How To Think Correctly

[CYOF]

It's much more than the platitudinous Master Key.

I seem to have missed much of the fun at the party and like the worst kind of guest I will be probably the first to arrive and the last to leave.

Much of the 1000+ posts of this thread has been establishing what is partially summarised in the paragraph below.

The Lord Buddha has said that we must not believe in a thing said merely because it is said; nor traditions because they have been handed down from antiquity; nor rumors, as such; nor writings by sages, because sages wrote them; nor fancies that we may suspect to have been inspired in us by a Deva (that is, in presumed spiritual inspiration); nor from inferences drawn from some haphazard assumption we may have made; nor because of what seems an analogical necessity; nor on the mere authority of our teachers or masters. But we are to believe when the writing, doctrine, or saying is corroborated by our own reason and consciousness. "For this," says he in concluding, "I taught you not to believe merely because you have heard, but when you believed of your consciousness, then to act accordingly and abundantly."
- Secret Doctrine, Vol. III, page 401. [vii]

Are we now heading into the choppy waters of secret knowledge?

Will CYOF present us with his own esoteric catechism for traders?

Now we are getting somewhere - this post is very goood Rols.

Please send me the link to the Secret Doctrine if you have it on pdf - if not I will try Amazon - it will be greatly appreciated.

As for me, as Socrates said, "I am but a mere mortal", and all I am doing is speaking what is on my mind - what I say will be understood differently by each person - the understanding of what I say will be determined by the way one thinks - no argument here I would imagine?

Slainte,

 

[CYOF]

"No, no strings, just my interpretation of something that I feel to be absolutely 100% correct."
I'm sure you realise new trader was referring to String Theory, not strings attached.
What do you think are the relevance of worm holes, if they exist?
Science is a dynamic set of systems, so ideas rarely stay static, but are affected by new knowledge; which is why old science has a reducing influence on newer thought although a few basic principles continue to apply. This is in contra-distinction to belief systems which tend to remain stubbornly static and therefore new knowledge has minimal effect on them.
There is no correct way to think, per se, only incorrect ways.
The same applies to trading............
Just thought people ought to consider that after 1225 posts........
Richard

Ah, my apologies, I did read it that I may be "pulling the strings", as I may have done in the past.

But, this shows we must be clear in what we write, or as clear as possible if we are stimulating mind activity.

The words "Strings" and "String Theory" will obviously convey different meanings, so we must be as clear as possible.

I disagree wholly that there is no correct way to think.

I will endeavour to show how there is actually a Scientific way of thinking, that is well documented, and in actual fact, we use the method unknown to ourselves on a continuous basis.

However, what we do not realise is that due to the immutable Laws that exist, we can in fact utilise this correct way of thinking to our own benefit - the results been "we are what we think".

I will give a common example that all will be able to relate to - this is directly from my text source:

"We can understand the action of the conscious and subconscious minds by observing the process by which the child learns to play the piano. He is taught how to hold his hands and strike the keys, but at first he finds it somewhat difficult to control the movement of his fingers. He must practice daily, must concentrate his thoughts upon his fingers, consciously making the right movements. These thoughts, in time, become subconscious, and the fingers are directed and controlled in the playing by the subconsciousness. In his first months, and possibly first years of practice, the pupil can perform only by keeping his conscious mind centered upon the work; but later he can play with ease and at the same time carry on a conversation with those about him, because the subconscious has become so thoroughly imbued with the idea of right movements that it can direct them without demanding the attention of the conscious mind."

I rest my case!

Slainte,

 

[trendie]

Now this is very interesting.

Let me see if I understand this - please correct me if I am wrong.

You have up to now been interested in the discussion, for what ever reason, but mainly due to the participation by all.

Now, you say you have read The Master Key System by Charles Haanel, and see many similarities to what I am posting - but you are not sure?

Why then should it matter if I am referring to the Master Key, or not. Surely it is the participation that is giving the enjoyment, and surely you must be learning something new from the discussions, I know that I am, I have learned some very useful information since this thread began, and all that was from conversing with other human beings.

Slainte,

I am enjoying this discussion, but as with someone who has attended a previous performance of a play, I want to know if the ending (I would say denouement, but that would be pretentious) is one I have seen before, and whether the ending was interesting enough for me to experience it again. ( I could read the entire MasterKey all over again in a third of the time it would take to re-read this thread )

I will continue to monitor, but my take on anything spiritual is that it is personal, and each has his/her own interpretation. Otherwise this becomes a religious "you don't get it cos you're not praying/meditating properly" type direction, which by its very nature, is not open to quantitive analysis (science), only pedantic word-games and such.

