2003-4-8 13:07:00
The Question: If the mental person is able to discern more shades of gray than the emotional, and overall the emotional is more black and white in his outlook, then why is it that the mental is more likely to give a yes or no answer to a specific question? Why is he more willing to give specific answers to specific questions?
Both sides claim to see the shades of gray. Is illusion involved? Explain.
Thank you for your answers. I do not have time to cover them in detail, but I am sure all response has provided good food for thought for the group. I'll just give you my view, which is in harmony with many of your thoughts.
The mental person discerns true shades of gray, based on true observation and discernment whereas the emotional person's feelings bounce all over the place. When his feelings change, his views change and he will often justify this by claiming to see shades of gray when he is not seeing at all. A changing emotional state has nothing do with shades of gray.
Since what the emotional person sees as shades of gray is really a fluctuating emotional state, he is reluctant to give specific answers, or often even answers, because he cannot understand or explain his feelings.
The mental person understands the difference between perception and emotional fluctuation and can thus reduce that which he perceives to words, even if shades of gray are involved. The emotional person does not understand why he is taking his current position because he does not understand that his views are emotionally polarized. He will thus reduce most of his thinking to some esoteric mystery that has no solution.
The mental person will answer yes or no when a yes or no is specifically requested because he is willing to see where the logic takes him.
The emotional person will only answer yes or no when the answer agrees with his feelings. If the answer does not agree he will not answer, often resisting if the question is repeated a dozen times.
An example would be a religious argument using the scriptures. If you read a scripture that contradicts his thinking and ask: "Now does this scripture says ABC or not."
The emotional person will not want to deal with the evidence so he will say, "but what about this other scripture?" Then he will change the subject to something that has little to do with the first scripture.
On the other hand, the mental person will analyze the scripture, even if it goes against his feelings.
This war is certainly a powerful issue that separates the mind from the emotions and there are many questions that could be asked that are difficult for the emotionally polarized to handle and examine with the mind.
I will just ask one, with the hope it does not lead us to some endless circular discussion.
Why is it that many feel that a people killed in the current combat is more harmful than the millions of people tortured, killed and suppressed by Saddam Hussein?
If the latter is more harmful then is not the war justified?
The emotional person will associate war in his mind with images of dead women and children, and, because of feeling association, he will not balance this off with the tremendous human suffering caused by the tyrant.
Overall, the major problem writing about the distinctions of the mind and the emotional polarization is this. The higher can understand the lower, but the lower cannot understand the higher. The emotional person does not understand the use of mind in coming to a decision, but is under the illusion that he is using mind because he uses his computer brain which is not mind. True mind brings forth true logic, common sense and wisdom.
The most significant thing that can happen to the emotionally polarized is to come to the realization that mind is there waiting for him to discover its benefits. When he becomes aware that he has further to go he can finally make progress.
This discussion will have very little effect on the emotionally polarized until he is ready to progress. And what makes him ready?
Usually it is hard painful experience. For instance, an incarnation where he lives under a tyrant will make him mentally analyze the idea that freedom from persecution and oppression may be worth the temporary difficulties of a war.
A person must carefully look for his deceptive thinking. If he will not see through the fog with the light of his own reasoning then his soul will place him in a situation (in this life or the next) where he will learn through painful experience.
Perhaps the most common deception is that we must appease tyrants rather than do what is necessary to stand up to them. Illusion on this is much more dangerous to the entity than he realizes for it will often lead to his being born under oppression so he can attain vision through the light of the mind.
Picture a person who is against the current war of liberation because he only looks at the disadvantages of war and does not identify with the oppressed people of Iraq.
Then imagine how his reasoning will change if he incarnates under a tyrant and is forced to watch his wife being raped and his children tortured before his eyes because he spoke a wrong word.
Keith writes:
If somebody has a great mind (i.e. intellectually astute, logical, deductive, inductive etc.) are they necessarily always mentally polarized? My pat answer would be no. (I think we are sometimes associating mental polarity with an above average intellectual mundane mind. I have met many intelligent people with extremely high I.Q's who are not mentally polarized. Adolph Hitler had many such men in his inner circle.)
This is essentially correct.
Why?
We are talking about emotional and mental polarization. The emotionally polarized person may have developed much ability to use reasoning and logic, but does not base his decisions on them.
Remember this important point.
The polarization is caused by the influencing factor in the decision making. Is it mind or emotion?
If one has power to reason, but ignores the logic and makes his decision based on emotion then he is still emotionally polarized. His reasoning powers are preparing him to make the switch but he has not done it yet.
Let me repeat another important point as we move along. The mental person will actually feel stronger emotion than the emotionally polarized because his centers are more open, but the emotions will not be able to control his power of decision.
Question: Another attribute of the emotionally polarized is that he is much more inclined to believe a person who lies to him.
Why?
Hint for contemplation: "I did not have sex with that woman."
On the other hand, is the emotionally polarized more likely to see lies where there are no lies?
Why?
Copyright 2003 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved