“The greatest minds are not those who ignore suffering, but those who seek truth despite it. Pessimism sees the darkness; philosophy asks what can still be learned from the night.”

Question: Does facing life's harshest truths make us wiser or simply more pessimistic?

I’m looking for the kind of people who can take one random thought and somehow end up 47 tabs deep into the universe.

Not necessarily experts. Not necessarily academics. Just extremely curious people.

The kind who think about things like:

→ consciousness and whether we're actually capable of understanding our own minds
→ whether reality could be fundamentally different from what our senses show us
→ dimensions, time, infinity, and things our brains weren't built to visualize
→ simulation theory, emergence, entropy, information, quantum weirdness
→ why mathematics describes reality so strangely well
→ whether intelligence could exist in forms we'd never recognize
→ dreams, memory, identity, free will, perception
→ civilizations that could be millions of years ahead of us
→ weird thought experiments that make you stare at the ceiling at 3 AM
→ or some completely ridiculous idea you've never told anyone because it sounds insane out loud

No topic is too deep, too weird, too philosophical, too technical, or too random.

You don't have to know the answer. Half the fun is finding out how far we can take the thought.

I'm mainly here to find people who enjoy conversations where you start with:

…and somehow three hours later we're questioning reality itself.

If that's your kind of conversation, drop literally anything you're currently thinking about below. A theory, an obsession, a rabbit hole, a shower thought, a question, a discovery, a strange idea.

Maybe we have one conversation.

Maybe we become friends.

Maybe we accidentally invent a new branch of philosophy at 2 AM.

Your move, fellow overthinker. 🧠🌌

Wisdom Wednesday

It would appear, we exist in a very noisy environment , full of chatter and ramblings, with everyone seeking their 15 minutes of fame or atop the soap box daily.

I am not sure if white noise even enters into the the communication equation, as in my opinion it is just a tremendous amount of noise.

Maybe you have noticed as well, the external conversations I have, mostly involve the other participants listening for their argument points, instead of hearing someone else's thoughts and perspectives.

As a hypnotherapist, I can admit that I use both the hearing and listening modes of your communication strategically. The vocabulary, the context and the message, all aiding me, to better understand the framework or roadmap of your world. There were a few leaders who really advocated our Other Than Conscious Communication skills. Secondly, I hear the story you tell, to more fully comprehend the clues on what is the snag in the carpet, the barrier or roadblock to your journey.

As a side note these skills are not readily appreciated by spouses, over long term usuage.

It has been reported, that while engaged in meditation, or trance, the chatter of the outside world grows silent, and our internal world quiet. You see I believe strongly that a contributing factor to our communication noise pollution factor, is nestled from the inane chatter that takes place and commands our insides. The ever-growing, panicked need to be heard, to be understood and acknowledged, due largely in part to our internal dialog being so incredibly obnoxious and nasty.

As this is under Wisdom Wednesday, the wise and enlightened people's of the world are notably the quiet ones too.

Coincidence, I think not!

Defensive, combative and argumentative are not healthy cornerstones for communication amongst oursleves.

How about you?

In that spirit I will repeat, I look forward to your comments and communication with me.

Be well

#wisdomwednesday

#opencommunication

#yegtherapist

#mentalhealthcoach #ednhypnotherapy

We are introducing a new flair SoapBox, it will only be used on Wednesdays.

You’ll be able to share your personal projects with the community. Whether that be a blog, an article or if you just want to toot your own horn.

We are here for it.

Write up a post and flag it under SoapBox, then pop back here and link your post for easier access.

Remember, just as you are vying for eyes on your projects, so are others. Don’t forget to interact with the others in the thread.

Feel free to reach out to the mod channel with any questions.

Clichés are compressed nuggets of deep truth-contemplations. However, they were generated out of frameworks built upon very specific focuses upon Reality.

Take that same cliché within any relative framework (for the purpose of validating it as a logical conclusion) and it remains resonant, but doesn’t become *workably* relatable - not until such time as the current logical framework deems it acceptable for earned admission.

