Competition serving Cooperation or Cooperation serving Competition

Cooperation serving Competition:
This is like most team sports.
The cooperation is within the team,
But it is meant to serve the higher goal of competition.

Competition serving Cooperation:
This is like the musician maestros of ancient India.
They would all bring their instruments,
And compete to best the other’s performance in each round,
But all of it serving to elevate the level of the art form itself.

My orientation has been towards ‘Competition serving Cooperation’.
Which is of all of us working towards a higher purpose/goal,
While also competing/playing with each other for fun,
Or competing in a way that ultimately serves all.
Like a “win-WIN” (serving as an encouragement for the smaller win),
Instead of a “WIN-LOSE” which is winning at the COST of the other.

Most of the activities I see in the world today,
School, College, Political Debates, Work, Sports, Making money, Business,

Almost all of it seems like the case of “Cooperation for Competition”.
Where everything happens in the same level playing field,
As a kind of zero-sum game,
In a quest for supremacy,
Where it is every man for himself.

Money is the formalization of recognition

Recognition of something is the primary element.
That is, recognition of value/importance and so on.
Once there is a shared recognition of a certain quality/thing,
It is then formalized in society by assigning a monetary value to it.
This creates an ontology/taxonomy/hierarchy/system of “objective” value assignment.
Here objective means the concretization of the subjective-common-agreement.

Alternatively, there is also ‘informal recognition’.
Informal recognition is like when you help your neighbors/relatives/friends etc.
That is also valued/recognized,
And it may give you other rewards like good-will, rapport etc.,
But it may not involve money-exchange.

The things in society that are assigned the highest monetary value,
Are the things that form the “backbone” of society.
They are a reflection of what society(the formalized agreement) prioritizes,
And what society deems as the most important or least important.
Money is literally the measurement of this formalized-value assignment,
Just like how we measure length in terms of feet, inches, and so on.

Money is the life-blood of society,
And just like real blood,
It basically is the carrier that distributes resources,
To every part of the various societal-systems working together.

Some people before starting any activity would always ask,
“Where is the money in this?” or “How much money would this make?”.
Such people are essentially looking for “Formalized Social-Recognition”.
In other words, they have fused their value-system with societal-values.

If you have a value system very different from the society you live in,
Then money would only be a means to an end,
And not a direct measure of your value/contribution itself.
If what you value deeply, is not recognized by society at all,
Then you fall off the map of “formalized valuation”.
The value of your contribution then would be left to subjective evaluation.

Society is a reflection of collective consciousness.
Collective consciousness can be seen as sort of like a bell curve,
With the majority-80% falling close to center line.
The majority have a value-system that is fused with the societal-value system.
It could also be said that it is the commonality of the majority,
That even enables and empowers a structure like society to thrive in the first place.
Money seen as a direct measure of contribution and value,
Is relevant to mainly this set of people.

If you value-system is too far out,
Too regressive or too progressive,
Then you would fall on the ends of this bell curve.
And money would thus become less and less relevant here,
Except as more of a means to an end.

From Modernity to Postmodernity

cymatics

We are transitioning from:
(the past)…Modernity (one large circle(majority), several tiny circles(minorities))-> Postmodernity (mixing of all circles) ->…(the beyond)
This happens like how in the cymatics study, the sand grains change their formation patterns from the rise of frequency.
The social systems will therefore evolve going through alternating periods of order and chaos, rising to more and more complex structures.

The freq of the earth itself is rising from moving into the higher yugas
(be it Kali -> Dwapara OR Dwapara -> Treta).
Rising freq = sun rising, light increasing = complex systems w/ more freedom.
Falling freq = sun setting, darkness increasing = simpler systems w/ more limitation.

The definitions of Tyranny and Freedom are relative.
Tyranny tries to simplify systems (more black and white, direct), which curtails the existing levels of freedom.
Freedom on the other hand, enhances the existing levels of freedom by moving into more intricate complex harmonies/systems.

