Food for thought

[Robert_Sock]

The range of what we think and do is limited by what we fail to notice.
And because we fail to notice
that we fail to notice
there is little we can do
to change
until we notice
how failing to notice
shapes our thoughts and deeds.–R. D. Laing.

This was written by a psychiatrist but I thing it applies to spirituality as well.

 

[Stjudeprayforus]

The range of what we think and do is limited by what we fail to notice.
And because we fail to notice
that we fail to notice
there is little we can do
to change
until we notice
how failing to notice
shapes our thoughts and deeds.–R. D. Laing.

This was written by a psychiatrist but I thing it applies to spirituality as well.

Wow, I like that.

There is a lot in that to ponder.

 

[PAboy57]

I guess that’s why our teachers told us to shut up and pay attention. If we listened we would not fail to notice so much.

I didn’t listen all the time so I fail to notice somethings, I think, but I’m not sure because I don’t know.

 

[MtnDwellar]

This sounds like some Guru-written, new age dribble, that was probably contemplated for hours by addle minded pot smoking acid heads…LOL

They liked to use circular logic to put your mind into an unending loop.

 

[Robert_Sock]

This sounds like some Guru-written, new age dribble, that was probably contemplated for hours by addle minded pot smoking acid heads…LOL

They liked to use circular logic to put your mind into an unending loop.

Criticize it as you may but you will never become aware of the works of Satan until you delve deeper into what you are unaware of. The working of the mind is largely unconscious.

 

[fhansen]

I think it just means that ignorance is a part of fallen man’s condition. And, to some extent, that mitigates culpability.

 

[Edward_H]

Seems like, because of this tendency not to notice, this would be a good reason to implement and practice with diligence and sincerity a daily evening examination of conscience which is tuned ever closer to those areas that we find ourselves struggling in. Focus on an area with God, fix it up with God, and move on to the next area.

vs. sort of writing it off improvement in holiness to “well I’m just human after all / come what may” sort of thinking.

Focus on what what went well, what didn’t go well, and make a concrete resolution for the next day (basically a Yes or No statement which can’t be mumbled away easily).

We need to struggle, fall into the hands of a loving Father, and with His help, move forward.

 

[MtnDwellar]

Criticize it as you may but you will never become aware of the works of Satan until you delve deeper into what you are unaware of. The working of the mind is largely unconscious.

Are you R. D. Laing? I ask because your comment sounds similar to the quotation. You basically said that I will not become aware of a thing which I am unaware of until I delve into that thing of which I am unaware.

I find it interesting how you have tied these statements into the works of Satan and the activity of unconscious mind. I am interested in more of this line of thought.

God bless.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Are you R. D. Laing? I ask because your comment sounds similar to the quotation. You basically said that I will not become aware of a thing which I am unaware of until I delve into that thing of which I am unaware.

I find it interesting how you have tied these statements into the works of Satan and the activity of unconscious mind. I am interested in more of this line of thought.

God bless.

Your mocking R. D. Laing was a cheap shot. Act respectfully and I will be happy to explain my perspective and that of R. D. Laing.

Have you ever studied R. D. Laing? I have! Laing never talked about Satan or religion, but has dealt extensively with the cognitive unconscious. I just tried to tie Laing’s theory of the unconscious into my study and belief of religion. My premise that Satan and his demons works through the unconscious can be debated, but please be respectful. What we are aware of at any point in time is just the tip of the Iceberg in terms of the unconscious.

Your turn, but remember, let’s be nice!

 

[MtnDwellar]

Your mocking R. D. Laing was a cheap shot. Act respectfully and I will be happy to explain my perspective and that of R. D. Laing.

Have you ever studied R. D. Laing? I have! Laing never talked about Satan or religion, but has dealt extensively with the cognitive unconscious. I just tried to tie Laing’s theory of the unconscious into my study and belief of religion. My premise that Satan and his demons works through the unconscious can be debated, but please be respectful. What we are aware of at any point in time is just the tip of the Iceberg in terms of the unconscious.

Your turn, but remember, let’s be nice!

Please accept my apology. I didn’t realize that you have a fondness for Mr. Lang. I will continue with respect.

I suspect that you and I may be alike in that we are both trying to rationalize views of the subconscious or other forms of mysticism with our Catholicism. It really isn’t that hard. If one digs deeply into Catholicism he will find many of the same ideas that are expressed by non-Catholic philosophers or psychologists. Truth is truth and many have discovered the truth. The problem that the Catholic Church has is that it is very large. When one starts teaching on a mystical level, every answer begets ten more questions. As the gospel says, “The harvest is abundant, but the workers are few.” There are not enough priests or teachers. The Church is forced to be more dogmatic and less explanatory.

I will not argue against demons working through the subconscious. I know that is true. It is not their only domain. They can also work in the physical world and conscious mind.

I could continue, but I suspect that if I start expressing my personal understandings which do not have biblical or Catholic supporting documents, others will take offense.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Please accept my apology. I didn’t realize that you have a fondness for Mr. Lang. I will continue with respect.

I suspect that you and I may be alike in that we are both trying to rationalize views of the subconscious or other forms of mysticism with our Catholicism. It really isn’t that hard. If one digs deeply into Catholicism he will find many of the same ideas that are expressed by non-Catholic philosophers or psychologists. Truth is truth and many have discovered the truth. The problem that the Catholic Church has is that it is very large. When one starts teaching on a mystical level, every answer begets ten more questions. As the gospel says, “The harvest is abundant, but the workers are few.” There are not enough priests or teachers. The Church is forced to be more dogmatic and less explanatory.