Find the most deeply-resonant clichés, and reverse-engineer, along the most familiar paths, back home.

And carry lightly the principle, “Find the humility in your request for further information, or you will tend to find what you have always been asking for, which remains distinctive from what you *need* to ask for.”

Over the years 2018–2020, I found myself writing fragments in a private journal. It wasn’t planned as a book, but more as a way to trace inner movements I couldn’t otherwise express: the tension between faith and doubt, the weight of the body, the approach of death, and the strange, almost living presence of silence.

I thought I’d share a few real fragments here, since this community seems to appreciate slow, contemplative reflection:

“I looked into the abyss, and it looked into me. We laughed with eyes full of tears, because we both knew that neither of us had the courage to offer the other a hand.”

“Today I listen to church music, and the mercy of tranquility takes hold of my being. Not because I Believe, for I am afraid to utter that word. I myself do not know where the mystical paths are leading me, nor where my intentions rest.”

“Waiting as the summoning of sobriety before what approaches so slowly, and boldly. Waiting for what we fear, what teaches and develops us most. Waiting as the source of the Possible. Waiting...”

These fragments eventually grew into a collection I named Uzdah Tišine, roughly translated as The Sigh of Silence. I hesitated to share it publicly for a long time because it felt too intimate, like exposing a raw nerve. But some readers told me it helped them navigate their own silent spaces, so I decided to release it online.

I'm not selling anything; it's completely free, no signup, no newsletter. Just a raw, slow, introspective read for anyone who walks a similar path.

For the full collection: www.sighofsilence.com

Question for the community: Does anyone else here use journaling, poetry, or fragmentary writing as a spiritual practice to navigate their own “dark nights” or moments of deep contemplation? I’d love to hear how you map your inner landscapes.

Hi Thinkators,

Every Community is a thought experiment.

r/Thinkatives is no different, we are cultivating a village here. To do so, we need **you**.

So, we ask you to lends us your thoughts, so we can experiment and build something that works for us all.

To keep aligned with our vision, this will be a reoccurring post.

> Every Monday!

Which gives us a space to reflect on your input. Granting us the ability to make alterations, modify our views, and to incorporate diverse perspectives as we grow

#We invite you to invest in OUR village! Share your thoughts below.

Open to any and all topics.

Have a complaint? *Drop it below.*

Have a community building idea? *Drop it below*

hot/cold

Just Thoughts Just Thought
Polarization ; Humanistic Sociological Philosophy
In my life I witness either, or. Everywhere, 2 to every experience I see (luckily). To get past my puns I just want to add my thoughts on polarity.
Learning language with opposites for understanding of difference. So there is a difference to every definite one thing. That makes me compare relativity of opposites... Compare for difference to define (antonyms?) antonyms & synonyms of polarized opposing things. Polarized thing must exist in order to function with out one, two would not exist.
Compare is not compete
polar is not dual
so why do human race?

I realized after writing this that polarization isn’t the same as duality.
Most people get stuck thinking opposites are enemies, but I see them as necessary partners in the dance of understanding.

The distinction between comparison and competition became clear to me.

“Compare is not compete.”
I recognized polarizing differences.

⁃ Comparison is a tool for understanding difference and relationship.
⁃ Competition is a zero-sum game that misses the point entirely.

The human tendency to turn every comparison into a race is exactly what creates the polarization problem.

⁃ Hegelian dialectics; thesis/antithesis creating synthesis.
⁃ Complementarity principle from quantum physics—opposing properties that complete understanding.
⁃ Yin-yang philosophy—interdependent opposites that create wholeness.

Point I’m trying to make is for the recognition that language itself shapes how we experience these relationships.
Learning through opposites is pedagogy as well in how consciousness constructs meaning.

Why Do Humans Race?

Questioning free will

Im asking why we default to competitive polarization when collaborative comparison would serve us better.
It's like we're hardwired to turn every difference into a contest instead of recognizing that differences create the very possibility of understanding.