So there is a tug of war between the good and evil.
The evil tries to centralize power (serving their own interests), curtail freedom, and control everything.
They try to reduce the population, impose simple systems, to make control easier.
While the good attempt to free people, by creating more nuanced systems (exerting a diffused kind of power, serving the interests of the common good) that increase the freedom for all.
This is what I believe we are witnessing in the world today.
The forces trying to reduce freedom —vs— The forces trying to enhance freedom.
The evil forces are trying to drag us back to the darkness, to previous regressive-systems, that allowed them to have total control over others.
While the good are trying to make richer-systems, that will take us beyond even our current limitations.

Society as a giant

The whole human organization is:
Giants standing on top of shoulders of giants, standing on top of shoulders of giants…and so on.
Differences are obvious —- Similarities/connection/unity are non-obvious.
The process of “enculturation/socialization” is the programming that initiates a child into the mega-giant of society/culture.
All the smaller giants stand on the shoulder of this giant, and the fractal goes on getting more and more refined.

There is a difference between:
INTERNALIZATION/IDENTIFICATION —and—– CONFORMITY
They both may look the same from the outside in actions/behavior.
But they are coming from vastly different places.
Identity is the passport to get into anything in society.
There are doors and doors everywhere.
You are let in, if you conform.

But without identification/internalization = there is no actual deep investment.
All investment in society then is only out of “VESTED-INTEREST”.
And it is difficult then to take on too much.
Because heart of hearts you would want to return to your identification.
Society in such a case, is not perceived as a HOME w/ BELONGING,
Rather it is perceived as a place you have to conform to get certain needs met for your real identity which lies elsewhere.

There is a difference between:
INSECURE SOCIETIES —and—- SECURE SOCIETIES.
When insecure, societies impose that all its denizens cooperate. It is forced to a much higher degree.
While secure, societies include people who do their own thing also, as long as they do not disturb the working of the societal machine much.

In the light of all this:
Deep mental illness is an ALIENATION of COLOSSAL PROPORTIONS,
Because you are literally disconnected from the largest giant itself (that of
Humanity),
And are dehumanized and sent to the mental asylums,
And other such quarantine-institutions etc.

All qualities simultaneously exist

Sometimes, I keep taking the opposite position and arguing with people.
Many a time, I feel compelled to take the opposing position.
Then I contemplated, and wondered about ‘why do I do that’.

One of the reasons I felt was,
To attain independence from people.
To test whether I could hold the opposite view vs. the person in front of me,
Instead of always getting absorbed into their point of view.
But this would often be really difficult for me.
Because I would end up seeing their point of view too,
Which would not only dilute my position,
But often even completely overshadow it.

Also, I realize that this does not give me any real independence,
Because this is still based on the other’s position only,
It is a reaction and not a true action.
I allow the other’s position to completely fill my inner space because:
# I want to maintain harmony with them.
# Because if I don’t then it will lead to vain/futile resistance and may be a threat to my well-being.
But within me, my inner space is so mercurial that it is quite hard to see what I want or feel about anything.
Everything could substantially dramatically shift in a dime.
Everything is so mutable and changeable, it’s hard for me to access my foundation.

This inability to ground into or take/maintain/forward a position/perspective,
Makes me feel quite powerless.
Because conventionally power is associated with force.
And unless you structure yourself into some position, no force can be created.
“Identity structures/foundation” are what generate force.
For instance, a tiger is completely grounded in its instinctual structures.
So the tiger carries enormous force in its very being.
You cannot talk it out of being a tiger.

Maybe I am somewhat disconnected from my animal nature and instincts,
Which is what makes me feel like I’m living in an “imaginative field”.
(This could have been a dissociation survival adaptation to high levels of childhood neglect/abuse/violation from others.)
I am profoundly confused as to what is my relationship with others or with the world/society itself.
On the plus side, since I can see all perspectives/points of view,
In the simulator function of my brain or imagination,
I gain a systems/ecological vision of things.
An impersonal w-holistic vision which is not about any particular thing or particular identity.
And it is easy for me to see that the only doer is god/field/consciousness,
And that everything is a temporal appearance.

