The name of this cf inspires the question where.  I mean most people
take the question for granted, obviously towards a better existance.
But is that really the case?  Or is it more correct to assume that in
choosing a direction we are really moving away from something.
        Basically the question is: is man motivated by need or by fear?

26 responses total.

Man is motivated by the want to live as well as he can. I believe this want,
is similar to an animal instinct, and cannot be changed. But, I also believe
that due to man's huge capacity for rational thought, man can use this to
his disadvantage, and make him think he wants something else. Fear, is a
complex that is created in the mind that does nothing but limit its
operation. Fear is irrational. :)

Goddess!  I'm irrational!  That's just what I was afraid of!
Isn't going nowhere still going in a direction, at 0 mph?

Of course! I still hold a lot of things in me, which I don't want. I'm
trying to get rid of them. One step at a time.

Well, you can't go nowhere first off, but I still know what you mean. :)
I think, it has more to do with *what* you are doing, going at 0 mph.
I can stay perfectly still physically, but my mind would be highly active.
For me, that is still going somewhere. As, if you consider it, if you really
did *nothing* you'd be dead! I think a problem more comes up, when you
aren't sure where you are going, yet you are going somewhere. Then, I'm
led to believe that you refuse to know where you are heading. :) I'm not sure.
All I'm sure of, is that for me, it's unhealthy if I don't know where I am
going. (Not that that never happens ... *grin*).

So, since you're going somewhere anyway, you might as well know and
even have control over where you'd like to go...

But in a universe where the variables effecting any one action are innumerable
isn't control over one's destiny little more than a self centered delusion?
I maen it is true that despite one's attempt to negate their effect on the 
universe, the very intention or rather the decision to carry out that
iintention is a conscious action and therefore doese effect you and your
enviroemnt in  ways we could barely fathom.

Folks! The initial question was Where to go? and then, Why to go?
As to the first one, the Cheshire Cat used to say it depends on your
intentions. So the question remains about the moving force of your intensions.
But wherever I go, I'm moved by the irresistible and irrepressible curiosity, 
and not by fear. If I'm afraid, I don't move. They say, of course, that 
curiosity killed the cat (wasn't it in Cheshire county?), yet I think it is 
less harmful to primates.

That is, I mean a man can be motivated not by need, not by fear, but
by sheer curiosity. And the latter option is the best.

Variable, I'm reminded of the myth of Oedipus Rex, wherein Oedipus' 
trying to avoid fate actually made him victim to it.  This is echoed 
throughout Greek thought.  But that's not a useful approach to life,
in my book. Oedipus *did* have control over his own destiny, he just
chose to act out of fear rather than understanding.

Yet understanding is limited by our ability to observe and 
witness that around us.  So in effect we must also rely upon a certain 
amount of faith that the unknown will not  impede the 
intended goals of our actions.  And even if it were true that those
here agree that they are not motivated by fear, is that true of the 
people who make decisions that effect all of us i.e. world leaders?

I was about to pose the same question yesterday. It seems that neither
Alexander the Great nor Julius Caesar were motivated by personal need or
personal fear. But what is it that motivates the modern Presidents and
Prime ministers? They are placed high, but they are made of the same flesh
as anybody. So we can return to discussing the motivations of an abstract human
being. The conclusions will apply to everybody, even to the world leaders.

(To #8): Paul, it is ridiculous to discuss the motivations of mythological
personae, those dummies created by an anonymous mind as illustrations of
universal thought. This item reminded me not of Oedipus, but of Diogenes of
Synop. The man systematically reduced and eliminated his needs and fears. He
fought the fearful Dragon of Public Opinion and other chimeras. He was a real
man, unlike your Oedipus, and he was neither lunatic nor a  village madman. 

Hm, I disagree that discussing literature is completely irrelevant, 
although I will admit it is less useful is real human examples can be 
found.  Fictional characters, after all, are intended to be reflections
of social thought, and free from the fetters of reality, can often be
used to construct ideal situations in which to portray reality.  But, 
of course, the consequences of a fictional character's actions are 
rarely what they would really be, but are rather what the author wants 
them to be (unbridled greed in the real world often leads to success
without reprimand, whereas in literature it invariably leads to 
downfall and degradation, for example).  So, by all means, if a
historic personae fits the example, let us dismiss Oedipus for now.

Caligula, for one, appears to have been motivated by fear (although 
he was apparently also insane).  Many Latin American leaders in our
century (as well as Middle Easterners and, lest we forget, Stalin
himself) have been motivated by fear because they took power through
destructive means..