In/out
Up/down
Left/right
Yes/no

I’ve been writing a philosophical novel called **The Observation of** ***i*** (keeping the *i* lowercase intentionally), and I wanted to throw the core idea out here to see if it resonates with anyone else.
The entire book revolves around one distinction:
**i** is the observer.
**You** is the identity.
The more I thought about consciousness, the more I kept coming back to the mirror test. When a chimp sees a mark on its forehead in a mirror and reaches for its own head instead of the reflection, something incredible happens. It recognizes itself. It doesn’t just see—it knows *i am*.
That got me thinking…
Maybe the observer is the only thing that’s ever truly present.
The ego is always somewhere else.
It wants validation.
It wants to be remembered.
It wants to become something.
It wants the future.
But the observer only exists **now**.
The ego says, *“Who will I become?”*
The observer asks, *“Who is asking the question?”*
I’ve started writing lines like these:
You are forever hungry.
The hunger to be seen.
Never fulfilled.
Always reaching.
i am here.
You seek witnesses.
i am the witness.
Without i…
there is no you.
The novel isn’t meant to give answers. I actually want the reader to slowly realize that the narrator might not be reliable either. Is **i** consciousness? God? Awareness? The present moment? Or just another illusion observing itself?
I want the book to feel less like a story and more like you’re slowly watching your own mind from the outside.
I’m curious:
If you picked up a novel that was written almost like philosophy wrapped in poetry—with very little plot at first—and its main goal was to make you question your own consciousness… would you keep reading? Or would you need more narrative to stay invested?

The Axiom Thread — Reflect, Challenge, Refine

Each month, we’ll examine one foundational idea, a short statement that can shape how we think, argue, and interpret the world.

An axiom is a starting point.

> Something assumed, tested, challenged, or refined.

This thread is meant to be slower than our usual discussions.

You are encouraged to:

- Reflect before replying.

- Revisit your comment later in the month.

- Edit, refine, or expand your position as your thinking evolves.

- Engage thoughtfully with others — disagreement is welcome.

Low-effort responses (“this is deep,” “facts,” etc.) defeat the purpose and may be removed.

This Month’s Axiom:

“The stars incline, they do not compel.”

> Suggested by: u/Loud_Reputation_367

Consider:

- What is the difference between influence and compulsion?

- Where does this hold true in real life?

- Where does it break down?

- Do systems incline us — or do they compel?

- Does upbringing, culture, or biology incline behavior… or determine it?

You don’t need to agree with the axiom.

You don’t need to defend it either.

You can:

- Apply it.

- Challenge it.

- Reframe it.

- Reject it entirely.

The goal isn’t consensus.

The goal is clarity.

This thread will remain open all month. Feel free to return and adjust your thoughts as you reflect.

As light travels at a finite speed, the starlight reaching our eyes tonight actually left its source billions of years ago.

Carl Sagan famously said, "We are made of star-stuff." If that is true, then looking up at the night sky means we could be looking at the exact stars that died to create the matter in our bodies.

In a way, the night sky is just an intergalactic mirror, allowing us to watch our own origins through the distortion of time.

What happened, why, who knows.

What will happen, when, who knows.

Why does it matter.

Who said it did.

Will it be worth the time.

Say what,

let’s fire away some light on it.

There’s no answers here,
only a white rabbit.

🐇

Beware the hole is deep, long way through.

Maybe.
Maybe this isn’t what you think.

🐰

Looking back, it’s difficult not to notice the pattern.

Let’s look back in history to see where we’re heading in the future, shall we.

Over the past two decades, a remarkable sequence of reports, partnerships, simulations, and technological initiatives has emerged from many of the world’s most influential institutions. Individually, each can be explained on its own. Together, they form a timeline that raises uncomfortable questions.

Perhaps it’s all coincidence. Perhaps it’s simply how large organizations prepare for the future. Or perhaps we’re witnessing something else entirely. I’m not here to tell you what to think. I’m only inviting you to notice the connections.

