Should protesters respect private property?

[srqrebel]

...some of us are directed by the rational.

This part I do not agree with.  Rational thought is the conscious mind in action, and the self-consciousness is the source of control.  Direction is the effect of external consciosness; control is the effect of internal consciousness.  One can only be "directed by the rational" by submitting to another conscious individual (which is in itself irrational).

Rather, through conscious thought one can override one's own emotion driven, reactionary subconscious, thereby asserting control.  This manifests itself, for instance, when a person responds to an insult in a respectful, peaceful manner for rational reasons, in spite of the subconscious urge to react aggressively.

The reactionary masses seek direction -- therefore the solution is to direct them emotionally toward asserting rational control.

Not only is the paradigm of self-dominion 100% rational, it holds tremendous emotional appeal as well.  By identifying and engaging its emotional trigger points, one can effectively transmit it to the reactionary masses -- influencing them one by one to assert control.

[Caleb]

This part I do not agree with.  Rational thought is the conscious mind in action, and the hallmark of self-consciousness is control.  Direction is the effect of external consciosness; control is the effect of internal consciousness.  One can only be "directed by the rational" by submitting to another conscious individual (which is in itself irrational).

Interesting analysis, and I agree with much of it. (At least, the part that I understand.) The conscious mind I call the "ego", and its main functions are self-awareness and control. It is in the driver's seat. It is the "I" that I perceive. In fact, it is only recently in human history that we have become aware that there is more to the "I" than just this ego. I'm not sure what you mean by One can only be "directed by the rational" by submitting to another conscious individual. And  ultimately, I think we were using words a little differently, but that's no biggie as long as we both understand each other.

Rather, through conscious thought one can override one's own emotion driven, reactionary subconscious, thereby asserting control.  This manifests itself, for instance, when a person responds to an insult in a respectful, peaceful manner for rational reasons, in spite of the subconscious urge to react aggressively.

Ok, but here's the point that I think you aren't seeing: The ego is itself conflicted. There are a couple points to be seen here.  1) The subconscious is no more "emotion driven" or lacking in rationality than the conscious. It is occultic in the true sense of the word: Hidden. Meaning your ego is not generally aware of it consciously. In that sense, it has an advantage over your ego, because it is *always* aware of the ego; in fact, it is obsessed with the ego. 2) The ego can itself be either emotion driven or more inclined to rational thinking. As can the subconscious. (There will typically be harmony on this point: if the ego is emotional, the subconscious will be too.) This is the F or the T factor of the Myers Briggs personality assessment. 3) So your example of a man who responds in a peaceful manner even when insulted is an example of a situation that reflects conflict within the ego itself, because he is AWARE of the urge to lash out as well as the need to maintain the peace. He feels and is aware of both urges, and selects the one over the other. This is entirely different than the ego facing manipulation from the subconscious of which it is UNAWARE, and thus unable to effectively deal with. The most obvious example of the power of the subconscious to dominate and effectively control the ego is hypnotism, wherein a person's ego can be coerced into doing ridiculous things (squawking like a chicken perhaps?) No amount of rational thinking will help the ego until it becomes aware of the problem. And if you can overlook the imprecise analogy, in a way, we are all walking around hypnotized, in the sense that 95% of our motivation is completely unknown to us.

The reactionary masses seek direction -- therefore the solution is to direct them emotionally toward asserting rational control.

How?

Not only is the paradigm of self-dominion 100% rational, it holds tremendous emotional appeal as well.  By identifying and engaging its emotional trigger points, one can effectively transmit it to the reactionary masses -- influencing them one by one to assert control.

Agreed. If you want to speak to the subconscious, you must speak its language. But you must also know what it wants, because what it wants is different than perhaps what you consciously want. It behaves rationally based on its desires, not those of the ego. As long as it is ignored, the subconscious will consider your ego an opponent, moreover an opponent that controls it and neglects its basic needs. This is self-hatred at its most fundamental level. In a sense, the task of every human being is to overcome this conflict by accepting the subconscious, loving it, caring for it, and achieving self-unity. We must accept that the reason the world is in turmoil is the same reason we are personally in turmoil: disease. The task is to heal that division

I don't know any other way of accomplishing this among the world without starting with me.

