If I understand things correctly, in order to reduce entropy we must interact with other beings with positive intent, or intent that isn't self-serving. I don't mind that at all.

However, we're doing this because the system wants to evolve. I assume that when the system evolves it becomes more powerful or better in some way? If so, the system wants us to be selfless in order for it to become better(or more powerful). Isn't this a "selfish" desire?

I'm not saying we get nothing out of this but I just find it to be an interesting paradox, that's all.

Any thoughts?

I'm thinking the terms selfish and selfless break down when you start talking about "All That Is". They're relative terms, i.e. you need a point of reference between two things. In other words, a selfish desire relative to what? We don't know AUM's external environment (if there is any).

When the system evolves for the better, it becomes more complex and powerful, yes. There is more useful data, less useless noise.

My understanding is that by being selfless we improve our own internal configuration (less fear, more love) so that we lower our entropy, not necessarily the rest of the system's entropy. By helping others, we actually help change our self, which lowers the entropy of the system of the whole (because we are part of the system).

The best thing we can do for others (the system) is to improve our self, the best thing we can do to improve our self is to help others. How's that for a paradox? :)

_________________
Mike

Most of us might agree (just based on our own experiences) that making ego/fear based choices leads to negative long term results while making more loved based choices leads to more positive long term results. This can be observed in a single PMR lifetime. The system is driven by the same fundamental process as we are: evolve or fade away (die). We are the system. If the systems does not evolve, it "dies" and we fade away with it... from a grand organization of information and experiences to a scattering of useless bits of unorganized nothing (high entropy).

I do understand what you are saying though. In some ways we are the manual laborers of the system, the foot soldiers... working in the blood, sweat, and tears of the PMR trenches. We really just have to trust that the "higher ups" in the chain of command know what is best.. until our awareness grows big enough to better understand the processes. Imagine a kid thinking how dumb and useless school is.. who needs this crap.. the teachers are stupid... I can do it on my own.. etc. Then that kid gets older and realizes that going to school actually was in his best interest. We can go against the grain. It is not so much that the system makes us evolve, but that we ourselves are involved in the same fundamental process.

And to be clear, the way to reduce entropy (as I understand it) is not just though having positive intent. The key is experience.. which can come in many different shapes and sizes. All those experiences show us what I stated above: making ego/fear based choices leads to negative long term results while making more loved based choices leads to more positive long term results. The only way to learn that at the being level is through experience. The more experiences we have, the more clear and natural that becomes. As toddlers we often walked right into walls and tables, etc. As adults we don't really think about not walking into things, we just avoid them with out thinking about it. It becomes natural. This is comparable to experience and having positive intent (at the being level).

That's my current take anyway...

Edit:


ha, nice.

_________________
-"You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find... you get what you need"

Only if becoming better is inherently selfish. And it's not. Becoming better in AUM terms is the natural process of evolution in coexistence with the state of existence as; unconditional love. An unconditional love AUM cannot support any "selfish desire". My simple thought on this :)

 
Chronopolis,

This is PMR perspective. LCS has a free will, as well, as all of us have. We are free to evolve or devolve, time and again make mistakes, and in a worse case scenario, our IUOC could be deleted. But even after that most important data of this IUOC could be found in the database.  'Better' or 'worse' belong to PMR judgment and values. Applying subset's rules (PMR) to a superset model (NPMR or LCS) cannot be helpful. 

Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.

Better and worse may be PMR words but I don't think the concepts are exclusive to PMR, surely?

If that were the case then you're basically saying that concepts such as compassion, morality, negativity, positivity etc are all PMR based and in truth mean nothing in the big picture because those words originated here.

If so, I'd accept that as there are a few people who crossed me here in PMR that I would love to "take care of".

:D

Don't try to apply simple concepts as better/worse or selfish/unselfish to the much more complex concept of entropy reduction. We do not know the process or algorithms involved and cannot make a similar measurement here. The concept of entropy reduction involves the improvement of the very functioning of our minds and the improvement of our ability to think and understand things as IUOCs. It means the same thing to AUM as it is our 'minds' as IUOCs that provides the mental functioning that makes the sum of us all into AUM as we process the data of AUM 'thinking'. We are both making the 'thinking' better for ourselves and AUM and converting capacity lost to simply being unusable as flawed somehow reality cells to additional functioning 'thinking power'. Be assured that it is a win/win situation and with no negative aspects.

Ted

think about an intestinal bacteria metaphor in MBT. It also might question herself what is better or worse, selfish or unselfish, and her place in a body's effort to maintain its health and vitality. Can this bacteria be sure, that her train of thoughts is a correct answer? Can her small world view give her a right perspective what needs to be done to keep a body, where this bacteria resigns, in a good shape?

Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.

You might misunderstand entropy and selfishness,
Selfishness (fear) can NEVER lead to lower entropy and "power". Selfishness (fear) will ALWAYS lead to seperation, isolation, frustration, depression, sadness, anger, hate, conflict, war, and death. Selfishness can never lead to better organized "bits", it (fear) will ALWAYS lead to, and is always a product OF, HIGH entropy.

Self- LESS -ness (LOVE) always leads to better organization, cooperation, unity, togetherness, forgiveness, compassion, happiness, and bliss (low entropy)

Try to think of it in terms of organization and cooperation. The family unit functions smoother and more efficiently when all members work together for the common good. Just as a village of families working together (low entropy) in an organized fashion can achieve much more than individuals working seperately (high entropy). The same goes for cities, states, nations, (and even possibly worlds)

Think of it in terms of systems, such as a machine where the efficiency of the machine depends on the individual parts working together. Or even as a computer system where the level of organized bits can determine the efficiency, and yes, power (power as defined as "The ability to do WORK)

Think of it in terms of collectives of biological organisms working together for the survival of the entire collective (such as Bees, or Ants) The greater organization of the individual parts, the greater the ability to perform different tasks.

Some examples of a low entropy systems of biological organisms would be a colony of ants, or a Beehive.
One example of a HIGH ENTROPY system of biological organisms would be the modern world of humans.
Other examples of high entropy biological systems would be a virus that kills the host, or a cancer that causes the cells of an organism to grow seperately from the main organism and counter to the original purpose of the cell, causing the death of said organism (killing the host)

And remember that the Whole is always greater than the sum of its parts, but the whole DEPENDS upon the individual parts working TOGETHER (love) in order to WORK

Entropy reduction is the name of the game
Consciousness Evolution is the way
and whether the question is WHO?, WHAT?, WHEN?, WHERE?, HOW? Or WHY?
LOVE is always the answer.

_________________
LOVE is the answer

peace
patrick

There is nothing wrong with attention to the self or the self's needs or desires. The problems come in when we either 1) administer to those needs and desires to the detriment of someone else or 2) Identify with those needs or desires (that is, hook your idea of the need or desire up with your model of yourself (ego).

Remember: There's nobody here but us chickens, and, as it turns out, we're all the same chicken.

-Montana

Agreed.

Here:

Anyone who is wondering about ethics regarding selfishness vs. altruism should read the following collection of essays ... though even any one of them is going to give you plenty to think about. The one on living in rationally in an irrational society is fairly accessible and to the point (number 8).

http://marsexxx.com/ycnex/Ayn_Rand-The_ ... shness.pdf

Rand argues that Selfishness is a virtue and altruism is, approximately, toxic.

These are not glib arguments; they have a lot of muscle, and I am myself having a hard time integrating her view with those of Tom et. al., whose views I also respect.

Montana

Montana,
There is NO comparison between Tom and Ayn Rand, only contrasts. They are nearly opposite views (in my opinion)on the nature of selfishness. Rand is taking a PMR view on the nature of reality (survival of the fittest and "me first") and our place within it, promoting selfishness and separateness. Where as Toms views encourage LOVE, and compassion. Tom has experienced the larger reality and has come back to tell us what he has found. While Rand has determined selfishness to be a virtue as a means to justify selfishness.

There are NPMR rules that seem to be exactly the opposite to what we see all around us here in PMR
You can find references to this ruleset in a variety of ancient as well as modern sources (including MBT)

_________________
LOVE is the answer

peace
patrick

I'd read a couple of her essays PG. Try the one mentioned on living rationally in an irrational society.

Can you refute what she says?



-Montana

@pgrue: What you say makes absolutely perfect logical sense when it comes to lowering entropy. However, there's a question that begs to be asked: What then? What then, after you lower your entropy? Help others lower their entropy? Then what? Sounds pretty monotonous and depressing to me.

But that's not it is it? We're ignoring the elephant in the room and that's the experience. The experience of being aware, as an individual and interacting with other individuals.

Bees build nice hives but do they get together, have a few beers and share funny stories about their lives? The unique perspective of a unique individual shouldn't be thrown out in favor of mindless robotic servitude.


@Montana: With regards to your first post, I'm glad that someone has clarified things a bit because I was beginning to get worried that my desire to enjoy life, have fun and be happy was "bad" or "useless" because it didn't serve the system's job for me which is entropy reduction (by selflessly aiding others, most of whom don't want it ;) )

As for your subsequent posts...well Ayn Rand was and still is a really controversial figure isn't she? I'll give that pdf a read, thanks.