As for rols and sex: didnt Reich talk about orgone energy, that could be collected during sex?
Or was that Ouspensky?

 

[trendie]

I shall now endeavour to listen, and will read and learn, rather than trying to think and analyse and interject.
I shall impose a no-more-posting from myself for a few days, and let the flow go where it goes.

 

[CYOF]

I am enjoying this discussion, but as with someone who has attended a previous performance of a play, I want to know if the ending (I would say denouement, but that would be pretentious) is one I have seen before, and whether the ending was interesting enough for me to experience it again. ( I could read the entire MasterKey all over again in a third of the time it would take to re-read this thread )

I will continue to monitor, but my take on anything spiritual is that it is personal, and each has his/her own interpretation. Otherwise this becomes a religious "you don't get it cos you're not praying/meditating properly" type direction, which by its very nature, is not open to quantitive analysis (science), only pedantic word-games and such.

As for rols and sex: didnt Reich talk about orgone energy, that could be collected during sex?
Or was that Ouspensky?

A fair point trendie,

Hence, I started off with the details about the Exodus and the discoveries in Egypt.

Not to delve into the subject too much, but we need to ask ourselves why do we have different religions. Why were people in the past led to believe that there were Gods of all types, who were responsible for different things?

What do the recent revelations - based on Scientific possibilities -tell us about the many writings that have been handed down over the centuries. We can now see, based on a Scientific explanation, that the Hebrews may have been released from slavery because all the first born Egyptians, who were privileged and slept on low beds to the ground, were suffocated by carbon dioxide released from the waters of a nearby river or lake due to underground volcanic activity.

And what about the parting of the Red Sea - can a sea really part!

Or maybe, just maybe, the Hebrew symbol for Red and Reed is one and the same, and there was also a marshy area called the Sea Of Reeds - which it was possible for the waters to drain away away into the Ocean due to a Tsunami - which might just have caught out the Egyptians when the followed Moses and his people, when the waters returned after the big suck out into the Ocean.

Why, why, why?

So, maybe the greatest book ever written does actually contain many answers to life and how we can live our lives to the full, but maybe also, just maybe, it has been interpreted incorrectly for centuries, or even worse, maybe this false interpretation was intentional for a specific reason that might just happened to be called POWER and DOMINATION - funny how these words just keep coming to my mind, and it is also funny how History seems to always prove my thoughts correct?

We are truly in the dawn of a new era -that goes without saying - but do we also expect any major changes in the status quo if qwe hold on to past beliefs and customs - many will of course say YES - but many are also saying NO.

At least now one has the choice - well in most of the civilised world at least - but in order to realise any major benefits, one must realise that what we end with in life is 100% governed by the way we think - so thinking correctly is of the utmost importance in a world that is still struggling between many conflicting thoughts.

Slainte,

 

[CYOF]

I shall now endeavour to listen, and will read and learn, rather than trying to think and analyse and interject.
I shall impose a no-more-posting from myself for a few days, and let the flow go where it goes.

No -this is not the correct thing to do.

The only way to discover true knowledge is by discussion - not by reading alone.

Read the essay by Montaigne again - it is really one of the best pieces of writing ever composed, at least I think it is, and it came highly recommended to me by the only Professor I know who seems to know how to teach correctly - and has actually admitted to me that the majority of his fellow teachers are ignorant to what teaching is really all about.

Slainte,

 

[trendie]

No -this is not the correct thing to do.

The only way to discover true knowledge is by discussion - not by reading alone.

Read the essay by Montaigne again - it is really one of the best pieces of writing ever composed, at least I think it is, and it came highly recommended to me by the only Professor I know who seems to know how to teach correctly - and has actually admitted to me that the majority of his fellow teachers are ignorant to what teaching is really all about.

Slainte,

My reasoning was that this thread is very popular, evidenced by the number of views, and I dint want to take it in a direction that you think inappropriate.
This would cause a meandering away from topic, and losing direction and focus.

Also, I dont want to monopolise it with my own personal limited thought-patterns.
There are many readers who are chomping at the bit to read your flow of thought, rather than my interjections. (oops, I did it again)

thanks for being kind enough to keep me in the loop, rather than getting irritated at me.

 

[firewalker99]

Question:

What is the most essential thing to sustain life?

I'm a bit late at this - this thread is moving so rapidly it's getting hard to follow full time - but I'll have a go at it anyway without reading the other answers first:

first thing that pops to mind would be water... but then I remember reading an article once where scientists say water is not as essential as we might think... so I cheated and looked it up... this is what they said: "a suitable temperature range to allow chemical bonding, and an energy source" are the two essential things to sustain life...

