart, of the "we" but once we cultivate a habit of allowing heart ,( "we" or "other") to speak, we will automatically come to have the balance between "me" and "we" that makes the "I am" feel quickened, enlivened, awakened, happy.

Perhaps we can hasten the process, reduce the errors in the learning curve.

Perhaps the "I am" that knows it is interpenetetrated with all will come to be the only voice we speak from; the only way we listen .

Like the tightrope walker,  we will come to walk that line every time in concenstration without effort in perfect unfailing balance.

 

Briefly  and co-heartedly,

 

Lindsay 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill Gellermann on November 19, 2011 at 3:14pm

All of what Lindsey said, as I understand it, is summarized in her first words (in slightly revised version) --"How we the 99% live our lives, the choices we make as "me" (instead of "we and me"), are truly the heart of this.  We have been partners in what has happened to us."

As I understand it, to cope with that problem we need simply to relax and listen to our intuition (our connection to our collective being, "we"), but those of us with strong egos may have difficulty even acknowledging that possibility, let alone "doing" it (namely listening to our intuition or spirit which connects us to "we").

What do you think? Can we develop a shared view that can function as a guide (a compass setting) that will help us make the choices that give direction to our lives?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill Gellermann on December 2, 2011 at 2:49pm

Almost all of what Lindsay says rings true for me (and maybe all).  There is so much.  Our challenge, as I see it, is to develop ways of expressing our shared views that are concise and focussed -- and that can then expand gradually so that we collaborate in developing a comprehensive, widely shared view that rings true for all/most of us.  Key concepts in achieving such a view, as I see it, are coordination (focussing in the same direction) and then collaboration (acting together in ways that help us move in that direction).  [I have started one discussion under the title of "Toward 'Conscious, Collaborative Evolution' which explores the meaning of "conscious collaboration."  And I am planning another to explore the specifics of "Developing Coordination and Collaboration."]

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Eggleton on December 2, 2011 at 3:13pm

"Our challenge, as I see it, is to develop ways of expressing our shared views that are concise and focussed -- and that can then expand gradually so that we collaborate in developing a comprehensive, widely shared view that rings true for all/most of us."

Bill,

First, thank you for the steady, consistent focus you bring here.  I have two questions, on which I'll be happy to elaborate, if asked.

What if it's not that arduous?  What if complementary contributions enter the picture?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill Gellermann on December 2, 2011 at 4:36pm

David:  Please do elaborate.  And then I'll try to respond (hopefully in a way that develops our collaboration).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Eggleton on December 2, 2011 at 5:26pm

This is a form of elaboration.

Implicit in the piece is the question what if we made our many economies out of the contributions people want/came to make day-by-day, instead of forcing most people to be something they are not, again and again?

I want us to get beyond governance dreams that could be nightmares to meeting human needs humanly, as nature working.

"We are nature working" has been attributed to Penny Livingston-Stark.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill Gellermann on December 3, 2011 at 4:21pm

I'm interested in the way I responded to your reply.  I clicked on "This," your first word which took me to a piece about your views of two economic models.  Then I clicked on Penny Livingston-Stark  which took me to a piece about her.  And I felt overwhelmed about how to respond to you.  And then I focussed on your words --"what if we made our many economies out of the contributions people want/came to make day-by-day, instead of forcing most people to be something they are not, again and again?"  And I realized that that was where I wanted to focus my attention.  I think it is an excellent focus on what I see as a central challenge that WE (the people) need to become aware of ... and then develop ways of coping with that challenge.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Eggleton on December 3, 2011 at 4:28pm

more, new

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page