It's becoming obvious my best posts are on dynamic issues like "Vital Paradoxes." These conflicting opinions are in fact much bigger issues. In the post, "General Concepts" Apr. 9th, 2013, I first outlined how our personal opinion biases are self identifying boundary definitions. These often can become our "Vital Paradoxes." And as it happens most people take their opinions very seriously. To demonstrate, I pose a brief series of questions that people take seriously. I used questions that not only express strong opposing biases but are also seen differently by intelligent people. For instance:
Is there a God? (Personal or otherwise?)
Are there real Psychics? (Or are we just crazy and corrupt?)
Is there a shadow Government? (Or do we just not care?)
Can two intelligent people disagree? (Or is one person always going to be wrong?)
And for today, "Is the world coming to an end?" (Or are we just being lazy as usual?)
I would like to suggest that there is the dynamic of shifting definitions and the rational processing of conflicting information. This process of "Vital Paradoxes" serves a greater service than just adversarial debate. For instance, I've been saying (and writing for decades) that the world has been predicted to die repeatedly for eons. But yet as a "Vital Paradox," this issue is much too important to dismiss just because of the predictably consistent outcomes to date.
I would like to offer that all of these arguments have more "Vital" significance than just the resolution of who ends up being right. I find that the arguments of my friends who like to think they know physics are much more interesting if I lend weight to their opinions. Not to mention that when it comes to opinions, there is no denying the value of debate.
But what about the Vital Paradoxes of daily living. Should we want to bring children into the world? And should I want to listen to my friends, when I know that they're not only wrong, but they are being jerks about it too? So many of the conflicts in intimate relations may be "Vital Paradoxes." Should we get baptized? Why? By whom? There may be right answers, but then maybe not. I'm not trying to exaggerate the already obscure issues of relative authority and conflict, but I just wanted to show how subtle the dynamics of personal opinions are. These dynamics of human relations effect the resultant outcomes of societal changes. As a psychic I am always amazed at how much real information I have to be prepared for. I must always prepare for the unexpected, the unanticipated, the unresolved.
Often peoples differences come down to issues dynamics and I can't help if I think I can take sides. Out of respect for myself and everyone else too, I've learned to own and identify my own "Vital Paradoxes" and there relations to other peoples opinions and biases. Having a rather neutral opinion bias can serve me well. This is especially true because I'm very opinionated.