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=15568

 

[CYOF]

CYOF,

As you say, the Socratic dialogues were beneficial to both teacher and pupil; they are also succinct. Use the dialogues as your model and ask a pertinent question.

"It can be done, by anyone, once one believes in what they are doing". In what are we supposed to believe - or as a minimum, discuss?

The thread is already degenerating into anarchy. Give it a purpose. Get a grip.

Grant.

Gratnx, this post is very good IMHO.

You see, I believe if you stick with it, it will eventually come right, but it requires perseverance.

I will adopt the Socratic approach if more think it will be of value - but it must be both ways - for I am only a learner like everyone else - and it is not easy trying to express your thoughts in generalised terms so that many may see the thought plane you are on - or to be more down to earth - understand why I think the way I do.

Socrates and Montaigne wre truly very wise men indeed, and we can all learn a great deal from trying to understand the way they thought - for it was their way of thinking that made them say the words they said.

Why do you think this thread is degenerating into anarchy?

Slainte,

 

[CYOF]

I'm a bit late at this - this thread is moving so rapidly it's getting hard to follow full time - but I'll have a go at it anyway without reading the other answers first:

first thing that pops to mind would be water... but then I remember reading an article once where scientists say water is not as essential as we might think... so I cheated and looked it up... this is what they said: "a suitable temperature range to allow chemical bonding, and an energy source" are the two essential things to sustain life...

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=15568

And what might that energy source be FW?

 

[Mr. Charts]

CYOF, you say,
"The only way to discover true knowledge is by discussion - not by reading alone"

Are you r-e-a-l-l-y sure about that...........?

Richard

 

[firewalker99]

CYOF, you say,
"The only way to discover true knowledge is by discussion - not by reading alone"

Are you r-e-a-l-l-y sure about that...........?

Richard

I agree with you Richard. Knowledge can be gained in many ways.
But knowledge isn't the same as wisdom or experience, or (moral, ethical,...) values,...
Knowledge in itself means very little...

 

[new_trader]

I'm a bit late at this - this thread is moving so rapidly it's getting hard to follow full time - but I'll have a go at it anyway without reading the other answers first:

first thing that pops to mind would be water... but then I remember reading an article once where scientists say water is not as essential as we might think... so I cheated and looked it up... this is what they said: "a suitable temperature range to allow chemical bonding, and an energy source" are the two essential things to sustain life...

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=15568

Two important things to note:

1) Scientists can't actually provide a Universal definition of "Life".
2) Scientists can't explain how life begun because they don't know the process involved to go from non-living to living.

What is essential to sustain life? Give me the definition of "life" and how it began first. Looking at the planets in our solar system it would be obvious to me that liquid water is the most important ingredient.

 

[SOCRATES]

The sooner this thread stops the better its nothing but a boring load of waffle .

It is not waffle......It is something very different.....and it is obvious....at least it is obvious to me if to no one else here ....that the discussion has gone adrift for the most simple of reasons....that everyone here seems to overlook....I shall not interrrupt and allow you all to continue and to see whether you are able to pin it ....without any help...:cheesy:

 

[new_trader]

I agree with you Richard. Knowledge can be gained in many ways.
But knowledge isn't the same as wisdom or experience, or (moral, ethical,...) values,...
Knowledge in itself means very little...

I also agree. Someone once said: Learning is the assimilation of knowledge. Wisdom is the correct use of this knowledge.

 

[Mr. Charts]

CYOF,
I said,
"There is no correct way to think, per se, only incorrect ways.
The same applies to trading............
Just thought people ought to consider that after 1225 posts........"

I did not say "there is no correct way to think" - I qualified it by the phrase "per se".
Now I am sure you are not saying there is only one correct way to think.....are you?
Now that is a very dangerous thought.

Now, you mention teaching and how almost all teachers can't.
The finest teaching is enabling people how to think for THEMSELVES......

Richard

 

[blackcab]

(... Marconi ... wireless ...) how is it possible for pulses of energy to travel vast distances instantly - and more importantly, what is the scientific explanation for it. I have a crude explanation that I can give, so if we have any budding scientists here in the field of wireless, please do add your thoughts, for they may well be very important in getting a true understanding.

Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) is energy carried by photons. For convenience and historical reasons, we've given names to different regions of the EMR spectrum - radio waves, microwaves, infrared, human-visible light, ultra violet, X rays and gamma rays. We've also given names to different regions of the visible light part of the spectrum - red, green, blue, etc. The shipping forecast, the colour orange, and microwaves that cook food are all the same thing - photons of a certain energy. The only difference between them is the amount of energy the photon has - not much for radio, and a lot for gamma. You can describe the photon's energy in terms of wavelength or frequency if you prefer (which people usually do when talking about radio).