[Caleb]

And let me emphasize something else, here:  A man can resist being controlled by the subconscious if he develops a powerful enough ego. (Perhaps this is what you mean by trying to get a person to choose rationality?) People with powerful egos are much more difficult to hypnotize too, showing that they are more resilient in dealing with the subconscious.

But dealing with the subconscious in this way is not healing the rift. It is merely beating the subconscious down. It is a form of violence, the saddest form really, because if I choose that route, it is violence directed at myself.

[srqrebel]

I'm not sure what you mean by One can only be "directed by the rational" by submitting to another conscious individual. And  ultimately, I think we were using words a little differently, but that's no biggie as long as we both understand each other.

The key word there is "directed".  Being "directed" implies submission to an external consciousness.  One does not 'direct' oneself -- when it comes from within, it is control.

...It is occultic in the true sense of the word: Hidden. Meaning your ego is not generally aware of it consciously. In that sense, it has an advantage over your ego, because it is *always* aware of the ego; in fact, it is obsessed with the ego.

If I am understanding your usage of the term 'ego' correctly, it is the same thing I call the conscious mind. 

Conscious mind is the very essence of awareness, hence the only thing capable of control.  The subconscious is by its very nature not aware, hence purely a reactionary mechanism.  It is programmable much the same as a computer, or an animal (when we program an animal, we call it training).

The most obvious example of the power of the subconscious to dominate and effectively control the ego is hypnotism, wherein a person's ego can be coerced into doing ridiculous things (squawking like a chicken perhaps?) No amount of rational thinking will help the ego until it becomes aware of the problem. And if you can overlook the imprecise analogy, in a way, we are all walking around hypnotized, in the sense that 95% of our motivation is completely unknown to us.

A person in a hypnotic state is in fact operating in 100% subconscious mode.  There is no awareness involved in this -- it is the subconscious mind doing the only thing it ever does: React to stimuli.

Indeed, to the extent that an individual is operating in subconscious mode, that individual is in a trance-like state (though completely unaware of it).  In my estimation, over 99% of the population operate primarily in subconscious mode, exerting only the negligible amount of conscious thought required to get by.

In the conscious mode, one is in control; in the subconscious mode, one is in a programmable state, subject to the conscious direction of others.

...If you want to speak to the subconscious, you must speak its language. But you must also know what it wants, because what it wants is different than perhaps what you consciously want. It behaves rationally based on its desires, not those of the ego. As long as it is ignored, the subconscious will consider your ego an opponent, moreover an opponent that controls it and neglects its basic needs.

There is nothing rational about the subconscious mind.  Rational thought requires awareness, hence it is strictly the domain of the conscious mind.

The subconscious is the source of one's emotions, which are purely reactionary responses.  Rational, conscious control (internally driven) can override this.  External consciousness can direct -- or program -- it, by observing and applying cause and effect.

I don't know any other way of accomplishing this among the world without starting with me.

We are certainly in agreement here.  One cannot hope to direct change, unless one first learns to exert control by operating in the rational, conscious mode as much as possible.

[Pat McCotter]

Rather, through conscious thought one can override one's own emotion driven, reactionary subconscious, thereby asserting control. 

I have integrated my "subconscious" into my conscious mind. I look at the subconscious as equivalent to multiple personalities. Each and every one of these personalities has something to contribute to the whole. "I", as the conscious mind, decide which personality's goal to follow at each moment.

There have been times when I have "allowed" control to fall to one of these "others". These were very trying times when I just wanted to give up on life. Having integrated all of those personalities, though, some of the other, stronger, minds have asserted themselves against the destructive selves and taken back control for me.

[dalebert]

I want whatever you guys are on so I can join this conversation. 

