|
The Pressing Problem |
|
|
The Pressing Problem |
|
|
An Email FROM: ted@cbconsult.com.au, DATE: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 08:37:23 +0930, SUBJECT: Re: What a Mess!, has given rise to the following analysis as my (Peter) response to the mental mess in the aftermath of the act of terror on September 11, 2001: Ted'sHi Peter You response is not surprising. I still find the trap is how to get started! I can personally sit around and think and write but that does not spread the message. As you can see people are trapped and either ignore your messages or pretend to understand. Minimal requirement for a TRANScending-solution: I still think that we need a general process so that we can communicate with key people who may or may not respond. regards TedSMaximal OPPOSITION: The patient way you Ted determinedly keep suggesting to transcend the trap IS in opposition to where I, Peter am solving the problem; modeling the laws of lifefulfillment in favor of a general process, which can not account for anybody’s lifefulfillment! However, you do not openly address step 3 of your innate bottom line mentality in view of step 4, the correspondingTRANScending-solution: In consequence you go selfless to cope with your trap-thinking about the minimal requirement which excluded lifefulfillment for anybody; you paving the way with a selfless transcendence of making the multiplication of the established and agreed upon objectives more efficient, e.g. from my point of view you enhance the problem at the expense of any solution.That approach is consistent with your self-less strategy of alienation of which you selflessly are not quite aware and which your partners, who are sensitive to being effectively thus turned into opponents against their intentions, do tell you about and react to – often to your genuine surprise as a concerned consultant… This point to the general lack of mutual understanding on really anything that matters between anybody without a C3 self-educated MOS mental operating system which inhibits even what you suggest, a general c3-process, other than simply defaulting to a c3-degeneration into chaos! In short you are disproved on two levels:
In short, your uneducated mental operating system is part of the problem, as is true for everyone, including myself. As a physicist you would agree that any uneducated tinkerer should not be allowed to muck around in an atomic power station! I just had to clean the roots of a teeth – I could have opted for a general process… The only general process that overcomes defaulting to godless chaos is to deregulate the idea that a general process can solve any real problem and to start creating lifefulfilling platforms in accordance with the laws of lifefulfillment of its members! In those terms are you part of dramatizing what cannot work, for others, and hopefully you yourself, to understand it for a turn around to what works! This leas us toThe Problem which requires an urgent response: The September 11, 2001 act of terror has sharpened our perception that there is a collective problem and that so far there has been a failure on the part of all of us to look at the real threat and treat it differently so that is is not just seen as a simple criminal act, or excuse ourselves from thinking about it seriously with our inability to understand it, e.g. pre-trans-trap it. We know that this failure needs to be overcome otherwise the consequences will escalate beyond measure. That means we must reshape the model of human interaction: The failures of intelligence to keep up with such actions in view of the fast technological global change are not just one person's failure, as is now being said in order to protect those in a positions of power legitimized by just that outdated model. This even deeper problem of how to transcend a collective problem without creating chaos among people who cannot and do not want to mentally cope, points to a need to change how those in a position of power handle intelligence matters. Even those lawmakers and their entourage of intellectuals who have turned that model into operational law and order admit that a New Thinking is required, to get what they want, attention for their opinions. In short, just voicing concern over a human catastrophe is not the solution for the underlying thinking catastrophe; it is in fact the problem for which it intends to be the solution and for which its protagonists claim their positions of
|