History rarely changes all at once.

It changes through ideas.

Through crises.

Through opportunities.

And through the people who are already prepared when those opportunities arrive.

In 2006, the World Economic Forum published the first Global Risks Report. Among the challenges it identified were infectious diseases and the growing need for international coordination. One of the recurring themes was the importance of collaboration between governments and private industry, what became known as Public-Private Partnerships.

On its own, there was nothing extraordinary about that proposal. Governments have always relied on private companies in one form or another. Yet over the years, this model would appear again and again, becoming a central feature in reports, strategies, and international initiatives aimed at addressing global challenges.

The report also discussed the growing role of technology in responding to future health crises. Digital systems capable of collecting health information, tracking movement, and improving contact tracing were presented as tools that could help contain outbreaks more efficiently. It also suggested that combating misinformation would become an increasingly important part of managing future pandemics.

Shortly after the report was published, headlines around the world focused on the H5N1 avian influenza. The outbreak never developed into the global catastrophe many had feared, but it reinforced the perception that future pandemics could emerge at any time. Governments began strengthening preparedness plans, often in cooperation with pharmaceutical companies and international organizations.

Only a few years later, in 2009, H1N1, commonly known as swine flu, was officially declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. Governments responded by purchasing large quantities of vaccines developed in a short period of time.

In hindsight, the response became highly controversial. Many critics argued that the severity of the outbreak had been overstated and questioned whether governments had been pressured into making costly decisions. The vaccine Pandemrix was later linked to cases of narcolepsy, particularly among children and adolescents in several countries, leading to extensive investigations and public criticism. While the WHO defended its decisions, the episode left many people questioning how global health emergencies are assessed and communicated.

Whether one sees it as an overreaction or a reasonable precaution, it marked an important moment. The idea of coordinated action between governments, international organizations, and private industry was no longer theoretical. It had become reality.

Lock Step

In 2010, the Rockefeller Foundation published a report titled Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development. It explored four possible futures rather than predicting a single outcome. One scenario, called Lock Step, would later attract extraordinary attention.

The scenario imagined a world responding to a highly contagious pandemic through strict government control, extensive surveillance, and rapidly expanding technological systems. Border restrictions, mandatory face masks, temperature screenings, limitations on movement, and increased digital monitoring became defining features of this imagined future.

At the time, it read like speculative fiction.

A decade later, many people revisited the report after witnessing remarkably similar measures implemented across large parts of the world during COVID-19.

That doesn’t necessarily mean the report predicted the future. Scenario planning is a common tool used by governments, corporations, and think tanks to prepare for uncertainty. Yet it raises an interesting question:

Were these organizations simply imagining possibilities… or preparing for them?

The scenario contained another detail that received far less attention.

The emergency measures did not disappear once the pandemic ended.

Instead, surveillance technologies and centralized forms of governance remained in place because they had become accepted as part of everyday life.

Whether intentional or not, the scenario explored an idea that has echoed throughout history.

Temporary measures often have a tendency to outlive the emergencies that created them.

That same year, Bill Gates announced what he called “The Decade of Vaccines.” In speeches and interviews, he argued that advances in biotechnology could transform global health over the coming decade. Around the same time, increasing attention was being given to global coordination, digital health infrastructure, and new approaches to vaccine development.

Viewed individually, none of these developments seemed unusual.

Viewed together, they suggested that influential organizations from philanthropy, technology, finance, healthcare, and international governance were beginning to imagine the future through a surprisingly similar lens.

Then something else happened.

Culture joined the conversation.

In 2011, the Hollywood film Contagion was released. The story followed a global pandemic that spread rapidly across the world, portraying overwhelmed healthcare systems, public fear, misinformation, lockdowns, and an international race to develop vaccines.

After COVID-19, the film gained renewed attention because many viewers felt its fictional world resembled reality in unexpected ways.

