It seems that projections paint others and things as complementary to our biases. Complementary in the sense of justifying/supporting our bias. Bias, as in 'role', disposition, 'mission', etc.
Are there other causes of projection?
For instance, I'm noticed, among others, one that's particularly forceful is to tend to see what others share with me as chances to offer 'my illuminating explanation/understanding/answer' or even just to direct their attention to things i think are revealing -- i do have a bias towards 'having the answer/understanding', because i want to understand in general.
I began to see how that blinds me to recognising and addressing other aspects of the communication/relationship like letting the other person know that you have genuine concern for their lives, building and affective connection, being a viable, long term support for that other person in a way that's not taxing.
How does one meet a situation/communication more 'as is'?
Also, i do think that sometimes projections can be decently accurate intuitions about a situation...does it then become a matter of managing them? How does one tell when it's an intuition about what's probably going?
"projection" is how we experience things here. It's like duality. Even when you withdraw projections, the mechanism of perception always involves one's unconscious. This is why Ra says we do not "understand" and why 4th density is that which attempts to "understand". But when your mind brings your unconscious to bear on everything, you have a mirror which is not available as such in the higher densities.
"how we experience things here" experience as in 'collection of perceptions' or archetype 4?
What you're saying suggests to me that if a projection is withdrawn then the personalised nature of the still unconsciously provided perceptions is recognised, that the subjectivity is perceived as a thing? (Since personal/subjective component is now more defined by virtue of withdrawn projections.)
How does one withdraw a projection? Is it something that needs to be continually done or can classes or 'levels' of projected material be written off?
Also, if, as you say, all perceptions involve our unconscious (via projection or not), what does that mean for intellectual explication of subject of study, especially when projection is still there?
And so basically, a good way to deal with this mechanism would be to try and see what is being kept sub/unconscious by our bias? Is that correct?
(11-04-2012, 04:14 AM)Ens Entium Wrote: [ -> ]"how we experience things here" experience as in 'collection of perceptions' or archetype 4?
It's both, you can't learn anything without experience and nothing new can be added to experience without perception.
(11-04-2012, 04:14 AM)Ens Entium Wrote: [ -> ]What you're saying suggests to me that if a projection is withdrawn then the personalised nature of the still unconsciously provided perceptions is recognised, that the subjectivity is perceived as a thing? (Since personal/subjective component is now more defined by virtue of withdrawn projections.)
Yes, the subjectivity is perceived as being an operable aspect of the experience at which point conscious judgment can also include that reality.
(11-04-2012, 04:14 AM)Ens Entium Wrote: [ -> ]How does one withdraw a projection? Is it something that needs to be continually done or can classes or 'levels' of projected material be written off?
It is a natural consequence of the process of individuation here. When you begin to become self aware (of aspects of self), experiential catalyst identifies itself from self. When you see reflected catalyst you eventually understand that any reaction to it must also be you, and so responsibility of teaching/learning with that awareness may begin. As more of yourself becomes conscious, more is able to be seen in reflection.
(11-04-2012, 04:14 AM)Ens Entium Wrote: [ -> ]Also, if, as you say, all perceptions involve our unconscious (via projection or not), what does that mean for intellectual explication of subject of study, especially when projection is still there?
This is a good question. The vast majority of our experience is not abstracted by thinking - it's direct and spontaneous. However, science, for example, has come to "understand" projection, as bias. Methodology is used to improve clarity, limit ambiguity and to robustly test assertions. What non-scientists don't seem to understand is that the appeal of science is not some kind of knowledge authority as a scientist might be considered, but the care taken to properly present knowledge. There is no coincidence that more clarity is more utility.
(11-04-2012, 04:14 AM)Ens Entium Wrote: [ -> ]And so basically, a good way to deal with this mechanism would be to try and see what is being kept sub/unconscious by our bias? Is that correct?
It is not only more helpful to oneself but more helpful to everyone, because people are confused enough as it is. If we have a choice in how we present catalyst, we should exercise the choice. We have not been doing so, and that's part of the reason our lifespans have been shortened.
An analogy is that pollution may be considered catalyst for learning, just as any catalyst. That does not mean that we should have more pollution to clean up.
I had an 'image' of what projection might be like.
it is like a die (a dice), say a six sided one, rolled onto a table. One face is in contact with the table, and you can see all other sides. The 'projection' is the visible faces; but the face that is not seen (not acknowleged) is the side facing down. That is 'you'; projecting outwards and saying that is all outside, but never acknowledging that the whole thing originates, and rests, on that one face maker.
anyway, came to me in one of my contemplations (I saw it actually
)