This post is actually a response to a conversation I’ve been having with @logiczombie. The initial conversation can be found here.
It was my response to an observation that was shared that emotions are the beginning of intellect. I disagree with that observation, and he asked for me to provide
Perhaps you could give me an example of some completely emotionless plan or goal.
My response will be quite lengthy, so thought I should share it as a post. This will also offer those of you reading an opportunity to weigh in if this sort of focus interests you. I will begin with my belief, so that way there is a proper foundation of understanding how I arrive at my conclusions.
I believe that intellect precedes emotion. Yet I also will say I believe feeling is independent of intellect, which can seem contradictory if one is prone to lumping emotions as feeling. While it is (I believe) under the domain of feeling, feeling itself is much more than emotion. Perhaps the best view I see is that emotion is experienced through the canvas of feeling, as are other flows.
Now that I have that laid out as a foundation, please feel free if you’re of a mind to deconstruct my belief at that point if you disagree, which could nullify some or all of where I go from here.
The first part are personal anecdotes. I will concede before beginning that it is something that requires faith on the person shared with. As Herman Hesse so eloquently discussed in his book Siddhartha, the Buddha is criticized by him in that he wastes his time sharing with followers. Wastes it because one can never convey personal experience as more than a tale. Unless the other experiences it directly, they can never KNOW what you are sharing. At best one can infer closely to ones own personal experience.
When I was young, my life was one of danger. I fought A LOT. When I first began fighting, I was enslaved to the anger inside of myself. Until the fight began. I suspect it was something to do with the danger, but my emotions would empty out of me. My thoughts and feeling seeming to be as one, the maneuvers and knowing that I was capable of defied normal capability. As though the emotion somehow slowed down what my mind was really capable of.
I won many fights that based on appearance I shouldn’t have, and I’ve always felt/known it was this lack of emotion that made it so.
Also when I was younger, there were a few times I was hunted like an animal. I won’t give any details as to by whom pr the why. But in these situations, where I was able to escape the odds were stacked tremendously against me. As with the fighting I mentioned above, something would seem to click in me, like a switch turning off the emotions. I was able to “know” what I should do, where I should go.
In all of these instances I mention above, the one commonality they had was I was in danger. While I don’t believe that is the only doorway to this place of no emotion, I do believe it is probably one of the easier access points to reaching this place.
I noticed at quite an early age that there was something wrong with the adults teaching me. They all pushed a facade that things were a certain way that it was obvious they were not. I remember around the age of 5 praying to God to grant me the wisdom of Solomon, as I believed something must have been wrong with me. These were my mentors, my loved ones.
As I grew older and watched and fought like Arjuna, trying to understand this battleground that seemed to array everything, including those I loved most against myself and the truth, I noticed the patterns.
Patterns of the utmost sincerity from everyone on the validity of falsehoods. I slowly came to realize that the false schemes for which many would grow emotionally charged over was a communicable dis-ease. That the emotional charge that would consume them before my very eyes was like some spell that was cast over them by the words/intellect that had been programmed into them. I recognized it so readily as I grew older because I learned to stalk myself, my own thoughts. I recognized the same dis-ease that so many times had ravaged my own mind and inner being.
The mentors, the experts shape these words. Shape them into emotionally charged spells that when invoked produce an intellect fogging gestalt that blinds oneself. Enslaves the person binding this spell to these reactions by the emotions that jail them. I wrote on this quite extensively when I first came here.
https://blurtter.com/blurtlife/@practicalthought/binder-of-demons-binder-of-angels
https://blurtter.com/blurtlife/@practicalthought/protecting-the-demons-the-war-for-enlightenment
https://blurtter.com/blurtlife/@practicalthought/enslaved-by-the-perception-masters
https://blurtter.com/blurtlife/@practicalthought/totality-of-the-self
The four posts linked above goes into great detail on how this is done to us. I name those doing it to us the perception masters.