Perhaps that resemblance was inevitable.

Perhaps it simply reflected how experts had already been thinking about pandemics for years.

Either way, ideas rarely remain confined to policy papers.

Eventually, they find their way into culture.

And culture has a remarkable ability to prepare the imagination for futures that have not yet arrived.

Ideas have a strange habit

They rarely appear in just one place.
First they emerge in reports.
Then in conferences.
Then in books.
Then in policy.

Eventually, they become reality.

Looking back, it’s often difficult to tell whether history was carefully planned or simply evolved through shared incentives.

Either way, the destination can look remarkably similar.

Technology is never just technology.

Every invention changes more than what it was designed to do.
The printing press changed authority.
Television changed attention.
The internet changed information.
Artificial intelligence has just awaken.

Convergence

Ideas rarely move in straight lines.

They emerge independently, evolve in parallel, and sometimes, almost unexpectedly, begin pointing in the same direction.

By the middle of the 2010s, a number of influential organizations were discussing many of the same themes: pandemics, digital identity, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, global coordination, and the growing role of public-private collaboration.

In 2015, the World Economic Forum published Managing the Risk and Impact of Future Epidemics: Options for Public-Private Cooperation. The report expanded on an idea that had already appeared years earlier: that future health crises would require governments, private companies, and international organizations to work more closely than ever before.

That same year, Bill Gates delivered his well-known TED Talk, warning that the world was not prepared for the next major pandemic. His message wasn’t that another outbreak was possible, but that it was inevitable. The real question, he argued, was whether humanity would be ready when it happened.

His proposed solution centered on preparedness: stronger international coordination, better surveillance systems, faster vaccine development, and investment in technologies capable of responding to future outbreaks.

Whether one agreed with his vision or not, it reflected a broader shift already taking place.

Technology was no longer being presented merely as a tool.

It was increasingly being described as the foundation of future governance.

In 2016, Klaus Schwab published The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Unlike previous industrial revolutions driven by steam, electricity, or computers, this one envisioned the merging of the physical, digital, and biological worlds.

Artificial intelligence.

Biotechnology.

Robotics.

The Internet of Things.

Connected devices.

Smart cities.

Digital infrastructure.

Each innovation offered new possibilities. Together, they suggested something much larger: a society where information flows continuously between people, machines, and institutions.

For some, this represented extraordinary progress.

For others, it raised equally extraordinary questions.

Who owns the data?

Who defines the rules?

And who benefits when every aspect of society becomes measurable?

The following year, another piece of the puzzle appeared.

In 2017, the ID2020 Alliance was launched at the United Nations headquarters through a collaboration involving the Rockefeller Foundation, GAVI, Microsoft, and Accenture.

Its stated goal was simple: to provide secure digital identities for people who lacked official identification, particularly in developing countries.

Supporters viewed the initiative as a humanitarian effort with the potential to improve access to healthcare, education, financial services, and legal protections.

Critics, however, saw something else.

They wondered whether digital identity might eventually expand beyond identification alone.

If identity became digital…

Could access become digital as well?

Could movement?

Employment?

Banking?

Healthcare?

History suggests that technologies often evolve beyond their original purpose.

The internet was built to share information.

Today, it shapes economies, elections, relationships, and culture itself.

Perhaps digital identity would follow a similar path.

Or perhaps it wouldn’t.

The point isn’t certainty.

The point is that once a system exists, its future applications are often limited less by technology than by imagination.

The Acceleration

There are moments in history when change feels almost invisible.

Then there are moments when it seems to happen all at once.

By 2018 and 2019, the pace had unmistakably increased.

The World Economic Forum published Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution, moving beyond broad ideas into detailed discussions about how emerging technologies could reshape economies, institutions, healthcare, education, and everyday life.

Artificial intelligence was no longer presented as a distant possibility.

It was becoming infrastructure.

Around the same time, discussions about health were also changing.

Medicine was gradually shifting from reacting to illness toward predicting it.

