open minded?

[random]

I agree with cheb in some ways.

What I think is that open-mindedness it's a miss concept in our days.
Being open minded I think it's being one with everything. And we, western society, with our values, culture, and etc.. have the feeling of "having things" "our things", etc ...

So my point is, if you whant to get close to be an open-minded person, you shouldn't bother , At All, if your "girlfriend/boyfriend" makes out with everyone she/he whants, and vice-versa.. so this two possessing words wouldn't even exist... as well as "Bad/Good" would probably lose their feeling.

 

[Forkbender]

Open mindedness is not something that can be attained. Like enlightenment it is something that needs to be put in practice like Cheb said.

About the free love thing: Open mindedness means also willingness to face things that you don't necessarily like. If both people in a relationship are openminded, there would be no problem with free love. However, there are always ways in which people are openminded and ways they are not, and these will most likely be the same for two people in one relationship (otherwise it wouldn't really be interesting, now would it?). This is an obstacle to free love (if one should see it as an ideal at all).

 

[random]

I was giving an example of open-mindedness.. because that it's a kind of open-mindedness that it's not very (I see it that way, even in me) usual to see.

But as cheb said, no one is truly open minded. Some people can't be open-minded to that issue I said above like other people can't be open minded to other things, religions, psychoactive substances, life itself, etc.. but that's what I think are creations or reflexes of our own ego.
Every thing we can't consider in an open minded way, ( just as "extreme" as the girlfriend/boyfriend example I gave ), "Open-Mindedness" interpertation can't exist.

So we are just more or less tolerant (because our ego is always "judging", in a way or another, the reality itself) than other animals.

 

[Forkbender]

^People tend to call those people openminded who agree with what they think.

 

[random]

I agree that if we start realizing what it's happening arround us, and start questioning beyond the machine we, everyday, feed.. we could ascent to a place where language , as we see it , wouldn't be necessary at all. Moved by energy and only feeling this ethernal moment, without notions of time. Without abstract feelings. Because I think everything is pure information (whatever that means. maybe something too beyond our dictionarys and interpertations to explain.)

That is an open-minded state, as I see it. Because we don't need the constant unnecessary clichés and wills that ego is always creating.

 

[GOD]

There is only one objective fact = me..................

 

[BrainEater]

lol GOD i just saw your posting from "21:44 Sat 19 Jan" at "21:39 Sat Jan 19" Nice message from the future Well.. lol then i saw the remark "all times are GMT +2 hours" ... i agree also about GOD being the only objective fact

peace!

 

[buffachino]

These are concepts one must explore on their own; no one should advocate or accept pre-packaged ideals about the nature of reality, simply because it is easier to do so.
Misinterpretation is the ignorance of understanding for the sanctuary of perceptual contraction. No one should ignore possibility simply because arbitrary absolutism makes them feel safe.
This is the externalisation of ones fear as a barrier for their understanding. If one allows their fear to arbitrate their perception, then ones absolute truth will be the fear of discovering truth itself.

To be truly open minded, one must not be afraid of what they will discover.
At the same time, one must not be afraid of others discoveries, despite how they might appear. It is for others to discover their own possibility or hide from it.

Peace.

 

[BrainEater]

hey buffa!! thanks again for sharing those words of wisdom! though i must disagree in your point that "misinterpretation is the ignorance of understanding for the sanctuary of of perceptual contraction", but simply because i don't quite get what you mean by it. Could you explain it ?

Greetings...

 

[Guest]

from reading this interstin thread, i reach two conclusions...1) if we were open minded, we won't be experimenting with psychoactives. 2) thinking that "i am openminded" is the most narrowminded thing that one can do. babies are openminded. animals are openminded. we are not, even if we want to do so. do yourself a favour and have a chat with a child, with 3-6 years old and see how many things you can learn.
but perhaps we are confusing narrowmindedness with natural conclusions that we reach through experience ? if it weren't so, what was the point in growing up, learning, living ? our minds get more and more specialized, that's the point of it. if everytime you went to the grocery store, you had to learn what was money, why people wear clothes, what is a banana, what are those lights, etc, etc, "normal" people wouldn't consider you openminded, would they ? they would think that you were retarded (or were in a full-blown psychedelic experience).
i think the arguments favour both parties. most of you are telling the examples of right-wing christians...they are hardheaded, they are extremely conservative and narrowminded. they can say that YOU are the narrowminded, because you have chosen the easy way out: you didn't belived something that was extremely hard to belive, and all evidence point it wrong. you chosen to belive in other religions, just because they messed up countless times, because they are conservative and stick with their ideas for centuries. they could say that it is so, because they want to keep an OPEN mind, searching everyday for evidence, faith and light. you narrowed your mind, saying that it was phoney and giving up on it. every argument favours both sides.
left wingers have their own problems, just like right wingers. politics are a way of controlling reality, and therefore are the responsible for the situation in the world. if we lived like REALLY evolved beings, like ants, we didn't needed to belive in lies of politicians to have some hope.
open and narrowmindness are just a label. there are people with many interests, and they join in groups and talk about their stuff. then, groups argue between them, and say "he has a narrowmind, he does not look to his side, just like a horse running". and the other says: "i look everywhere, you are the one who is forgetting objective reasoning". both of them are right to themselves and both of them are wrong to the other.

 

[buffachino]

Hey BrainEater

Basically, one ignores having to face ambiguous possibility because they feel safe in their conventional perception of reality. One does not wish to have to contemplate possibility outside their currant understanding, and so judge their perception on this ignorance.

And Daytripper;

Both of them are right to themselves.
Both of them are wrong to the other.
And both are afraid of understanding eachother.

hehehe. :wink:

Peace.

 

[Meduzz]

Indeed buff, i guess we can say open-mindedness is the daring of leaving the safe, own conventional ideas, towards the unknown ideas of another being.

Trying to find a definition for open-minded, i'm getting the feeling that a pure open minded person is non-existing.

If a person is open-minded, he must be able to explore the ideas of a narrow minded (if you understand where i'm going).

To me, this feels like doing mathematics with zero's and infinites, and they usually result into something asymptotic. Now with some thinking open-mindednes could be considered asymptotic: you can reach for it, but never touch it.

 

[buffachino]

The mind is the reflection of ones perception, and it consists of both expansion and contraction, as all things do.
To be truly open-minded, the mind itself would cease to exist and one would realize pure creation itself; totally open to all possibility, unbound by contraction, the embodiment of infinite expansion.
Open mindedness is like chasing the dragon, one cannot catch it, one can only be it, and nothing else.

Peace.

 

[Meduzz]

To be truly open-minded, the mind itself would cease to exist and one would realize pure creation itself; totally open to all possibility, unbound by contraction, the embodiment of infinite expansion.

Open mindednes = Ego death
But then again, one must still be able to reason...
An open mind is more vulnerable to propaganda (?)

It's a balance :idea:

I guess the best thing to do is walk the path in the middle.

 

[Faust]

To be truly open-minded, the mind itself would cease to exist and one would realize pure creation itself; totally open to all possibility, unbound by contraction, the embodiment of infinite expansion.

Open mindednes = Ego death
But then again, one must still be able to reason...
An open mind is more vulnerable to propaganda (?)

It's a balance :idea:

I guess the best thing to do is walk the path in the middle.

Propanganda isn't effective cause people are so open-minded. Theres a whole range of psychological tricks behind propaganda that makes it so effective. The tricks make use of a bunch of 'tactics' that the brain follows. It's really nasty when you think of it really. It sure as hell doesn't work better on open-minded people though.

 

[Meduzz]

Propanganda isn't effective cause people are so open-minded.

Thx for the answer, i took a wild assumption there (hence the "(?)").
I now see that propaganda is an attempt to close the mind around the cause,
eliminating all open-mindednes towards other causes... (in simple metaphors).

But still, (to continue in metaphors) and open mind can be bent around a cause easily...

Maybe an example: a redneck is less vulnerable to "meat is murder" propaganda than an open-minded person, because an open minded person tends to explore the "trap"...

