Re: Choosing Values -- metaphysical? instinctual?

[Guest guest]

I have a tendancy to analyse and think about stuff and, well, be in my

head. There have been some exercises in the book that I have struggled

with particularly because I thought I had to understand them first (I

remember the concept of observer mind was one of these). Then I

decided that the point was to just get on and do the exercises.

Experience them.

I think the exercise is merely to practise choosing, no matter whether

your mind then evaluates and judges your choice. To realise that when

you make a choice, your mind may then evaluate it as 'wrong' 'too

painful' or <insert your own thought brand> and just let that happen.

J

>

> I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and actions are

> likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our minds

> create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up with

> something.

>

> This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are Values?

> chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice, but then

> practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is generating.

>

> So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing values by

> reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a metaphysical issue?

>

> I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our instincts are

> smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few examples

> where that is true), or that there is something supernatural underneath

> it all.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

--- " soniaspider " wrote:

> So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing values

> by reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a metaphysical

> issue?

none of the above values are a way of connecting to the part of

you that's walled off most of the time by chatter & avoidance ...

right next door to whatever pain it is you don't want to look at

they're not myhstical or instinctive - theyre what you believe is

important when you let go for just a moment of trying to talk

yoruself out of living.

values are hard because there are no guarantees & no perfect

solutions ... minds hate that!!

[Guest guest]

I think we are supposed to be reconnecting with something, but what you

call that something isn't the important thing. What I think ACT helps

reconnect with is the activity and experience of choosing without

foundation. I don't mean that the choices are therefore arbitrary; I

mean that the choices have no external ground.

My mind tends to look for a rational answer to every question. Mostly

that's good and useful, but when it comes to questions of values, that's

really unhelpful. I don't believe values can be rationally decided. But

because of this tendency, and my tendency to mistrust any decision I

can't justify rationally, I have trouble making decisions that involve

my personal values.

And that process of trying and failing to find a rational justification

is what keeps me in my mind rather than in my life. That's what, at

least for me, ACT is helping to do -- stop the never-ending search for a

rational justification, hence an external foundation, for my life

decisions and take responsibility for and ownership of those decisions

myself. Ultimately the only justification for my values decisions is me;

acknowledging that takes courage, and acceptance that I won't always

make the right decision.

I suppose you could call that instinctual, but differentiating this sort

of thinking from rational thinking by calling it " instinctual " is still

elevating the rational in the same way that, at least for me, causes the

problem in the first place. I see it instead as getting in touch with

another aspect of our humanity. I think the ability to make these

decisions about where we want our life to go is fundamental to being

human, and the pain and regret that inevitably accompanies this

capacity, and that we are all trying to learn to deal with and not to

avoid, is just another aspect of our freedom.

On Tue, 15 May 2007 19:15:00 -0000, " soniaspider "

said:

> I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and actions are

> likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our minds

> create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up with

> something.

>

> This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are Values?

> chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice, but then

> practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is generating.

>

> So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing values by

> reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a metaphysical issue?

>

> I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our instincts are

> smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few examples

> where that is true), or that there is something supernatural underneath

> it all.

>

>

>

--

Styer

michael@...

[Guest guest]

Thanks for replying, , I could relate to much of this. There

are other aspects of my life that I can allow to be inexplicable

or " a-rational " , but it's definitely a surprising concept for me to

let values be chosen this way.

I feel as if I'm familiar with several of the ACT skills, but I don't

apply them them to enough, or to the appropriate, aspects of my life.

~S

>

> I think we are supposed to be reconnecting with something, but what

you

> call that something isn't the important thing. What I think ACT

helps

> reconnect with is the activity and experience of choosing without

> foundation. I don't mean that the choices are therefore arbitrary; I

> mean that the choices have no external ground.

>

> My mind tends to look for a rational answer to every question.

Mostly

> that's good and useful, but when it comes to questions of values,

that's

> really unhelpful. I don't believe values can be rationally decided.

