Why do I get angry when someone is horrible to me? I could just ignore them and carry on no harm done.

Have you ever come across anyone, or even yourself, who has asked the following question? I ask because it feels like it fits into 'field theory'.

"Why do I get angry when someone is rude to me? Or, is unkind to me in any number of other ways, all the way up to and including a physical attack?"

Seems like a strange question right?

But I'm asking very seriously about it. Because my anger in response is a choice I freely made. I could have made an alternative choice which is to laugh or ignore it. Or simply not to have got angry and carried on as usual.

There reason I ask and why I feel it's important, is because social organisation stands fully behind our 'right' to be angry when someone is horrible to us. Society does not say "just ignore it, its just words". And now we have hate law reinforcing what society already backs up.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the behaviours of both sides in such an interaction. I'm asking because I want to know why it happens, in the material sense, not the moral one.

Is there a scientific name for this? Maybe Rupert Sheldrake knows and has already discussed it.

Is there a 'field' which is distorted when people try to project harm onto others by making them angry. And the anger is a natural force response correcting the field back into its normal shape. Does this fit in with the morphic field?

The trigger which caused me to ask further, is that I have put the question to trusted friends. And I get a fierce response instead of a logical or scientific dialogue. Followed by an allegation that I am too provocative with people and its true what they've heard about me.

That kind of response, is a clear signal something very important is happening. Some kind of forbidden or secret knowledge, which may or may not need defending by nature and for good reason maybe.

But, what is it, exactly?

PETITION: Government to indicate countries of the UK are open to accede to the US

Sign the Petition A Dialogue on the UK's Accession to the United States Executive Summary This initiative seeks to foster a formal dialogue regarding the potential accession of the countries of the United Kingdom , to the United States , as individual states. Simply put, this petition is asking the government to start a conversation about the benefits of leaving the UK and joining the United States. The objective is to evaluate the benefits to citizens and stakeholders, encouraging a constructive discourse on the political, economic, and social implications of such a union. If Wales , Northern Ireland , Scotland , or England were to leave the United Kingdom, it would end their system of constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy . Instead, if they joined the United States as separate states, they would govern themselves under the U.S. federal system while receiving its protection. This proposal recognises that immediate change is unlikely but urges a serious con...

Who Said There Was Anything Wrong With a Worldview?

Who Said There Was Anything Wrong With a Worldview? I didn't. But it's when I believe my worldview, is truth, that I become violent without realising it. This is extremely hard for people to accept as possible. The resistance to seeing it and the temptation to escape from looking, is built into its foundations. So, I never said worldviews are bad for us. I did say that when I believe my worldview is a fact, then "I" become root cause of the worlds problems. Thought creates an image of the world. Then thought worships the image that thought created. I am scared of death. So I create an existential worldview about immortality - an image. This can be a God, a political ideology, scientific religiosity, atheism, planet saving activism, anything which my fear of death can hide behind. So if I do 'good' through this image I created, I will ultimately get a 'seat on the right hand side of God' , or whatever the image I created has defined as heaven. Then I w...

Facing Draco, Mining Dorado

This is a proposal to show how the 18.6 year real estate cycle is a hang over from times where the mechanics of the lunar month were used by high priests of the time to forecast ancient agricultural cycles - what we would today call a business cycle culminating in a financial crisis or a great recession. The 18.6 year period is governed by the intersection of lunar and solar eclipses. It is known scientifically as the Saros Cycle. Where all 3 harmonics of the orbit of the moon coincide once every 18.6 years. The ancient scholars knew this. And the politicians of the time used it to signal the day when the economy would be deliberately reset by fiat. This reset was necessary because this period was about how long the people of nations could abuse the economy before it was too late to recover on its own and much worse effects would have emerged. So it was the wisdom of the leadership of the time. As the aeons went by, the meaning and rationale of this policy became normalised - people an...

North Stoke Life

Search This Blog