Now on to some personal observations in others I’ve noticed.
My first sharing harks back to when Obama ran the first time for president of the U.S. against John McCain. He had picked Biden as his running mate. McCain had picked Sarah Palin. I can recall the sudden hatred that seemed to erupt towards Palin. Irrational hatred. One of the detractors most common used reasons why McCain had to lose was that she was to young, that she had no experience.
That always flabbergasted me, as of the four of them she was the ONLY candidate who had any actual executive experience being a former governor of a state. Further exacerbated by the fact that Obama had only one real job coming into this, as a partial first term Senator. Yet, I would come across so many parroting this, as they often would get very angry. Spewing venom as they talked about how much they hated her. I was always quick to probe as to the why of this hatred. I never had any of the numerous people this exchange occurred with be able to explain exactly why they hated her.
But I knew. The perception masters had planted the intellectual construction in their minds that elicited this angry construct.
I’m going to share some videos now that shows the bias (I believe held in place due to the emotions that are the point of dis-ease) that the perception masters instill in others so easily. The following videos showcase college students being asked about statements from the state of the union address. They all believe they were made by former president Trump, and the students are shocked after strongly criticizing Trump for saying it to find out it was actually Obama and other democrat leaders.
To be fair, the other side of this false political chess set also have their emotionally charged (intellectual) talking points. One that comes quickly to mind was a few years ago there was a picture of a wall being circulated among right wingers. It was claimed to be a wall Mexico had on their own southern border to keep illegals out. The emotional charge being that Mexicans were being hypocrites, having their own wall while protesting the U.S. having one.
The problem you wonder? The wall in the picture was actually a wall in Israel.
I could go on with the examples all day long. But the structure to them all is the same. Intellect is used to create emotion farms. These crops, once planted within others using the intellect paint (plant seeds) scenes designed to trap others into emotional prisons. Bars made of bias to keep folks chained to those emotions. These chains fog up a persons natural ability of intellect, imprinting the perception masters in such a way that once a topic on that area is broached, the intellect surrenders itself to the emotion that requires all ones energy to feed it.
Biases are mostly learned. These biases are the foundations of emotions. Those who we rely on to trust are all arrayed against us the moment we step into this world from our mother at birth. Arrayed against us as they seek to imprison us all into the emotionally charged jails of their limiting intellectual designs. I often compare the story of Arjuna to our own, as that story is perhaps the greatest telling of this battleground of intellect and emotion.
I’ve used a lot of descriptions here, sharing both personal and observational experiences. Yet, I can see I barely touched upon this mysterious topic. It is quite difficult I think to describe this as in many ways we can view these parameters as being the glue(s) that hold us together. Or so it seems at least. But, I must stop somewhere even though this feels inadequate. I'm already at around 1200 words. I have to wonder though if this is one of those topics I will be unable to convey adequately enough the syntax I feel/know is correct.
Whether or not this is enough to create a bridge between our understandings I don’t know. I am however open to a further exploration in case you have observations that either align or refute (in your view) what I’ve shared. I hold these views as self evident which is always a personal thing, subject to my own bias.
What people call emotions are the weightings the nervous system gives to its reactions, which could be sensory or mental.
"being emotional" is just an obvious external manifestation, but there are many minor emotions that are purely internal and often fleeting even to the actor.
Given that "thinking" and "emotions" are both neurological functions, it would seem bizarre if they were not connected ;-)
I think it's fair to say we approach this a little differently in view. A few questions please.
Could you explain more on these weightings. I'm most curious as to what you believe creates and categorizes these weightings.
I'm most curious as to your understanding that emotions are an external event.
It appears the opposite to me, in that emotions seem to well up inside of us, to the point one can be joyous or enraged etc. The affects can be so great internally that it can cause dis-ease and psychosomatic issues. It seems to me that emotions become external once they have taken control internally and demand release. Of course, they need our submission at that point, which most give, often unwittingly as we are trained to react instead of act.