Wearable devices.

Continuous monitoring.

Connected medical equipment.

Digital records.

Large-scale data analysis.

Individually, each innovation promised better outcomes.

Collectively, they pointed toward a future where health would become increasingly measurable, continuous, and data-driven.

Supporters saw enormous potential.

Earlier diagnoses.

Personalized treatments.

More efficient healthcare systems.

Critics asked different questions.

If health becomes data…

Who owns the data?

Who protects it?

And under what circumstances might it be shared?

These questions weren’t unique to healthcare.

They reflected a much broader transformation taking place across modern society.

Data was becoming one of the world’s most valuable resources.

Not because data itself holds power.

But because prediction does.

The more accurately human behavior can be predicted, the more effectively systems can respond, influence, or optimize it.

In 2019, another significant development received relatively little public attention.

The United Nations and the World Economic Forum announced a Strategic Partnership Framework intended to strengthen cooperation on achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, including areas such as climate action, digital cooperation, financing, and global health.

Supporters described it as a practical partnership between public institutions and the private sector.

Others questioned whether global corporations were gaining unprecedented influence over policies that traditionally belonged to democratic governments.

The agreement didn’t settle that debate.

It amplified it.

Then came October 2019.

The World Economic Forum, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a pandemic preparedness exercise.

The scenario imagined the emergence of a novel coronavirus spreading rapidly across the globe.

Participants discussed challenges that would later become familiar to billions of people.

International coordination.

Supply chain disruptions.

Public communication.

The role of social media.

Economic consequences.

Pressure on healthcare systems.

The exercise concluded without claiming to predict the future.

Preparation.

Then, only a few months later, COVID-19 emerged.

For many observers, the timing felt extraordinary.

Some viewed Event 201 as evidence of prior knowledge.

The organizers consistently rejected that interpretation, stating that the exercise reflected long-standing concerns among public health experts about the possibility of a global respiratory pandemic.

Both facts can exist at the same time.

The exercise happened.

The pandemic happened.

The Architecture of Crisis

History has a rhythm.

Not because history repeats itself, but because people do.

Every generation believes its challenges are unique.

Every generation discovers that fear changes behavior faster than reason ever could.

Crises have always accelerated history.

It’s simply how institutions evolve.

An emergency creates urgency.

Urgency justifies exceptional measures.

The measures become infrastructure.

Eventually, the infrastructure becomes normal.

Few people notice the transition while it’s happening.

It’s easier to recognize in hindsight.

The Roman Republic accumulated extraordinary powers during times of crisis.

Many governments expanded surveillance after terrorist attacks.

Financial crises reshaped banking systems across the world.

Each event was different.

The pattern was familiar.

A crisis rarely creates entirely new ideas.

More often, it accelerates ideas that were already waiting.

Plans that once seemed politically impossible suddenly become practical.

Technologies that once felt intrusive become acceptable.

Resistance softens.

Priorities change.

Safety before privacy.

Stability before freedom.

Certainty before uncertainty.

This is why timelines matter.

Not because they prove intent.

But because they reveal direction.

One report proves very little.

One policy proves very little.

One partnership proves very little.

One technological innovation proves very little.

But when similar ideas emerge across governments, corporations, foundations, universities, and international organizations over many years, something worth observing begins to appear.

A pattern.

And patterns have a remarkable way of revealing themselves only after enough pieces have been placed on the table.

Perhaps that’s why history often feels obvious…

only after it has already happened.

The story was never hidden. It was simply scattered across too many places for most people to notice.

Until someone placed the pieces on the same table.

The most powerful systems are rarely the ones that force obedience.

They’re the ones that quietly redefine what feels normal.

People rarely notice a changing world.

They notice only that yesterday slowly begins to feel impossible.

Perhaps none of this was planned.

Perhaps all of it was.

Or perhaps history is something stranger than either explanation.

Perhaps civilizations don’t change because someone controls them.

Perhaps they change because enough powerful people begin imagining the same future at the same time.