But

> because of this tendency, and my tendency to mistrust any decision I

> can't justify rationally, I have trouble making decisions that

involve

> my personal values.

>

> And that process of trying and failing to find a rational

justification

> is what keeps me in my mind rather than in my life. That's what, at

> least for me, ACT is helping to do -- stop the never-ending search

for a

> rational justification, hence an external foundation, for my life

> decisions and take responsibility for and ownership of those

decisions

> myself. Ultimately the only justification for my values decisions

is me;

> acknowledging that takes courage, and acceptance that I won't always

> make the right decision.

>

> I suppose you could call that instinctual, but differentiating this

sort

> of thinking from rational thinking by calling it " instinctual " is

still

> elevating the rational in the same way that, at least for me,

causes the

> problem in the first place. I see it instead as getting in touch

with

> another aspect of our humanity. I think the ability to make these

> decisions about where we want our life to go is fundamental to being

> human, and the pain and regret that inevitably accompanies this

> capacity, and that we are all trying to learn to deal with and not

to

> avoid, is just another aspect of our freedom.

>

>

> On Tue, 15 May 2007 19:15:00 -0000, " soniaspider "

> said:

> > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and

actions are

> > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our

minds

> > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up

with

> > something.

> >

> > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are Values?

> > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice, but

then

> > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is

generating.

> >

> > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing values

by

> > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a metaphysical

issue?

> >

> > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our instincts

are

> > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few

examples

> > where that is true), or that there is something supernatural

underneath

> > it all.

> >

> >

> >

> --

> Styer

> michael@...

>

[Guest guest]

Good point about practicing making decisions and experiencing the

mind chatter no matter how trivial the choice. Thank you. I did it

and I thought, yeah yeah my mind comes up with stuff no matter what.

But I didn't move on to, " so maybe it's all just a bunch of chatter

when you make important decisions, too. "

> >

> > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and

actions are

> > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our

minds

> > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up

with

> > something.

> >

> > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are Values?

> > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice, but

then

> > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is

generating.

> >

> > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing values

by

> > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a metaphysical

issue?

> >

> > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our instincts

are

> > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few

examples

> > where that is true), or that there is something supernatural

underneath

> > it all.

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Yeah, the observer mind is both tricky and simple at the same time.

It's tricky because it can't be conceptualised or analysed or thought

about in any way, and simple because it's closer than close and fully

present every moment of our waking lives (and when we dream).

We can't see it because it's what's doing the seeing. It's not

anything we can see or hear or touch or taste or smell or think about

or feel. Anything that we're aware OF is not it. If you like, it's

what's doing the 'aware-ing " .

It's like the eye, which can see everything except itself, since it's

what's doing the seeing.

In practice it's a kind of looking in and out at the same time. For

example, if I'm looking at a tree, I can look out at the tree and

look inwards at the same time to see what's doing the looking.

You can find some unusual and very entertaining exercises that can

help with seeing the observing self at

http://www.headless.org/english-new/experiments.htm. The site uses

different names for it, but I'm pretty sure it's what ACT is

referring to (there's only one observing self after all, whatever

label you give to it).

If the more metaphysical aspects of the site don't suit you, you can

safely ignore them. The exercises still have immense value whatever

beliefs you hold or don't hold.

Stan

> >

> > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and

actions are

> > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our

minds

> > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up

with

> > something.

> >

> > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are Values?

> > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice, but

then

> > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is

generating.

> >

> > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing values

by

> > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a metaphysical

issue?

> >

> > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our instincts

are

> > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few

examples

> > where that is true), or that there is something supernatural

underneath

> > it all.

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

> > >

> > > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and

> actions are

> > > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our

> minds

> > > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up

> with

> > > something.

> > >

> > > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are Values?

> > > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice, but

> then

> > > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is

> generating.

> > >

> > > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing values

> by

> > > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a metaphysical

> issue?

