As long as I can understand something new and find it suitable for my schemata of conceptualizing this reality, I can easily question my beliefs.
If one is too conservative with ideologies, looking for more alternatives, but not even considering and comparing your beliefs at all makes the whole endeavor pointless. If one actually has to stay true with their current beliefs for the sake of preventing "instability," at least understand what it is you're rejecting into your schemata.
As for the part with the questioning possibly "shattering" your world, I feel that sends off a negative vibe to those who aren't as strong-willed as they think they are.
An easy example for this is the people that I interact with on a daily basis:
-I acknowledge peoples' existence, but I don't grow so attached to that belief where I become distracted of my own. I still am aware of my own existence, even if it's been through misconceptions and having realities skewed a bit, the only aspect of existence in this dimension that I’m sure of is myself.
- I base this solipsistic applying on what I consider to be a "static" reality. If I were to focus on one person affecting my life for so long, I would find myself shifting accordingly to that attachment of this person causing some sort of motion in my decision-making.
-But if I break or "shatter" it down, I realize that this person is not someone I can be 100% sure of that is responsible for my actions.
-So this habit tends to go into a state of self-actualization, rather than being worried that "my" world is being shattered.
So how do I really acknowledge my full potential?
Simply because I have it engrained in my mind that retrospect is a powerful asset to learn what to do, and what not to do; having the desire to analyze what endeavors would be worth the investment of time to understand and benefit me.
I believe that the choosing a certain choice may not imply free will to others, but because we're so predictable in our choices, the probability of us choosing what's favorable to us is higher.
So in our reality, it might imply free-will to the person with a narrow scope of what they believe is reality, but in a broader sense (which I think has to be acknowledged at other levels of consciousness), it still sustains the implication of free-will, but it's based on probability and understanding how human beings think.
The presumption of the action the person will take to cause this or that to happen itself is flawed because it sets a half-assed deterministic mindset on what that person will do. So having complete exercise of “free-will” is unlikely, but complete exercise of the probabilities given to you is something I think is much better to indulge in.
Because the latter accepts that you focus on the reality you’re in, using common sense as a basis, but not the only source for development. While the former that implies complete exercise of free-will (which is highly unlikely) is idealistic hopes that are not able to sustain for very long.
So the point I’m making here is:
- If a belief that I’ve held as an a strong attachment to is something that has sustainability for long periods of time that acts accordingly to this reality; even if it’s delusional or flawed in itself, I will stick to it.
- However at the same time, if I find something that creates better sustainability in the convictions, or something I can conform myself into that’s suitable to my desires, then I’ll reconsider it, and then question my beliefs; as long as I can understand the alternative to the best of my abilities, I see no fear in my world being “shattered,” when in fact the de-fragmenting prevents anxiety and speculating worst case scenarios.
Fear of something being broken is merely an insecurity in not realizing how if you just use levelheadedness to interchange with understanding trends of reality and idealistic and positive intentions, the probability of the margin for error being low or high should not prevent me from potentially making mistakes in this life.
Again, retrospect, in my opinion, combined with the desire to attempt to understand (meaning learning to unlearn what you believe in just for a moment to see the alternatives with practical thinking) are just two rudiments I’m sure of.
Of course, I don’t think there’s such a thing as completely “unlearning” your beliefs, because there’s still the probability of mental filters skewing how you understand something. However, I use what I have, and I try my best to expand my options that give me more awareness to more probabilities of beliefs and actions that I can take and use in this reality.
|
|
Bookmarks