I can appreciate the idea of connected. That's part of what makes this topic so difficult, especially for one as myself. It is like (for myself) discussing say the stomach and the heart. They are both connected in a physiological sense, yet both have their own doings and reasons.
Thank you for commenting. I appreciate it greatly, especially on topics such as this. It's rare to find others in the circles I've kept in my life to discuss such things with. Many things I've learned over the years I've even encountered myself knowing a word, knowing its spelling and meaning yet not its pronunciation as I've never met anyone using the word(s). The internet has been a boon for me in this regard, as it allows me to find others like yourself who appreciate and are willing to join in on what many would feel is an odd topic.
I didn't say emotions were external.
Emotional weightings are the bonds that tie together the internal network of ideas.
Easiest perhaps to notice when such bonds are broken, such as those who "lose their faith" in whatever.
We don't really have a very rich emotional language coz language is designed to share the obvious ;-)
The buzz at solving a puzzle, or of remembering something one had forgotten; the emotion of reading a particularly effective sentence.
So emotions are related to resonance and dissonance at the neuro level.
Your examples of emotionless states are good, they are single-pointed states of concentration. All martial arts teach to not fight in anger as calm focus is far more effective. That very short attention span is something most humans have forgotten how to achieve. I was watching a video about the cognitive tradeoff hypothesis
Amazingly, chimps are better than humans at short-term memory!
Thus both thinking and emotions get in the way of being in the "now".
I highly recommend every episode of "Mind Field".
Funny thing, this video was referenced in another discussion I happen to be reading at the same time,
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/5856-why-china-is-superior?page=1&post_number=1
Thank you for clarifying.
The video was interesting, although as with most everything it appears to make some assumptions that are used as starting points. Glad that it is called a hypothesis.
I do wonder if perhaps we also have these abilities and have been trained to ignore them. I've posited for years that I believe many things we consider supernatural probably aren't, we have been trained to ignore/erode our ability to tap into these structures/flows.
The closest I can think that might indicate humans also possess this ability we see in the video are those with what we call a photographic memory. Many years ago I regularly played chess against one with this gift. He would often leave me in awe after I lost (I rarely bested him) by being able to backtrack, sometimes 30+ moves to show me where he believed I made the mistake that guaranteed my loss.
Back when I searched for God, studying so many different religions the thing that stood out to me as a constant was the lack of real instruction or clarification on what we are. Such as how we work, practical applications etc. No in-depth schematics that explain our presence/being in any meaningful way.
This further got complicated for me as most religions have their stories of supernatural happenings in the lore. My takeaway from that is whatever super events may have occurred, it appeared the deity involved was not the catalyst, it was the purety of the belief.
My question did become more highly refined, as I began questioning how one could even know they were interacting with God. We don't even know where we stop to know where God would begin. We often pretend we do by classifying things as though that process fully captures a thing. It seems evident to me that any outside power that would be able to exhibit acts that seem of a super nature could lay claim to this. Perhaps even by harnessing our own talents we remain unaware of. I think of the European conquest where the inventions they had must have made them seem like Gods, or emissaries of God to the natives upon first observation.
I'm rambling now. Thanks so much for sharing further and the video.
Edited to add. You were correct about the payouts showing not being reflective of the actual payout. I suspected you were despite the person who commented on your post saying the front ends were displaying this correctly. My claim to the pool didn't just magically almost double. :)
Exactly!
I discovered some states of mind as a kid that no adult seemed to know about. Only many years later did I read about the state of rigpa.
And yes, some people have those "gifts" - the sad part is that few seem to care that we have many gifts that remain largely unexplored and almost unwelcomed from the mundane tedium of life on this planet. lol.
Then we get "virtual reality" when most humans have barely a grip on actual reality. Few seem to develop astral projections instead, I guess that's too much effort compared to being a zombie entrained by synthetic frequencies.
