| |
|
| | Post New Topic | | A new theory of attention - part one | Views: 669 | | Jul 06, 2006 9:33 pm | | A new theory of attention - part one | # | 
Ronald Wopereis | | Love and attention are the high and low tide of our energy system.
Love is the food, flowing from the whole to its parts.
Where there is a movement, there is also a countermovement.
Attention is the the existential emptiness, the flow backwards from the parts to their whole.
And then there is the holon, the whole for its parts and the part within the whole.
When we consider love and attention, whole and parts, there are several orders to be observed.
One is time, where the parent is born before the child. And so the parent is the whole.
The child pays attention to the parent, in order to receive the love from the parent. And the parent decides how and when they will give their love to their child. This is what brings about conditioning.
One is again time, where the person was a child before he became an adult. Let's name the person as a child the "inner child", then the adult pays attention to the inner child. This inner child then radiates love to the adult. Such love is often called passion, or pain, or creativity, depending on context.
In nature, love and attention are seldomly used. For love, the word food usually applies. And for attention, it seems there is no word. The mother bird flies to the nest with a wurm in her mouth. The young birds spread their mouth wide open. Love is the food. What are the wide open mouths? Do young birds pay attention to their mother?
The last example in this part one, is where the whole is the woman and the parts are the man. Use other words if you like. For the woman: female energy, the intuition. For the man: male energy, the mind. So the mind pays attention to the intuition. And the intuition radiates love to the mind.
Why is this all of any importance? Consider the human being a drop of water in the ocean of love and attention. Would a drop of water ever get tired? So why would a human being get tired? Of what?
Best regards, Ron
Private Reply to Ronald Wopereis |  | |
| |
Previous Topic | 
