Thoughts on Control
Back in September, I posted some thoughts on the idea of control. My thought was that while we think we have at least some measure of control over the conditions and circumstances we face in life, we have more effective control over what thoughts we choose to think, and that gives us a powerful say in how we feel. The following conversation ensued:
Mohamed Hassan/Pixabay
Floyd: The only true control is the control over yourself!
Larry: Thanks, Floyd. How about... the only true control is the control you have over what thoughts you think.
Floyd: I would agree! I had to learn the hard way to control my emotions especially anger and fear! Your thoughts control how you react to situations.
Jeff: Lol! Do you? If you had control over your thoughts there would be no need for control over your thoughts. For a millenia, or more or less, man has tried to control thought; with the invention of religious practice and mantras and the rest of it. Those who wish to control are the enemy of peace. To control is futile, it creates its own chaos.. To understand the self is enough.
Floyd: Maybe I should be more exact of what I mean by my statement! I control what I think about various things in life! When I am in a dangerous situation, do I panic and freeze or do I use my intelligence to help me remove myself from the danger! I try to always use logic to access the things that affect me!
Larry: Jeff, That's a good point. To understand the self, however, might turn out to require many of the same techniques you refer to. And ultimately, I suspect, the self might turn out not to exist at all as a separate entity, but rather an aspect of Being.
As for controlling thought, we humans can choose thoughts. It's just that we have been thinking the ones we think for so long the thought-choosing muscles have atrophied. But they can be rehabilitated. And beyond that, I've found that techniques for focusing the attention on non-thought can be very helpful in allowing the overall volume of thoughts to die down.
Jeff: also, I think (if that means anything at all) that it is important to understand that thought is limited by experience. It can only operate in the field of limited experience.
Consider life is the movement in relationship, and intelligence, which is not the accumulation of experience as knowledge but rather a prerequisite of it, is the sensitivity to THAT movement.
Perhaps, if one can be aware to this point, there is also an awareness in which one can see what has been the cultivation of knowledge from the beginning, and, perhaps what may be, through understanding, the cultivation of intelligence.
Larry: I agree. I think it's important to distinguish between knowledge as the accumulation of information, which I would argue is indirect knowledge, and the knowledge that comes from direct experience. The former can be useful in creating, designing, dealing with life and winning arguments. The latter can be transformative, opening possibilities that were never apparent before. Good conversation!