I must have had a faith-deficit as never believed any of them! I studied comparative religions and Jung's archetypal psychodramas, but as I teach my kid now, you don't have to believe any of it in order to learn and understand what others believe in, coz u then find the believers themselves to be largely inarticulate in their own belief-construct, which I always found amusing and a clue to how badly constructed the belief-network is inside the brain.
The brain does not like unknowns and especially unknowables, as it wastes too much energy thinking about them - experiments now even show this in action - so it plugs the holes... but those plugs don't necessary hold together in a meaningful whole.
Not sure it was a deficit as much as possibly you weren't trained from the beginning of your cognitive years to believe so strongly in it.
The more one examines the stories found in the faith systems, one quickly encounters contradictions that are unexplainable. Further complicated when one tries asking the whys when the response is along the lines of
or
or
etc.
As to the learning what others believe, I tried to impart that idea on those I care for over the years. It isn't so easy to do I've found. I've tried telling those when attempting that just because they might not believe it doesn't mean others don't, and those others may one day act upon you from their beliefs.
Breaking religious training is very similar to breaking a hypnotic suggestion - have done both.
I was "trained" but it never touched the doubting Thomas inside - show me! They couldn't, so I shrugged, "What are you people actually doing?" lmao
Anyway, am sure I mentioned: transcendental experiences trumped any dogma. And I knew they didn't know, hence I figured they didn't know much at all.
It struck me reading this comment yesterday this is exactly what happens when folks enter the so called mid life crises, the realization they poured all that time and energy into an illusion they had been hypnotized into believing would be the result of their actions.
Would you consider "feeling" to be "pre-verbal" and "emotion" to be "post-verbal" (post "intellectual") perhaps?
Possibly the reverse. I don't see much point in splitting hairs between synonyms - one Latinate, the other Germanic - as English is full of such words.
Just as we cannot pre-think a thought, so we cannot pre-perceive an emotion. We can have emotional abreactions but those are re-experiencing stored memory-complexes rather than being the perception of a new experience.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/feel
https://www.etymonline.com/word/emotion
Using the word feeling as the perception of an emotion is interesting - being able to touch it like one of the senses. It dovetails with the Buddhist philosophy where perceptions can be perceived, but often unperceived, and hence we follow their energy and consequences blindly. eg. a person may get angry and react in an angry manner without the self-perception at the time that they are merely in a state of anger... and have the option to chill-out and get over it! ;-)
A great question. Thank you. I often feel comfortable knowing things without classifying them and these questions lead me to doing just that.
I don't believe feeling is in the domain of verbal at all. Emotion on the other hand is created in the area of feeling by verbal.
I do believe that both feeling and intellect do affect one another. I also include in intellect the ability to think in images however, which is not a verbal application for what it's worth.
Back to emotion and feeling. I believe that intellect creates emotion positions within feeling to make for better survival. By better survival, what occurs to me is that we store these emotions within feeling and when we encounter situations that in the past required quick action, the intensity of these feelings were of such a rush that it would force a spontaneous reaction eliminating an internal dialogue/debate.
The problem is this fractionates us, as due to conflicting input from external stimuli we often have emotional storage centers at odds with one another. I suspect that this is often done to us on purpose, used in conjunction with our being trained to defer to our emotions so that we cruise through life asleep in a sense, on autopilot.
I believe this is why it seems to many that emotions are the origin. It isn't naturally, and appears so due to programming.
It's in this arena that brainwashing/hypnosis is performed. If you look at extreme cases such as MKultra, or even those in the military when they are in boot camp you can see this even more clearly.
The intensity of fractionation is used to create such strong emotional reference points that it places the person in a sort of spell. But at the root of every one of these emotional charges, there are thoughts first classifying, then instructing the autopilot on what is the "appropriate" response. Often, the response is damaging, but at this point the intellect has abdicated to the strong emotional charge that can act like a prison.
