Thoughts Vs Feelings

by · 1 Comment
Filed under: Mind 

I’ve studied the Edgar Cayce readings since 1987. Having cleaned up some chemical dendencies and enrolled in 12 group[s], it became apparent they didn’t have all the spiritual answers I needed passed the spiritual program we were in.

I think I completed around forty five to seventy books in about 2 years. All based on the Edgar Cayce readings. For a time I would focus on one topic, divulge all the related books on that topic and then move on to the next.

Meditating as instructed, praying as suggested and living in what I thought was a temperate maximum between the 12 steps and higher conscious living…

There is one maybe two, okay two things that I kept having a serious problem with. One was that I was a broken spirit, and the second was, I didn’t know how I could be repaired.

Act as if. This was a powerful action step.
Since I was told that feelings are not facts, I accepted that and applied the wisdom to act as if my feelings were something I could not trust.

After all, when you have nothing to dull your senses, everything is raw, so living in a constant reactive state to life, kinda makes us what we today term a drama queen. Every little thing hurts. A friend was always telling me that at times the pain was so intense, that even her hair hurt. It was just an analogy, but damn if I didn’t relate to that sometimes myself.

Thoughts vs Feelings: The chicken & the egg syndrom.

Apparently we have thoughts that make us feel and we certainly have feelings which stir-up thoughts of all manners… So, which comes first?

Have you ever had a feeling that wasn’t driven by any particular thought at all? They may be rare occassions, but they do seem to happen, at least to me they have. I mean all of a sudden we’re either sunk to our depths for absolutely no reason whatsoever, or we’re calm and completely sublime for the same damn reason.

If there are no thoughts which engage us, from where do these rushes of emotions derive? And why?

Obviously we can think ourselves sick. Like worrying… I’ve learned that worry is a direct result of fear, and fear is a direct result of doubt. Subsequently doubt has its origins in lack of faith, and faith being the belief in things unseen, has its own wonderment.

But feelings are quite queer bedfellows if you’ll pardon the expression.
They’re untrustworthy, in my honest opinion, not that I place all my faith in the concept of mental reason, which certainly has its own pitfalls.

But feelings.. and thoughts… How do we know which is which?

If I said to you “I feel like a lowlife piece of shit.” Is that a literal that can be taken as a physical description? Or is it a thought formed by some simili used to desribe how I Think of myself?

I think I’m happy… What does this mean? Have you ever been asked how you felt and used this phrase as a response? You THINK you’re happy? Really? I might be apt to disagree with your self examination there buddy.

I had a friend corner me once and have me repeat several times how I felt, as I responded each time with they way I felt, he pointed his finger either to my head or to my gut. Based on my responses, I had quite the knot on my head when we were done with this little excercise..

So it seems, that I completely felt with my head… at the time. Which made sense to me, because for a mojor portion of my life I was expressing all my emotions with one single emotional response, and that was with anger.

Why anger? Its indestructible, or so I thought.

I am statements, I am happy, I am angry, I am joyful, I am sad.
Each of these describes emotions, somewhere some over-intelligent individual decided that men and women have a distinct difference in the number of emotions bettwen them. While a man may have say 26 emotions, it was suggested that a woman has up to but not limited to 117 different emotions…

Really??? Really? Where the hell did all these emotions suddenly appear from?
We’re one single human race bestowed with thoughts and emotions, how is it there is such an imbalance between men and women? I’ll postulate that there are only a certain degree of emotions between either side of the species…

The categorical difference is in processing of such things as events and connecting them to different emotions to develop new meaning for the original base emotion set. But don’t take my word for it, if you think there are more emotions for one than the other, remind yourself to ask the feel question and see whether they are thought based or gut based.

I ran this by a friend, and while I agree men are basically wired in ape brain fashion, if we were to ask a man in touch with his emotions whether he had less emotions than a woman I think the unbeliever would be surprised at the response.

I feel like you’re not respecting my space.
I feel you don’t love me
I feel I’m the only one who does anything around here

These are not feelings.. do you think they are? …{To Be Continued}

Until the next post
Stay focused
Dan Lopez

Incoming search terms:

What is authenticity integrity or twitter

Authenticity refers to the truthfulness of origins, attributions, commitments, sincerity, devotion, and intentions.



Authenticity or Authentic may refer to:

* Authentication, having passed the tests thereof
* Authenticity (philosophy), a particular way of dealing with the external world, being faithful to internal rather than external ideas
* Authentic performance refers to a movement in classical movement also known as historically informed performance
* Authenticity (reenactment), in historical reenactment, a measure of how close an item, prop, action, weapon, or custom is, to what would actually have been used or done in the time period being depicted

The Authentic Self:

Authenticity is a technical term in existentialist philosophy, and is also used in the philosophy of art and psychology. In philosophy, the conscious self is seen as coming to terms with being in a material world and with encountering external forces, pressures and influences which are very different from, and other than, itself. Authenticity is the degree to which one is true to one’s own personality, spirit, or character, despite these pressures. Different types of Existentialist philosophers see this process in different ways.




Integrity in ethics

Ethical meanings of integrity used in medicine and law refer to a quality of “wholeness” that must be present in the human body and in the body of law, respectively. Such wholeness is defined by “sacred” axioms such as unity, consistency, purity, unspoiledness and uncorruptedness.

