Highlighted Quotes
"You cannot have an argument with a fully conscious person."
"When you are fully conscious, you cease to be in conflict."
"No one who is at one with himself can even conceive of conflict." – A Course in Miracles
“You cannot have an argument with a conscious person.”
This is similar to what a friend of mine, Dwayne, mentioned quite a few times. “When you experience it for yourself, nobody can tell you anything.”
Similar to what my father also would say, “go there and see for yourself and make sure you understand how it works.”
When this level of consciousness is reached by direct firsthand experience and understanding, there will be no more arguments.
You will state what you know, say you don’t know, ask questions when you don’t know, and leave it at that.
Discourse is simple.
But it seems the thing that gets in the way is the identification with the mind.
Is that what ego is? Mind identification? Identification with thoughts?
Most thoughts are not placed there from within but by external forces.
Schools, the environment, and social media.
All of this can be considered the “environment.”
An environment of false beliefs. With false prophets. We call them scientists, doctors, pastors, politicians, businessmen, and “experts.”
It seems I might need to look into what “A Course in Miracles” is about.
When the Christians call it satanic or anti-Christian, but the author claims she was divinely inspired by Jesus, then there is good reason to look into it.
It is always a good idea to look at the very thing someone tells you to not look into. Whether that knowledge is good or bad, only you can make that judgment.
A next man should never make a judgment call for you when determining good or bad.
Especially as it relates to health. What you should or should not put in your mind or body.
So as it relates to not arguing with anyone, that is something I find fun with.
I don’t consider it arguing but picking on their egos.
Usually, I will make a statement on a platform like Reddit, then someone will come in to start an argument because they disagree. The disagreement usually does not contain any sound reasoning and they do not ask questions to clarify why I am reasoning the way I am.
It is akin to throwing a tantrum online. Sometimes they will make the statement and then block me, so I cannot even see what they said.
They use terms like “case closed” or “this is the only way it works.” Something that signifies that it only works one way, their way, and there is no debate about it.
It does help me to refine my thoughts more, so dissent is a good thing. Especially if done cordially.
When done cordially, it will turn out that we are most likely saying the same thing. If not, and you dig into their beliefs, it will be a destructive belief.
It is destructive to their biochemistry/biophysics, their mental health, and relationships.
Many of those books on my shelf can explain why something may be good or bad in the context. But only you can understand your context and make that judgment call.
But when I say something is good or bad in my context, those who are doing the opposite will feel attacked. They feel attacked because you are living a different life from them.
They feel attacked because you tried the vegan diet and it doesn’t work so you try carnivore. The carnivores feel attacked because it does not work in the tropics so you start consuming fruits.
To these mind identifiers, their ideology is threatened. Meat, dairy, fruits are bad because too much fats, glucose, cholesterol is bad for somebody’s identity.
This is also the level that Alan, a photobiologist, talks on. He just states how it works, and can read up the believers quickly and call them out.
In a lipid/cholesterol Facebook group, we can see where the guys who come in are low carb, high cholesterol, are seeking solace.
Their ideology is that glucose is bad. This does not make any sense for me when I tried to follow their way.
There is a low-carb prophet in the group named Amber OHearn, who told me that nothing is wrong with feeding the cow grains and byproducts from corn to fatten them up.
This was in a response that my farmer and butcher who raises grass-fed animals cannot get fatty cuts. The animals in the tropics are naturally lean.
When I look around me all I see are fruit trees and tubers like yams.
But instead of understanding how it works in my environment, her argument was to unnaturally fatten the cow with one-sided science. For what?
This is why those who are closer to the equator with darker skin colors must be very critical of the American white folks.
Their science will help them cope with their environment.
And they will mess up their environment and come up with more science and technology to compensate. For example, pasteurization.
If I know that my goats and cows are roaming happily in the hillside eating a wide variety of bush, and my farmers milk them in sterile environments, then I want all that goodness without heat treatment.
But the Americans will tell me that I need to kill off all those good bacteria because their science said so. Science that had to happen because they crammed 200 cows in less than an acre of shit-filled pen.
Good farmers will tell you one and a half cows per acre.
They will use analogies like raw milk drinkers who know their source of milk is drinking river water.
No, they are the ones drinking from a polluted river with whatever purification process they fool themselves with. We are drinking mountain spring water. Completely different source.
We are not the same.
What they do not understand is that many of us was drinking from that same river and something had to happen for us to now know better.
But this challenges their ego.
That in itself causes massive discomfort.
This discomfort causes them to want to argue with us. If we are in another level of consciousness, they cannot fathom our reasoning.
Because it is a journey that has to happen for all of us.
They must go through that journey themselves and feel the pain themselves before they can see for themselves, understand how it works, and ask questions.