I hope I've explained my opinion on this well enough. I've found in my life that often when I try explaining my view it makes total sense to me, and the person I share with is lacking many reference points I took for granted in my formation of the idea(s).
Words. Such a wonderful tool that when used to isolate most often demonstrates its limitations to do just such a thing, lol.
I know I keep saying it, but I appreciate you popping in over here. I have a predeliction for examination which you are great at initiating. I do miss at times yourself and some others at Hive, but I prefer not to take part in systems I disapprove of if possible, which with Hive it is. I'm hopeful that as features are tweaked here that more will migrate over. There is more dignity here for what there is considered small users, or users who aren't favored by cliques. I can't in good conscious find myself supporting that there despite my fondness for many still there.
I also wanted to let you know there appears to be some kind of cut in the rewards for comment voting. I don't think it was intentional based on my initial probing of this. So until a fix is made my votes for comments will be minuscule as I shift the votes more to posts where they will be more effective for all involved.
I recall clearly that I deleted every game on my first PC as it dawned on me that, not only was it devouring my time but I'd also learnt nothing in the process. I sometimes spend 10 minutes playing backgammon ;-) So, was interesting to see a POV from an industry I have little contact with.
We could soon be a failed species unless we cull those abhumans that are the primary cause our downfall. But, of course, "good" people will never save themselves - coz that would mean doing something "bad".
Games are fascinating to me because it's basically work.
How do you trick people into doing work (problem solving, puzzle solving, repetitive tasks) for free?
And not only "for free" but most of them actually pay $$$ for the privilege.
It's like getting people to audition for free.
It's like getting people to submit contest entries for free.
It's like getting people to pitch their best ideas to you for free.
I'd have to think about that one. What I see is entrainment and diversions - a few genuine players surrounded by a haze of ppl who seem to spend more energy looking for cheats and walkthroughs and anything that avoids them actually using their brain. I don't even see the point of that, apart from impressing their friends.
I've even seen it, and worked a little on, so-called edutainment - the gamification of education - doesn't work, so far, as students can smell their brains burning.
I would create a sim-city-like environment with real science and history - havent seen that done. eg how to make the first knife ;-) most inventions are accidents; the inventiveness of humans is to then think, "oh, that's interesting, how did it do that? can I repeat it without making a mess?"
Great idea.
I wanted to make a game where you roll a starting character, a random historical time, a random historical geographic location, a random social status, a random set of physical characteristics with a realistic chance of birth defects.
You can only roll ONE CHARACTER.
as ur into games, I wondered if ud come across anything like that? I thought of that 20 years ago! would also be interesting to program it...
ok, how do you make a knife? well, we need a sharp edge... so the first knives were made of stone, but not any stone... then u discover some stones melt and then harden... some can make pots and spoons, some are crap for knives, but some are good... u still dont have the concept of a metal, just that some stones change properties when heated... a primitive alchemy is born... anyway lol
then some psycho thinks a knife is a better way of killing someone rather than as a craft or tool. and so the world churns.
A nice video that touched on the boot camp from the beginning.
I'm not much of a gamer, but when my son was a teen he got me to play World of Warcraft with him. It had its moments, but I grew to exploiting the auction houses by creating shortages and jacking prices up for items necessary to make spells and weaponry and such. It helped me years later understand even better the manipulations that run rampant in crypto markets.
One thing that surprised me was people that were willing to pay me real currency in exchange for my game currency when I decided to leave the game.
I used to play chess a lot as a kid and young adult but slowly lost my zest for it. I'd say about 20 years ago I had been given a game called Go, but i never found anyone to play with so sold it. I really don't have any interest in games anymore.
Not to mention the forex and bond and futures and gold and stock markets.
Yes, pretty much most markets. I even reported on it in the hotel industry I've been working in very briefly. Depending on the person seeking a room it can vary how much the person will be paying. I even see it at play with gas stations, where the price is dependent often of locality. In certain areas where it is easier to fleece customers the price is often higher.
