Comments on: Because everybody wonders, but no one ever asks… http://chelsieguillemet.com/blog/theunseenpath/ Because there is no Try... Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:38:47 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Lauren http://chelsieguillemet.com/blog/theunseenpath/comment-page-1/#comment-213 Lauren Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:38:47 +0000 http://chelsieguillemet.com/?p=366#comment-213 LOVE IT! Love. It's all we got so let's live out of it. Well written song, Chels! LOVE IT! Love. It’s all we got so let’s live out of it. Well written song, Chels!

]]> By: Chelsie http://chelsieguillemet.com/blog/theunseenpath/comment-page-1/#comment-209 Chelsie Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:56:31 +0000 http://chelsieguillemet.com/?p=366#comment-209 Chaaaase. Good to hear from you :) I was directing 'faith' towards the beliefs we see in our world. Personally, I very much agree that faith is no superior way of approaching life-in all honesty, it seems to never really approach life, holding experience and reason at arms length..perhaps in fear that they might impart significant (or conflicting) realities?? Experience and reason are tools we'd be crazy not to use. ... I see your point about love, but that only works in terms of dualism. Love/Hate; Right/Wrong; Good/Bad. All equal and opposite reactions, certainly, but I try not to operate in that mindset, because that's all it is, a mindset. It's easier for me to be compassionate/respectful when I don't have to separate people's choices into opposing terms. Whatever responses or circumstances follow and accompany your choice will demonstrate that for you well enough. Focusing only on the choices I'm responsible for (my own) helps me keep my sanity in life. Love...whatever its definition, people can always claim actions its name, or in the name of anything else for that matter. (We get mighty subjective when it comes to definitions. Sure makes it more difficult to land on the same page, eh?) Claiming an action in the name of anything is a mask for lack of personal responsibility. Your action is nothing but your choice. No denial of automony there. Like you said, love is a good way to be. The nature of love (warmth, compassion, respect, etc..) suggests that an extreme/opposite form of it would not be loving at all. That's where religion/faith fail to see the purpose of love as a peacekeeping, harmony-seeking way, tending to take love and turn it into hate, which always seems to leave someone out in the cold (or dead, for that matter). Hate is not loving. Reason and worldly experience demonstrate this adequately, as you mentioned. Any "love" that defines itself by its opposite cannot be real, but conjured by the mind to benefit the ego. If you're in N'ville soon, let's get together, eh? Chaaaase. Good to hear from you :)
I was directing ‘faith’ towards the beliefs we see in our world. Personally, I very much agree that faith is no superior way of approaching life-in all honesty, it seems to never really approach life, holding experience and reason at arms length..perhaps in fear that they might impart significant (or conflicting) realities??
Experience and reason are tools we’d be crazy not to use.
…
I see your point about love, but that only works in terms of dualism. Love/Hate; Right/Wrong; Good/Bad. All equal and opposite reactions, certainly, but I try not to operate in that mindset, because that’s all it is, a mindset. It’s easier for me to be compassionate/respectful when I don’t have to separate people’s choices into opposing terms. Whatever responses or circumstances follow and accompany your choice will demonstrate that for you well enough. Focusing only on the choices I’m responsible for (my own) helps me keep my sanity in life.

Love…whatever its definition, people can always claim actions its name, or in the name of anything else for that matter. (We get mighty subjective when it comes to definitions. Sure makes it more difficult to land on the same page, eh?)
Claiming an action in the name of anything is a mask for lack of personal responsibility. Your action is nothing but your choice. No denial of automony there.

Like you said, love is a good way to be. The nature of love (warmth, compassion, respect, etc..) suggests that an extreme/opposite form of it would not be loving at all. That’s where religion/faith fail to see the purpose of love as a peacekeeping, harmony-seeking way, tending to take love and turn it into hate, which always seems to leave someone out in the cold (or dead, for that matter). Hate is not loving.
Reason and worldly experience demonstrate this adequately, as you mentioned. Any “love” that defines itself by its opposite cannot be real, but conjured by the mind to benefit the ego.

If you’re in N’ville soon, let’s get together, eh?

]]> By: Chase hardin http://chelsieguillemet.com/blog/theunseenpath/comment-page-1/#comment-208 Chase hardin Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:54:54 +0000 http://chelsieguillemet.com/?p=366#comment-208 It's a good idea but faith is not the only way to come to a decision, when you build a foundation of logic, reason follows implicitly. Faith is for those without conviction. Love is a good way to be, no doubt but the problem enters in two major ways, 1) value problem: who defines the love? You shouldn't impose any thought or feeling on another person because it denies their autonomy. 2) hate: the most extreme love. .. If youlive love you live hate too, you can't have one without the other, they are paired together like catdog, destined to never separate. This is a problem that rests on the value problem, because again who is defining the love. It's a chemical process in the brain completely subject to arbitrary decisions. So instead rest on reason and worldly experience to guide you and no that no matter who you are and how you be you are playing the only role you can, there are 6.8 billion other people living completely different, both in their mind as well in the physical. Choose an ethical process that isn't arbitrary, and a way to be without so harsh a consequence, think of how much destruction there is in the name of love. Love of Helen destroyed Troy. Love of tradition destroyed Jesus. Love for Allah and a nonwestern lifestyle killed 3000+ people on September 11th. Chase It’s a good idea but faith is not the only way to come to a decision, when you build a foundation of logic, reason follows implicitly. Faith is for those without conviction.
Love is a good way to be, no doubt but the problem enters in two major ways, 1) value problem: who defines the love? You shouldn’t impose any thought or feeling on another person because it denies their autonomy. 2) hate: the most extreme love. .. If youlive love you live hate too, you can’t have one without the other, they are paired together like catdog, destined to never separate. This is a problem that rests on the value problem, because again who is defining the love. It’s a chemical process in the brain completely subject to arbitrary decisions.
So instead rest on reason and worldly experience to guide you and no that no matter who you are and how you be you are playing the only role you can, there are 6.8 billion other people living completely different, both in their mind as well in the physical. Choose an ethical process that isn’t arbitrary, and a way to be without so harsh a consequence, think of how much destruction there is in the name of love. Love of Helen destroyed Troy. Love of tradition destroyed Jesus. Love for Allah and a nonwestern lifestyle killed 3000+ people on September 11th.
Chase

]]>