After constantly living in a soup of all superimposed positionalities,
I realized that trying to polarize myself,
To any one extreme polarity,
In any of the dimensions,
With my efforts,
Has been the cause for a lot of strife within me.
I realized that I can:
# Neither be not affected, nor can I be affected completely.
# Neither be totally powerful, nor can I be totally powerless.
# Neither be completely good, nor can I be completely bad.
# Neither be completely with, nor can I completely avoid.
# Neither be completely clear, nor can I be completely unclear.
# Neither be completely truthful, nor can I be completely false.
# Neither be fully right, nor can I be fully wrong.
# Neither be completely loving, nor can I be completely hateful.

So this kind of throws light on my fundamental resistance to life.
Because life happens on its terms, while I am struggling against it.

Disharmony or harmony among humans is relative to the collective

Health = Harmony.
Disease = Disharmony.
Harmony or disharmony, health or disease, is wrt. the collective.
Being under or over the collective is going to create:
isolation, alienation, separation, disease, disharmony, pain, suffering etc.

# If you are a hellish creature in hell = You are in harmony.
# If you are a heavenly creature in heaven = You are in harmony.
# If you are a heavenly creature in hell = You are in disharmony.
# If you are a hellish creature in heaven = You are in disharmony.

That is why the regressives and progressives hang out together sometimes.
That is because they both have the commonality of being outcasts and out of tune with the collective.

Also there is social harmony vs. existential harmony.
Society may not be in harmony with existence.
That would create the collective suffering.
But you may be in harmony within society.

Conversely, you may be in existential harmony if you are enlightened, but be in disharmony with society.
If you are stronger than society, you will transform it.
If you are weaker than society, it will oppress you.

Gurus are like mountains, Society is like the plain settlements

mountains

Every guru is like a mountain.
The seeker is the adventurer,
Who ascends the mountain,
To reach its peak,
To the shrine of light.
He may then choose.
To bring the light down to the plains.

General society/civilization on the other hand,
Are like the settlements at the plains.
Society is a combination of maintenance and inspiration,
The inspiration/evolution/change/renaissance,
Is brought about by the seekers who ascend the mountains,
And bring down their light.

On Social dynamics

Let’s take 2 cases:
1. When you are in your own space.
2. When you are in a shared space with others.

When you are in your own space,
Various interests bubble up into your mind,
And the strongest one usually gets your attention/focus/investment/energy.

When you are in a shared group-space with others,
Then the different people are in a relationship with each other.
The following questions come up:
# Who is going to set the frame?
Will there be multiple smaller frames between the people?
Will the frame organically emerge or will it be a chaos?
# Who is naturally receiving? Who is naturally emitting?
# Who is open/malleable? Who is rigid/closed?
# What are the intentions/expectations of the various people around?
# Where are each of these people coming from?
# What is the common larger frame? What are the expectations? cultural structs? societal structs? governing that.
# What can I say, what can I not say?
# What are the set of possible topics I can speak about?
All this can be sensed.
All of these come under “social dynamics”.
This invariably happens when a group of people get together and create a group space.

Why is motherhood worshipped but sexuality demonized?

A deep trend I observe in society is:
Maternal instinct is deified —while— Sexual instinct is demonized.
Are they not the 2 sides of the same coin?
Ultimately isn’t the sexual instinct prior to the maternal instinct itself?
How would the children even happen without sex?
The mother’s urge to play and protect the child, is it not the same as the male’s urge to protect and play with the opposite-sex?
Why is the sexual instinct and mothering instinct treated like they belong to 2 different levels of reality?
Aren’t both of them part of the same nature?
And it is totally prevalent across the entire animal kingdom.
What gives the mothering instinct is also driven by hormones only, just as all of sex-instinct too is driven by hormones.
Why is the mothering instinct elevated to a different level of reality?
It is considered a blasphemy even to think about it.
This is a vast topic, but just wanted to share this as food for thought.

A single evil entity by itself is powerless

A singular evil entity by itself is fairly powerless.
It has to tap into the evil in others to really work.
So evil exists everywhere.
The entity you cleanly identify as evil is only the top of the iceberg.
It appeals and brings out the unconscious and shadow of society and humanity itself, which is carried in everyone.
On the surface, only the perpetrator of evil is clearly visible.
But it cannot really work unless the entire system supports it.