This made me laugh. The few partners I've had in my adult life have all commented many times that they believe I'm cynical. I would always reply with not cynical, just a realist.
The part I wanted to focus on with that video is the brainwashing, specifically in boot camp.
But it's interesting to me how much brainwashing is also involved in gaming.
And even in labor.
The gaming companies can pit wannabe coders against each other in order to drive down their labor costs.
It's amazing that they can take large groups of young men, and in such a short time of constant friction to them convince them they may need to go murder folks who've done them no harm, who are minding their own business just trying to live in far off places.
They're the exact same techniques used by terrorists and other "cults".
Yes, the structure is the same.
Consider joining LOGICZOMBIE discord,
https://discord.gg/gMzt59Vh
Thank you for the invite. I've avoided Discord after three years of being asked/told to go there, and will keep my record intact. I'm not sure why, but something about Discord feels off to me. I could rattle off a few reasons, but there is something deeper to it all inside of me. But then, I'm getting that way with most everything anymore. Fakebook, Google, even normal "free" email. The thought of adding more consent to be data harvested is a dark area anymore for myself.
here's my idea for discord,
I'll edit this comment when I have more time and can watch the video. Thanks for sharing.
Ok, so, using your lexicon,
INTELLECT ONLY SERVES FEELING
Imagine a chariot.
This chariot is pulled along by a GIANT BABY (and) an old fogey (and) a 16 year old kid and sitting in the "driver seat" is an adult.
Who is "in control" of this chariot?
No, and I apologize if I somehow gave you the impression I thought this. I believe they are two separate functions that can interact/influence one another.
This is an unanswerable question, in my opinion. Its been so long since I read much of what I have, but in the arguments placed in antiquity railing against the agnostics, I never found myself swayed that gnosis was possible.
I believe we can know things that fit a narrow area, but whether it is a truth or not I don't know.
Intellect seems to me to have the ability to dominate over oneself (whatever this is, the witness for lack of a better term), which means ruling over the area of feelings if one allows it. Which many do. Many allow this to take place by intellect creating feelings. then placing a level of importance to them that is activated when the spell of intellect is reactivated at a future date that is specific to the initial spell.
Feeling itself requires no classification (hence no intellect) to be logged in whatever it is we are (witnesses)?
So as to who is in control of the chariot( ourselves) I don't think that can be answered. I can't conceive that it can be anyway. It's quite possible that those who have hoarded the worlds histories and knowledge know exactly. They certainly know enough of intellect and its ability to cast spells on us, as they do this to the masses non stop.
I've read before that the mind (intellect) does not belong to us. That it is a foreign installation, whose purpose is to create the emotions it does so the beings who installed it can feed on that energy. While as with many things this is a tale to me, I can say after spending years sporadically stalking my own internal dialogue that the origin of many that take place have no obvious sign of origin from myself.
I believe Jung tried to account for this somewhat in his hypothesis on what he coined the collective unconscious. However, it seems to me that it would then be just as likely if we shared this common connection that it could indeed be manipulated as I read elsewhere. The older I get the more it makes sense too. We are all energy, and by all I mean all. The world is one huge circuit and and currents in one area affect currents elsewhere.
So I said a lot to say nothing. I simply don't know who or what is in control. Other than in momentary situations when I'm awake (paying attention) the manifestation of my will on a dynamic seems lacking to an extent. On autopilot. But what is piloting then, what is being abdicated to that takes over? I'm not really sure. I do believe whatever is taking place there it must take care to stay within the boundaries of the spells one agreed to or it would startle one awake, which gives one the ability to exert ones will on a thing.
Then that raises the question of what is will? Once again, I'm not certain. It does seem however that will comes from the area of feeling. I can think all day long that I want to move my arm, and nothing will happen if I don't push it through the area of feeling and will it so.
Please explain.