But to strive for such power would indicate that something would indeed
be missing from thier lives.  Maybe this is coming to close to
the evaluation by achievement discussion.  It seems that those have everything
that they need would have little use for such power.  Surely they must be
afraid of somehting.

I'm not sure, about the specific reasons people do things. The way I look
at it is this. Humans have a basic drive to live and be happy. Call it an
animal instinct, or something else, I see it as the same thing. Humans,
have a large capacity for reasoning, and this can be used for them or
against them. You can live your life, precisely the way your basic drive
dictates it (hence, be the happiest you can be), or you can let your mind
itself dictate what you are going to do. Now, when I am refering to the
mind in this instance, you can call it the conditioned mind, and the other
part would be the original mind. People warp their minds in some very
strange ways. I'm not sure, what exactly drives them, perhaps a faint
remenant of the basic drive of life does. What I do know however, is that
I personally don't want to operate from my conditioned mind, and am
striving to not operate from it. :)

Bravo! You show the audience the right way to the Freudian abyss. Yeah, basic
drive, basic instincts, Sharon Stone and all that. Yet it is better to use your
mind sometimes, especially if it is well-conditioned.

Especially if it is well-conditioned? How so? Conditioning just limits
operation of the mind. If you think you can't understand something,
you never will! :)

Dear Mark, to keep one's brain in a good condition is necessary.
Otherwise you 'll suffer an unconditional surrender to you basic drive,
which tolerates no conditioning, and perhaps you'll make the living
conditions for others unbearable.

        An unconditioned mind may limit its potential, however,DDDDDDDDDDD
":help"

x
x

        Sorry about that last, brain lock dontyaknow.  Any ways...
A conditioned mind may be more limited than an unconditioned in the
same way a blank piece of paper may have less limits than one that has been
written on.  The blank one can still be used to write upon and draw upon
where the one filled with text is now less useful for any other particular
action.
        The wordl conditioned carries with it a scary conotation.  It brings 
up images of brain washing and conformity.  On the other hand one's
mind can be condtitioned like a muscle, so that it can operate more
efficiently.

*grin*. That gave me a laugh... conditioned mind (restricted) versus
well-conditioned as in well used mind. Little confusion there.

But yes, for sure a well used mind is better than an under used mind.
The mind is the servant of the basic drive. To fulfill that basic drive,
you usually have to use your mind. :) I'm not sure still however on the
specific details. What I do know, is that I want to be happy. I am
studying myself to determine what makes me happy, so that I can fulfill
myself. I'm sure I may go through stages at times, but I can't talk about
those stages until I reach them. *grin*

*a series of grins* I'm pleased to hear the word *connotation* here.
Last time I've heard it from a very learned guy 3 years ago.
*more grins* Mark, you don't need to use you brain to to fulfil your dear
cherished basic drive. If you want to be happy, please do not study yourself.
Extra wisdom means extra grieves, don'tcha know? Don't worry, be happy, and
your basic drive will care about you. *Jesus, I'm grinning like a madman!*
Brains are like muscles  - in a way. You can develop yours by training. (Oh
sorry Ishould've typed "One can develop, etc.") No offence, I hope.

Acutally I've always viewed the mind as that which was beyond the normal
drive.  The mind can rationalize what instinct cannot reconcile with the basics
of its programming.  One is needed as much as the other, a balance is needed.

I'm not sure still. I was considering that perhaps the brain was totally
independent of that basic drive. I'm not sure. :)
Now Vladimir, I don't think extra wisdom means extra greives. I think it
is possible to understand a hell of a lot, and still be innocent of it.
And yes, I know I have to exercise my mind. :) There's nothing more
rewarding than successful exercising of the mind! (maybe..*grin*) As to
studying myself. Hmmm. I am still coming to terms with myself. You see.. I
am young. Right now, I have hit upon this rather queer situation. I know
how I am very well. I have been defining myself, and there is starting to
be a pretty solid definition. Yet, it is as if I am independent of it.
There is still the question: "But, is the person I know as myself, me?"

        Interesting quandry, and in the human arena, perhaps the most
profound.  A book called "The Way of Zen" has some interesting things
to say about this (written by Alan Watts).  One of the greatest rewards
I have gained from meditation is the knowledge that the person I am
was somebody I really had respect for, the trick was brining him to
the surface.

Hmmm. Did you ever bring the person you have respect for, to the surface?

        I manage to for periods of time, the trick is when faced with
certain challenges not slipping into the more familiar phoniness.
Continued meditation leads to greater discovery and strength.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss