Polarization Clarified Again

2003-4-13 13:12:00

Chris writes:
I am glad JJ has brought the whole subject of polarization up. It fills me with great joy that he is in a place where he can confidently define such a term.

Glad to bring a little joy in your life.

Personally I'd say it is only in the last year I have become mentally polarized, and I have indeed noticed the difference. My thoughts or perceived point of consciousness within the mind no longer flit between the left and right hemispheres. An interesting consequence of this is that stereo music now sounds more like mono! I now think with better clarity and a better filtering mechanism for emotions, especially negative ones. I put much of my progression down to esthetic support structures which I feel are in place. These I feel are both internal and external. (Do I hear an halleluiah?)

I'm glad you brought this up so we can bring up some additional clarification to some who may not yet understand. It is obvious you are attempting some humor here but what is not clear is if you truly believe that I have been presenting a mental polarization as meaning that the mind only is at play to the exclusion of the emotions. I would hope that none have seen it this way because I have said the opposite many times in my writings. Just in case any misunderstanding yet exists, let me repeat the principle.

To be mentally polarized does not mean that you are like Spock attempting to have no emotions. A mental person is more like Kirk, who is very logical but with a strong emotional side. Even though Kirk often operates from the intuitive level, the intuition only comes into play during points of tension and often defaults to the mind in normal decision making.

A polarization on one plane does not mean all your energy is there. If 49% of your energy is on the emotional plane and 51% is on the mental then the polarization will be mental. The situation is never zero percent verses 100%. The highest mental polarization would be something like 40/60 with 30/70 being an extreme.

It's a little like the functioning of a corporation. If you have 51% of the stock then you have control. Even so, the other 49% of the stockholders still have a strong influence.

Mental or emotional polarization is determined by the force that dominates your decision-making. This is the key. It is not determined by how strongly you feel about the matter.

I do not see any logic in your accusation that the U.S. went to war merely to justify the existence of their military. Is this your feeling nature telling you this?

If your reasoning is correct then why did not France go to war? They also have a large military machine.