I'll try to briefly do so, but am pressed for time today unfortunately.
It appears to me that gnosis would only be possible if one held all possible knowledge to know for sure there aren't variables that are possible that make things suddenly what they aren't.
I don't know how one can possibly lay claim to the idea that gnosis is possible and they themselves hold it. It seems to me that it would be the same as trying to fit the ocean into a small sippy cup. Gnosis being the ocean, our limited whatever we are being the sippy cup.
This is a great topic by the way. It was inviting a commentary on gnosis as proclaimed by various religious branches that are anything but. They are yet more instances of perception masters creating the system and the recipients taking it in (being placed under its spell-ing). I notice this form of gnosis is often used both as a shield and a weapon, dependent on the position of strength of this particular form of self declared gnosis.
If you drop the sippy cup into the ocean, it may slowly fill with saltwater and sink into the depths.
Later the sippy cup may be washed ashore and the saltwater slowly leaks out onto the sand.
Before you can drink from the sippy cup, you must first rinse away the saltwater.
I like this.
Why do you breathe?
Why do you get out of bed in the morning?
Why do you eat?
Perhaps we can agree to call "pre-verbal" unidentified "feelings" "proto-feelings"?
And maybe "post-verbal" identified "feelings" "quantified-emotions"?
I dislike I'm rushed today as you are asking so many great questions. It will give me something to look forward to later when I'm not so rushed. I wish to make an observation before I try to briefly attempt answering this. It's an observation on a comment that rycharde has made somewhere here regarding emotion and feeling being a case of splitting hairs.
Obviously I view this different than he, which is why I'm doing exactly that here. In fact, the more I exchange with you if anything, my surety on them being two distinct areas has not only frown, I now question my original take that emotions are necessarily tied to feeling as I originally had thought. As I commit myself to explaining to another I am in the unique position of seeing my thoughts committed to , which is most enlightening. My debt and gratitude to both yourself and rycharde humoring me on this topic is immense.
Emotions - a jail of sorts that are created by intellectual spells.
Feeling - sensations that are a unique language/knowing. Smash your hand with a hammer, the light touch of another as it delights the self, the feeling another staring at you from behind and turning around and seeing it is so. It seems amazing to me that once examined that emotions are so easily confused with feeling. I caught myself even falling under this construct in an earlier comment I made to you where I used the word emotion when I should have used feeling. I left the mistake instead of editing it when I discovered I made it last night. I thought leaving a visible sign of my own folly on this matter could possibly serve as a lesson for others who may be observant.
The intellectual spells are very powerful indeed. Now as to whether this is so because we are immersed in them from birth I wonder. I suspect this is why.
I will try to watch the videos you have shared today, along with check out your latest comments and respond tomorrow.
∴
So therefore, I'm now questioning my assumption that emotions are bound to the area of feeling the way I had believed. The more we discuss this, the more I'm beginning to see it something like this.
I've always relegated emotions to feeling, as that is where they become noticeable. Evoking reactions in the feeling center of a person, they are not necessarily a feeling at all. I've noted for many years they are constructs of intellect. So now I'm thinking more along these lines.
Imagine one is climbing a mountain and brings rope and stakes. As they climb the mountain, they hammer their stakes into its side before progressing upwards to the next place they hammer the stakes.
The person hammering is the intellect, the stakes are emotions and the mountain is feeling. With only a cursory glance, one could conclude the stakes were part of the mountain if they didn't know better and the only place they ever encountered the stakes were in the sides of mountains. Yet they weren't part of the mountain at all, despite the person never encountering them elsewhere.
Not a complete analogy for sure, but it describes a mistake I think I've been making in assuming they were a part of the feeling area since that is where they are (where I have) observed (them). So at this point, the only thing of which I'm certain is that emotions are a by product of intellect casting a spell onto those binding the spell onto themselves. The emotions binding areas of feeling into certain reactions when the (intellect)spell in invoked.