I will not argue against demons working through the subconscious. I know that is true. It is not their only domain. They can also work in the physical world and conscious mind.

I could continue, but I suspect that if I start expressing my personal understandings which do not have biblical or Catholic supporting documents, others will take offense.

Combining religion and psychology is leaving one open to all sorts of criticism. Therefore I’m usually quiet in this respect. But let me go out on the limb by saying that the unconscious is darkness. All unconscious conflict can be overcome by bringing what is unconscious into the conscious (light). The unconscious conflicts are that easy to resolve, if we had the power to overcome the unconscious itself.

Going out on the limb even more, I suspect that Christ had no unconscious. I believe that He could hear the Holy Spirit loud and clear during His time on this earth (this was how the Word was made flesh). Heaven will be a place where there is no darkness… no unconscious conflicts to temp us into sin… Satan and the Seven Deadly Sins will be powerless in the presence of the Holy Spirit. The unconscious is the root of all evil here on earth (the bicameral brain).

I could go on forever here, but I think what I have said will provide people on this forum a taste of how I think.

 

[MtnDwellar]

Combining religion and psychology is leaving one open to all sorts of criticism. Therefore I’m usually quiet in this respect. But let me go out on the limb by saying that the unconscious is darkness. All unconscious conflict can be overcome by bringing what is unconscious into the conscious (light). The unconscious conflicts are that easy to resolve, if we had the power to overcome the unconscious itself.

Going out on the limb even more, I suspect that Christ had no unconscious. I believe that He could hear the Holy Spirit loud and clear during His time on this earth (this was how the Word was made flesh). Heaven will be a place where there is no darkness… no unconscious conflicts to temp us into sin… Satan and the Seven Deadly Sins will be powerless in the presence of the Holy Spirit. The unconscious is the root of all evil here on earth (the bicameral brain).

I could go on forever here, but I think what I have said will provide people on this forum a taste of how I think.

I don’t think that you are too far out on a limb. Most of what you said can be derived from our religion. We can begin with St Thomas. St. Thomas tells us that all vice (The Seven Deadly Sins) originates from our lower faculties (unconscious mind). We are taught that the Virgin Mary’s lower faculties were completely subordinated to her conscious mind by virtue of her immaculate conception. Christ was also conceived immaculately. Can we say that complete subordination is equivalent to non-existence? If the answer is yes, then we can conclude that Christ and Mary were both without unconscious. In any case, saying that they either had no unconscious or one which was completely ineffective is picking nits. We may further conclude that the existence of our unconscious is a result of original sin.

Not having an unconscious did not mean that Christ was not tempted. But, the temptation could not occur in the usual way as it does with us. Satan physically appeared to Christ in order to tempt Him.

 

[MtnDwellar]

Hey! Something else just occurred to me.

Adam and Eve were sinless before the fall. I thought that they were sinless because they did not know the difference between good and evil. Eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil made sin possible. One of the requirements of sin is that the sinner knows that it is a sin.

If we look again to St. Thomas, I love St. Thomas , he tells us that natural law is the study of natural evidence to determine God’s intention or will. Furthermore, St. Thomas tells us that all sin is a corruption of natural law because it goes against the will of God.

Along with Jesus and Mary, Adam and Eve were without original sin (up until the time that they sinned). Perhaps the reason that Adam was sinless is not really because of a lack of knowledge. It was more because of an inability to consider sin. If Adam and Eve were without unconscious, perhaps they were unable to get a notion of sin. Prior to the fall, all things complied completely with natural law. Sin was virtually impossible because sin is conveyed through the unconscious.

The temptation of Eve was not a mental temptation. It was a physical appearance of Satan. Again, as with the temptation of Christ, Satan was not able to work mentally as he does today.

I am liking your idea that Christ had no unconscious. I am also liking the idea that the unconscious resulted from the fall. As far as the unconscious being dark and the conscious being light, it is a metaphor. Does it help to explain how the conscious can overcome the subconscious?

St. Thomas gives us methods of subordinating the lower faculties. Basically, it is through grace, mortification, and prayers.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Hey! Something else just occurred to me.

Adam and Eve were sinless before the fall. I thought that they were sinless because they did not know the difference between good and evil. Eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil made sin possible. One of the requirements of sin is that the sinner knows that it is a sin.

If we look again to St. Thomas, I love St. Thomas , he tells us that natural law is the study of natural evidence to determine God’s intention or will. Furthermore, St. Thomas tells us that all sin is a corruption of natural law because it goes against the will of God.

Along with Jesus and Mary, Adam and Eve were without original sin (up until the time that they sinned). Perhaps the reason that Adam was sinless is not really because of a lack of knowledge. It was more because of an inability to consider sin. If Adam and Eve were without unconscious, perhaps they were unable to get a notion of sin. Prior to the fall, all things complied completely with natural law. Sin was virtually impossible because sin is conveyed through the unconscious.

The temptation of Eve was not a mental temptation. It was a physical appearance of Satan. Again, as with the temptation of Christ, Satan was not able to work mentally as he does today.

I am liking your idea that Christ had no unconscious. I am also liking the idea that the unconscious resulted from the fall. As far as the unconscious being dark and the conscious being light, it is a metaphor. Does it help to explain how the conscious can overcome the subconscious?

St. Thomas gives us methods of subordinating the lower faculties. Basically, it is through grace, mortification, and prayers.

Nice insights! I like your idea of grace, mortification and prayer, along with the other teachings of St Thomas. It’s mentally stimulating to contemplate such things but it always leads me back to faith and prayer, the basics.