Please correct where necesary :wink:

 

[GOD]

I think everybody has forgoten somethings . As i said the only objective fact is that "I" exist ( weather the "I" who is thinking is the "I" that is me or the "I" that is you......) , that is the only undenyable truth , all the other things that
go through my / your consciousness are............going through my / your consciousness = subjective . No one can be said to be 100% open minded or objective untill he has been asked every question and proved his openmindedness / objectivity in every case . So we are generalising . Open mindedness and objectivity are goals that we can only try to reach . So we are waisting our time talking about them as absolutes . Realisticaly we as individuals can only judge ..... subjectivly.....or as groups if an idea , action or thought was / is objective or open minded .

 

[Meduzz]

Open mindedness and objectivity are goals that we can only try to reach .

Yes.

"So we are waisting our time talking about them as absolutes ."

No, that is, if you look at it in mathematical terms. An asymptote (human mind) also needs a theoretical value (absolute truth/open-mindedness/...) that lies out of the reach of the asymptote, to give full meaning to the asymptote.

Now without math metaphors, if one wants to be as open-minded as possible, he must know what direction he has to go to get closer to absolute open-mindedness.

This is all wild wild speculation, but i like it

 

[random]

Again, open-mindedness is a word that it has a value for each one of us ( in different ways ). It's the same asking you what do you think about when you see The rainbow.

I think everybody has forgoten somethings . As i said the only objective fact is that "I" exist ( weather the "I" who is thinking is the "I" that is me or the "I" that is you......) , that is the only undenyable truth ...

I totally agree!

And that is what had lead us to where we are today. Because of our own-ego games..
We are information somewhere. We are as life as our cells in our body. They feed your body. We feed the "Universe" or "God".

As One. We have to think above those superficial social games, interpertations, states of reflection with our own ego.

But... after all, inl one way or another we are stucked on a Big Cage. Physically/mentally.

 

[Dantediv86]

how true dear GOD
i have been following this thread hoping someone would realise the flaw that was in it thank you for coming in and stating clearly where it was. i wouldnt be able to be so synthetic and direct.
i must say, however, that an open mind differs from a narrow mind in the learning evolutionary curve...
the mind is the product of our evolution
it is a tool for survival, in the first place (any being has a mind, the quickness of it then depends on the evolution of the species)
the mind stores experiences, decripts reality (stimuli experiences etc), creates communication codes, creates actions necessary for survival.
a narrow mind is essential to survival on the short term
the learning curve is slow and low (integralist people acquire technology that does not require a high level of knowlege, cars guns and handphones) and usually before using any new device they make sure it fits in the model of imposing their narrowmindedness. hoever they are efficient in procreating and perpetrating their species (see how many children those bible looneys get per couple) however their narrowmindedness keeps them close to the mentality of bacteria and is efficient as long as supplies last (see average Joe Christian they don't give a damn about pollution or anything that influences their species on the long term since they believe an end of the world is going to occurr and accept the fact anything goes)
an open mind is essential for survival on the long term
the learning curve is fast and grows exponentially the open mind is able to accept new points of view and learn from them to make her own life better and make the life of the future generations better, thus the open minded makes sure not to overpopulate (see ppl who use contraception for ethical reasons) and to renew resources. the true open mind also realizes that a part of her is fixed in structure and tends to lead to narrowmindednes because that was an evolutionary step made before to ensure basic survival. thus is able to discern what are the filters to reality put up by the "narrow" side, and thus to recognize them in other mindsets.
these would be extreems
then we all fall in the various shades of these two extreemes and there are various degrees of open and narrowmindedness however none of these reach the 0° or 360° even when extreme. as GOD says we can only try to be openminded and try to be as real as possible (or the contary as well, if it fits your goal)
again it is hard to explain and i keep retorting to generalization
and i do agree when someone says that we are not as openminded as we wish we were...we barely accept eachothers ideas most times though we try
by using tools such as psychedelics or entheogens
surely they are a sign an indication, but they are not the way
a truly open mind is able to percieve over reality without the need of a "guide" thus is not open anymore but enlightened, it does not follow anymore it reaches out to the universe and learns without asking anyone's opinion
because then it won't see, hear, smell, taste...it will just "be"
and that is why we cannot be enlightened by using drugs or seek openmindedness. we already are of course at this stage it depends on the degree we want to be open and then we have to make a leap to an unknown zone that i really believe hard to explore in human form.
EDIT : i just read the mathematical metafore (NICE ONE!) i thought i was right after GOD..gee it was long to write