[Lloyd Danforth]

I haven't found being on something much help here

[Caleb]

You are so close, Menno. You know where the problem is coming from. You can see that. You even see that we have to use different ideas, concepts, and methods to reach people at the source of their problem. As you show below:

Indeed, to the extent that an individual is operating in subconscious mode, that individual is in a trance-like state (though completely unaware of it).  In my estimation, over 99% of the population operate primarily in subconscious mode, exerting only the negligible amount of conscious thought required to get by.

But you are missing something. First, you are grossly underestimating the nature of the subconscious. It is *not* irrational. It is not inferior to your ego, it just thinks differently than your ego. And it can't be programmed. Yes, it is suggestible. But so is your ego. Freud thought that he could hypnotize his way to fixing people's problems, but he quickly learned how stubborn the subconscious is. And modern hypnotists have also learned that you cannot hypnotize a person into doing something that is against their morality. Your EGO, however, can be coerced to go against its standard of morality. For instance, there was a study where people were directed by scientists to press a button that they were told would cause pain in the subject. Most people continued to press the button when the scientists told them to, even when they heard screaming. But you can't hypnotize them into pressing the button. The lesson from this is that your subconscious has more moral fiber than your ego. It is a fully human mind. It is witty, kind, loving, intelligent, and resourceful. It can also be incredibly manipulative and can play your ego like a fiddle. Don't underestimate it. It's not a computer or an animal, and I suspect its far more aware than your ego is. It deals with realities that would make you and I piss our pants. Isn't it you that said never to underestimate your opponent? And that's your second mistake, why make it your opponent?

[Caleb]

Rather, through conscious thought one can override one's own emotion driven, reactionary subconscious, thereby asserting control. 

I have integrated my "subconscious" into my conscious mind. I look at the subconscious as equivalent to multiple personalities. Each and every one of these personalities has something to contribute to the whole. "I", as the conscious mind, decide which personality's goal to follow at each moment.

There have been times when I have "allowed" control to fall to one of these "others". These were very trying times when I just wanted to give up on life. Having integrated all of those personalities, though, some of the other, stronger, minds have asserted themselves against the destructive selves and taken back control for me.

Thank you for sharing this, Pat. I am also experiencing these archetypes as I practice Jung's meditation, and some of them are scary, but I feel like I'm learning so much.

If nothing else, you learn the daily battles that your subconscious goes through just to create an Oasis of sanity that is your Ego. It creates a lot of compassion in you for that other part of yourself that you tend to neglect. Unity is indeed the goal. The subconscious may be a mystery, but it is ultimately on your side, and its daily struggle determines my sanity (or lack thereof).

[Caleb]

I haven't found being on something much help here

Try LSD.    Though the meditation I recommend is safer.

[Lloyd Danforth]

Nothing helps

[Ron Helwig]

But you are missing something. First, you are grossly underestimating the nature of the subconscious. It is *not* irrational. It is not inferior to your ego, it just thinks differently than your ego. And it can't be programmed.

Carrying this train of thought out to its logical conclusion, if you want to change the world "for the better", you will need to make sure that everyone's unprogrammable subconscious is correct. In order to do this, you will need to identify which subconsciouses are correct and prevent the others from reproducing, thus cleaning up the gene pool.

Sorry, but I don't buy that nazi crap.

[Caleb]

Good. Cause no one mentioned anything about eliminating other people except you. And since even you reject your own conclusion, sounds like you won't be leading this Nazi revolution that you just made up in your mind through gigantic leaps of (undoubtedly inebriated) logic. 

[grasshopper]

   Back on topic.  If you take my property, or disrespect my property, you'll be in bad shap one way or the other.  If I open my property up for "public use", come and do your stuff, it is part of our rites to speak out in a public place.
   Now, I'm going to get really serious...   If you take my Ren and Stimpy dolls and tapes, your ALL going to see God.

[Raineyrocks]

   Back on topic.  If you take my property, or disrespect my property, you'll be in bad shap one way or the other.  If I open my property up for "public use", come and do your stuff, it is part of our rites to speak out in a public place.
   Now, I'm going to get really serious...   If you take my Ren and Stimpy dolls and tapes, your ALL going to see God.

Or the big bad red dude with horns!