In discussions on behavior and morality, one view of the property of integrity sees it as the virtue of basing actions on an internally-consistent framework of principles. This scenario may emphasize depth of principles and adherence of each level of postulates or axioms to those it logically relies upon.[citation needed] One can describe a person as having ethical integrity to the extent that everything that that person does or believes: actions, methods, measures and principles — all of these derive from a single core group of values.

One essential aspect of a consistent framework is its avoidance of any unwarranted (arbitrary) exceptions for a particular person or group — especially the person or group that holds the framework. In law, this principle of universal application requires that even those in positions of official power be subject to the same laws as pertain to their fellow citizens. In personal ethics, this principle requires that one should not act according to any rule that one would not wish to see universally followed. For example, one should not steal unless one would want to live in a world in which everyone was a thief. This was formally described by the philosopher Immanuel Kant in his categorical imperative.

In the context of accountability, integrity serves as a measure of willingness to adjust a value system to maintain or improve its consistency, when an expected result appears incongruent with observed outcome.

Some regard integrity as a virtue in that they see accountability and moral responsibility as necessary tools for maintaining such consistency.

In the context of value theory, integrity provides the expected causation from a base value to its extrapolated implementation or other values. A value system emerges as a set of values and measures that one can observe as consistent with expectations.

Some commentators stress the idea of integrity as personal honesty: acting according to one’s beliefs and values at all times. Speaking about integrity can emphasize the “wholeness” or “intactness” of a moral stance or attitude. Some views of wholeness may also emphasize commitment and authenticity.

Subjective interpretations

In common public usage, people sometimes use the word “integrity” in reference to a single “absolute” morality rather than in reference to the assumptions of the value system in question. In an absolute context, the word “integrity” conveys no meaning between people with differing definitions of absolute morality, and becomes nothing more than a vague assertion of perceived political correctness or popularity, similar to using terms such as “good” or “ethical” in a moralistic context.

One can also speak of “integrity” outside of its prescriptive meaning, in reference to a person or group of people of which the speaker subjectively approves or disapproves. Thus a favored person can be described as “having integrity”, while an enemy can be regarded as “completely lacking in integrity”. Such labeling, in the absence of measures of independent testing, renders the accusation itself baseless and (ironically) others may call the integrity of the assertion into question.

Integrity in modern ethics

In a formal study of the term “integrity” and its meaning in modern ethics, law professor Stephen L. Carter sees integrity not only as a refusal to engage in behavior that evades responsibility[citation needed], but also as an understanding of different modes or styles in which discourse attempts to uncover a particular truth.

Carter writes that integrity requires three steps: “discerning what is right and what is wrong; acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost; and saying openly that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong.” He regards integrity as being distinct from honesty.




Get short, timely messages from Twitter.

Twitter is a rich source of instantly updated information. It’s easy to stay updated on an incredibly wide variety of topics.

Once reneowned by the users as the place where adults could talk to adults when there weren’t any local adults  around. In such a manner acquainted friends followed each other on twitter, helped each other on twitter and became popular on twitter.



This must have pissed a lot of twitter originators off, because their users were becoming celebrities on their service while they were frantically trying to keep the fail whale at bay. The explosion of users was and still is alarming the attention of press and media alike.

But the poor originators couldn’t quite grasp a foothold for prospective buyers.

What does all this have to do with Authenticity and Integrity?

Dunno…  in fact I could freakin care less..  All I know is that there honestly seems to be a prevailing wind of  automated horseshit from once notables in the twitter community that were stalwarts of same…

Now rubbish and crickets abound the delirium once known as the peoples community.

Damn that sounds hateful.. I don’t hate twitter, its been very good to me. Made great friends and even best friends on there. But my mentors of marketing are all on a mass exodus… And to me, that means either they don’t get social media marketing, or they can no longer afford to waste their time there.

I’m guessing a little of both but enuff for an extreme change… and since focusing means changing or altering your perception wholly on the task at hand…  I’m going to take a hiatus from the delirium and crickets.

Peace out…

Incoming search terms:

Mysterious Explorations

by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Focus, Mind 

On occasion, one comes across a bit of art worthy of sharing…

Nominated for an Oscar and for a BAFTA award, Jasper Morello is a short feature made in a unique style of silhouette animation developed by director Anthony Lucas and inspired by the work of authors Edgar Alan Poe and Jules Verne. In the frontier city of Carpathia, Jasper Morello discovers that his former adversary Doctor Claude Belgon has returned from the grave.

When Claude reveals that he knows the location of the ancient city of Alto Mea where the secrets of life have been discovered, Jasper cannot resist the temptation to bring his own dead wife Amelia back. But they are captured by Armand Forgette, leader of the radical Horizontalist anti-technology movement, who is determined to reanimate his terrorist father Vasco.

As lightning energises the arcane machineries of life in the floating castle of Alto Mea, Jasper must choose between having his beloved restored or seeing the government of Gothia destroyed. Set in a world of iron dirigibles and steam powered computers, this gothic horror mystery tells the story of Jasper Morello, a disgraced aerial navigator who flees his Plague-ridden home on a desperate voyage to redeem himself.

The Mysterious Explorations of Jasper Morello

Whaddya Think?

Next Page »