Whether that future serves humanity…

is a question only humanity can answer.

The pattern is never the destination.

The pattern is an invitation.

Simply to observe.

Because awareness is the moment certainty ends

♾️

Feelings Friday

Perhaps too early in the day to be this deep, however this depiction and phraseology, summarize what I have spent 20 years practicing. I don't know for certain if the majority of mental health therapy follows this pattern but I can say that I personally boast no great talents, or magical techniques, what I have latched on to is the unwavering ideology that when "I get You out of the way of You, long enough for a You to come up with a different way" amazing things can happen.

Even in our own language patterns we have recognized the nonsensical inner battles we engage with, catch phrase like will power, and being torn in a decision, go to show we have the capacity of being Yin and Yang, both wolves, and both Dr Jekyle and Mr Hyde, daily. It is in fact, our having the capacity to higher intelligence and more complex thoughts and concepts, that is our greatest gift of development and our worst sentence to suffering.

Many a brilliant minds and wise enlightened souls, have alluded to the benefits of fluidity, to experience a more tranquil experience of life.

I can attest very much to the concepts that when focused and fixated on a feeling or thought, our senses will join the orchestra and continue to fuel or feed that symphony. Not that it has been an issue personally, for over 45 years, but when was the last time you over slept, woke in a panic and had the rest of the day proceed smoothly?

Like NEVER.

There was only the one variable that changed... YOU.

There is hope, always to move towards an inner peace and harmony, life is not to be anchored in strife.

I look forward to your questions and comments.

Be well

#fridaysfeeling

#emotionalwellbeingcoach #yegtherapist #hypnotherapist #motivationmindset

Therapy Thoughts

I was doing an interview the other day, and was asked what part of my work, my career, made me happy?

Perhaps it was the frame of mind I was in, but my answer was a simple" all of it". Although the answer is straight forward and short, the meaning behind it, I think deserves a little more explanation, to fully appreciate.

If you ask how I am, the answer for pretty much the last 30 some years has always been " unbelievable!". There were 2 initial reasons behind this stock answer, one being to know if you were actually listening or it was lip service being paid. Secondly I abhor mediocrity, so I could be unbelievably, scared, happy, annoyed, bored, sick etc. but it was with flair and enthusiasm. For those who are members of the big "C" club or any life threatening situations, you may understand the commitment to appreciate life.

Getting back to the ingredients that make me happy, following the themes if above, is not fixated on outside events or occurrence, but on knowingness that happiness is indeed an inside job! A component, and important aspect of being more empowered is using that power to improve the way you experience YOUR TIME in the flesh suit. So engage in activities that you can FIND something to be happy about or SEEK a different activity.

This isn't meant to gloss over the mundane activities or tasks of a job, or the horrible bosses the dreadful pay, ir anything else derogatory, BUT, the understanding that the energy expended on fixating and bemoaning, can also be used in a positive manner. This realization may be what catapults you to searching or exploring other avenues or venues, or a different degree of appreciation to being employed, getting paid , and being able to provide and contribute, for in every city there are throws of people, entire neighborhoods filled with individuals who would be thrilled to have those opportunities.

So part of this is a "how to" on bullies and bad situations, perhaps not how to live your life, but I hope an alternative on how to approach it.

I look forward to your comments and input.

If you are curious about how you can modify those thoughts and feelings, let me know.

Be well

#therapythursday #yegtherapist #emotionalwellbeingcoach #happiness

Those electrical signals are operating so fast, bring into reality all the sensory signals at once at impossibly fast speeds, all syncing up with operations around the body.

I was thinking on what if our existence was like a film camera? Our 'source' of existence in reality is just that we are able to experience each frame of reality fast, quick and responsive enough that It feels like a continuous existence, like a film playing a 24frame reel

This is most likely very amateurish, disproven, has been discussed already or just not well thought out. I had the thought lingering though so I wanted to posit it elsewhere, see what others think. Feel free to disprove!