so all those motivational books, speakers, religious texts, philosophers, spiritual leaders etc. keep saying: be yourself. just be. you are a human being, not a human doing, blah blah blah…
i think that just maybe, “being” imposes restrictions on action… you’re encouraged to accept everything, as if it will all just do itself, without your active input. in fact, your active input is the reason nothing works, you should rather just be….
Wait!...What?!
I say hell no! I’m here to DO! Not Just BE…. The ‘Unified Theory’ in science (as I understand it) is based on the science of MOVEMENT… everything in science points to movement being the question and it’s description the answer.
Now, if MOVEMENT is the scientific unified theory, then it’s philosophical counterpart would be ACTION, and NOT Existence.
Argument:
Being refers to being in the moment, the now, while still “doing”. It does not mean be a vegetable or comatose. It means do not get caught up in the tenses (past, future) Of course do, but do not le the doing become you. They are actions thats all.
Response:
every moment, if you really want to track it down, is already the past, so being in the moment means constantly slipping into the past, whereas, doing means active movement forward, it is the opposite of being in that it is constantly slipping into the future.
the difference in mindset then becomes vast.
like the difference between someone who will hope for an end to world hunger, and someone who will actively fix world hunger.
just being in the moment, means i simply exist, that is all, and while this is a very peaceful philosophy, existing and living are two very different things…
Argument:
I think what he means is by simply being you are doing. The advice is to be so that you can do. If you simply just do you will never become your true self and you are slave to the task.
Response:
i find this interesting… in order to ‘just be’, i would have to stop ‘doing’, paradoxically allowing me to ‘do’, but by ‘doing’ i risk losing my ‘being’… so my ‘being’ would have to constantly change along with my ‘doing’, making my ‘doing’ the driving force, and my ‘being’ a stabilizing force.
i think that the downplay of action through simply ‘being’ is a very strong component of what is wrong with society, and although this is just my opinion, i base it on the global tendency toward apathy regarding the planet’s countless wrongs.
in short, ‘being’ alone achieves nothing if there is no active and cognitive doing involved.
Argument:
I think just by being you are establishing a base for all action ever done. Just by being you are given the greatest gift…an understanding of yourself and your place in the universe. Without this understanding we would be blindly doing.
Response:
Agreed, but languishing in ‘being’ would be indulgent if we don’t use our new-found understanding for a purpose greater than understanding in-and-of itself. Fulfilling this purpose requires Action.
It’s like the difference between reading a brilliantly explained textbook, with all the facts, that help you understand Science, and actually doing scientific experiments. If you do not intend to do anything with that understanding, the understanding itself (though it’s a really nice gift) is rendered meaningless. The greatest gift is the ability to DO something with your understanding.
So i think that though Being is a prerequisite for positive Doing, we must not get stuck in our ‘Being’ but use it to move forward, with an emphasis placed rather on action than on existence.
i think that just maybe, “being” imposes restrictions on action… you’re encouraged to accept everything, as if it will all just do itself, without your active input. in fact, your active input is the reason nothing works, you should rather just be….
Wait!...What?!
I say hell no! I’m here to DO! Not Just BE…. The ‘Unified Theory’ in science (as I understand it) is based on the science of MOVEMENT… everything in science points to movement being the question and it’s description the answer.
Now, if MOVEMENT is the scientific unified theory, then it’s philosophical counterpart would be ACTION, and NOT Existence.
Argument:
Being refers to being in the moment, the now, while still “doing”. It does not mean be a vegetable or comatose. It means do not get caught up in the tenses (past, future) Of course do, but do not le the doing become you. They are actions thats all.
Response:
every moment, if you really want to track it down, is already the past, so being in the moment means constantly slipping into the past, whereas, doing means active movement forward, it is the opposite of being in that it is constantly slipping into the future.
the difference in mindset then becomes vast.
like the difference between someone who will hope for an end to world hunger, and someone who will actively fix world hunger.
just being in the moment, means i simply exist, that is all, and while this is a very peaceful philosophy, existing and living are two very different things…
Argument:
I think what he means is by simply being you are doing. The advice is to be so that you can do. If you simply just do you will never become your true self and you are slave to the task.
Response:
i find this interesting… in order to ‘just be’, i would have to stop ‘doing’, paradoxically allowing me to ‘do’, but by ‘doing’ i risk losing my ‘being’… so my ‘being’ would have to constantly change along with my ‘doing’, making my ‘doing’ the driving force, and my ‘being’ a stabilizing force.
i think that the downplay of action through simply ‘being’ is a very strong component of what is wrong with society, and although this is just my opinion, i base it on the global tendency toward apathy regarding the planet’s countless wrongs.
in short, ‘being’ alone achieves nothing if there is no active and cognitive doing involved.
Argument:
I think just by being you are establishing a base for all action ever done. Just by being you are given the greatest gift…an understanding of yourself and your place in the universe. Without this understanding we would be blindly doing.
Response:
Agreed, but languishing in ‘being’ would be indulgent if we don’t use our new-found understanding for a purpose greater than understanding in-and-of itself. Fulfilling this purpose requires Action.
It’s like the difference between reading a brilliantly explained textbook, with all the facts, that help you understand Science, and actually doing scientific experiments. If you do not intend to do anything with that understanding, the understanding itself (though it’s a really nice gift) is rendered meaningless. The greatest gift is the ability to DO something with your understanding.
So i think that though Being is a prerequisite for positive Doing, we must not get stuck in our ‘Being’ but use it to move forward, with an emphasis placed rather on action than on existence.
Tweet
- August 6, 2012 5:30
- ·
Janosh Aurel
I would rather opt for the latter. To do, is to be; and to be, is to do. Both are intrinsically co-entwined. Both stem from the precept of motion.
- August 6, 2012
- ·
- Reply
- ·
- Like