> > >

> > > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our instincts

> are

> > > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few

> examples

> > > where that is true), or that there is something supernatural

> underneath

> > > it all.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Ok, now I'm just laughing at myself. I don't know if it's not

explicitly in the book or I just didn't get it, but I really missed

that the Observing Mind was choosing the values.

I've been in touch with the Observing Mind state several times over

my life, certainly not an everyday thing, but I never, ever would

have thought to turn over value choices to that state of mind.

But then if you're making choices without the chatter, then that's

what state of mind will remain.

Thanks,

> > >

> > > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and

> actions are

> > > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our

> minds

> > > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up

> with

> > > something.

> > >

> > > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are

Values?

> > > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice,

but

> then

> > > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is

> generating.

> > >

> > > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing

values

> by

> > > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a

metaphysical

> issue?

> > >

> > > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our

instincts

> are

> > > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few

> examples

> > > where that is true), or that there is something supernatural

> underneath

> > > it all.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

,

Just a quick point. The observing self doesn't choose or even care

about values or any other kind of judgment about reality and the way

we think it should or shouldn't be.

It's like the sky, which doesn't care whether clouds are present or

not, or what kind they are, or whether a light breeze is blowing or

there's a howling storm or a cyclone. The sky remains completely

undisturbed and unchanging no matter what passes through it.

Stan

> > > >

> > > > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and

> > actions are

> > > > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then*

our

> > minds

> > > > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up

> > with

> > > > something.

> > > >

> > > > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are

> Values?

> > > > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice,

> but

> > then

> > > > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is

> > generating.

> > > >

> > > > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing

> values

> > by

> > > > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a

> metaphysical

> > issue?

> > > >

> > > > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our

> instincts

> > are

> > > > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few

> > examples

> > > > where that is true), or that there is something supernatural

> > underneath

> > > > it all.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

And sometimes you can only truly see the direction to head when you can look at the terrain below from the perspective of the sky.....

Re: Choosing Values -- metaphysical? instinctual?

,Just a quick point. The observing self doesn't choose or even care about values or any other kind of judgment about reality and the way we think it should or shouldn't be.It's like the sky, which doesn't care whether clouds are present or not, or what kind they are, or whether a light breeze is blowing or there's a howling storm or a cyclone. The sky remains completely undisturbed and unchanging no matter what passes through it.Stan> > > >> > > > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and > > actions are > > > > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then* our > > minds > > > > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come up > > with > > > > something. > > > > > > > > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are > Values? > > > > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial choice, > but > > then > > > > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind is > > generating.> > > > > > > > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing > values > > by > > > > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a > metaphysical > > issue?> > > > > > > > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our > instincts > > are > > > > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few > > examples > > > > where that is true), or that there is something supernatural > > underneath > > > > it all. > > > > > > > > > > > >> > >> >>

[Guest guest]

All right. So it's more like the observing mind doesn't react, no

matter what you choose, but the chattering mind does react, no matter

what you choose?

> > > > >

> > > > > I've read the cognitive studies that show that choices and

> > > actions are

> > > > > likely made for reasons we aren't even aware of, and *then*

> our

> > > minds

> > > > > create the explanation as a reason. And we can always come

up

> > > with

> > > > > something.

> > > > >

> > > > > This seems to be what is being alluded to in the What Are

> > Values?

> > > > > chapter where you come up with reasons for a trivial

choice,

> > but

> > > then

> > > > > practice choosing without regard to the reasons your mind

is

> > > generating.

> > > > >

> > > > > So...what's going on here? Are we supposed to be choosing

> > values

> > > by

> > > > > reconnecting with instinct? Spirituality? Is this a

> > metaphysical

> > > issue?

> > > > >

> > > > > I'm not sure I can really get behind the idea that our

> > instincts

> > > are

> > > > > smarter than our minds (though offhand I can think of a few

> > > examples

> > > > > where that is true), or that there is something

supernatural

> > > underneath

> > > > > it all.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>