If the organs that we've evolved to sense electromagnetic radiation could sense a broader portion of the EMR spectrum than they currently can, then we could see radio, and radio would just be another colour to our eyes.

how is it possible for pulses of energy to travel vast distances instantlyThey don't travel instantly but at the speed of light, which is fast by our standards, but not instant. There's the interesting phenomenon of 'entanglement' whereby two quantum particles become related in some way and changing the state of one particle causes an instantaneous change in the other regardless of the distance between them, but that's poorly understood at the moment, certainly by me. The question of "how is it possible" is far too big for me

 

[new_trader]

CYOF,
I said,
"There is no correct way to think, per se, only incorrect ways.
The same applies to trading............
Just thought people ought to consider that after 1225 posts........"

I did not say "there is no correct way to think" - I qualified it by the phrase "per se".
Now I am sure you are not saying there is only one correct way to think.....are you?
Now that is a very dangerous thought.

Now, you mention teaching and how almost all teachers can't.
The finest teaching is enabling people how to think for THEMSELVES......

Richard

This is (IMO) where intelligence comes in. Intelligence cannot be taught and is not related to knowledge. Intelligence is the ability to do the correct and appropriate thing in a new and unexpected situation and thus cannot be taught. Anyone who thinks they can impart the correct way of thinking is playing the role of A (The?) messiah. That takes us back to religion, control and domination....

 

[CYOF]

Now, many good posts above, but I will try and generalise -this is not a cop out, and do feel free to re-question if you think it is warranted.

I, CYOF, am stating my thoughts. I have admitted that I truly believe that I, and I can only say I, as I can not think for anyone else, really know nothing when it comes to understanding how everything is exactly the way it is.

So, If I say something, I am already admitting that I may be wrong, but it is my thought, and if someone else puts forward another thought that makes more sense, then so be it, but in reality, if we all ultimately agree that what we are saying is a result from a thought that originated in the mind of someones else, then who is to say who is right, and who is wrong?

I will follow up with a real life example of how thinking can actually change what you have in life - and this is 100% true - as it is my own story in relation to the the not too distant past - lets see what you all think of this?

Nice to see you back Socrates, I hope you enjoyed the holidays and look forward to your input.

BTW, I remember reading some posts where a lot of advice was been give to check you ego at the door for trading - this, I now believe, is flawed, and ego, I now believe, is very important in relation to thinking correctly, which is in turn very important for positive trading results, which is all that matters in relation to trading, positive results are the ultimate experience, and like all cause and effect, positive things will leads to more positive things, and vice versa of course.

 

[CYOF]

My Example

I think a word of caution is required at this point in time, and this is based on my personal experiences.

As with all things of value, one must be fully aware of the possible outcomes. As every cause has an effect, it is just as easy to get it wrong, and whilst one may think that they are doing the right thing, they may in fact do the very opposite if they are not fully aware of the consequences.

I will try and keep this as brief as possible:

Started with Fundamental Analysis, opened account with Datek, traded penny stocks, made 300% in 6 weeks on small money, started to read TA, started to use Island Book with TA for placing trades, got very interested in DTU and Daytrading using Multi Monitor Trading, thought about it all the time, in Nov2002 started to set up Multi Screens in own office, got a reality shock, got some training, got another reality shock, stayed with it for months, got an investor, big mistake, got rid of him, no $25K for day margin, trader ES E-mini, got another reality shock, just started to make good progress when - 1 FULL YEAR WAS GONE.

You see, my thoughts came into reality, but I had not done the sensible thing and covered all avenues – so I ended up having to spend the majority of my savings on living expenses during the year – a big mistake that will never happen again.

But, I am only highlighting what may happen, when in actual fact, the reality of the situation is that, due to my experiences during the year, where I done a lot of work with Computers myself, and done several Business Plans, which I had never done before, I actually ended up getting a job that is now paying TWICE what I was earning in 2002.

If I had not made a conscious decision to stick it out for 1 full Year, I may have returned to my old job, where I would now more than likely still be, earning a lot less money than I am now earning. Also, like riding a bike, when you are trading with no other income, learning becomes real, and you quickly drop all the crap that wastes your time – necessity is really the mother of all invention.

Anyway, just thought I would mention this, as it is possible to sabotage yourself if you do not behave in a responsible and realistic manner – thinking correctly can also be dangerous in the hands of the ill informed – hence the many posts for a real understanding of what may, and may not, be possible outcomes for adopting a scientific method of thinking.

You have been warned!