[split] "Some people eat animals, some don't."

[Monica]

I asked you to explain the metaphysics behind it and you gave me poetry.

'Knowing and callously' are very specific modifiers and ones which are pretty hard to spot from the outside. Sure, intentionally, unloving, then yes, that seems likely to polarize negatively, but it seems like you immediately project those modifiers on to anyone who does what you believe is negative, which I do not agree with.

You basically just tried to get me to answer my own question for you, which is very clever and sneaky. That's a kind of manipulative approach, don't you think? If you just don't understand or know the processes of energy transfer which take place you could just say that.

No, I don't think it's manipulative or sneaky. It's a commonly used tool to explain something, and I taught children so it's in my repertoire. It's simply a technique to get a point across, nothing more.

The reason I used that analogy is that the principle is the same, whether the victim is human or animal. If we were discussing the intentional, unnecessary, conscious enslavement/rape/torture/killing of humans, would you be asking whether it was inherently STS for the perpetrators to be doing those things? I think not. Would you be asking why it's inherently STS for someone to do those things? I think not. We all understand that, when someone does those things to a human, it's considered heinous and, in Law of One terminology, inherently STS. That's a given.

We might wax eloquent about how we can't really know exactly to what degree it's negatively polarizing, or that the victim chose to be a victim on some level, blah blah blah, but at the end of the day, no one here is going to disagree that the perpetrator of heinous acts against humans is more likely to be polarizing in the STS direction than in the STO direction.

So, I was simply pointing out that the mechanism is exactly the same. Whether the victim is late 2D, early 3D, late 3D, or a Wanderer, makes no difference. What matters is that the person committing the actions had an opportunity to choose compassion for a sentient entity who feels pain and fear, but chose to continue supporting the enslavement/rape/torture/killing rather than making the compassionate choice to stop.

It's really quite simple: When presented with an opportunity to open one's heart and choose compassion, the person chooses Not to do so, then the heart remains blocked in that area. That is the very definition of STS!

Does this mean that the person is STS-oriented to the point of being harvested STS? No, of course not. It's been said many times that harvestability is the result of the sum total of one's polarity and cannot be ascertained or measured by a single action or choice, nor even by a continuous stream of daily actions/choices.

But we can deduce enough from what Ra taught us about polarity to know when a choice is likely to be polarizing in one direction or another.

If you doubt this, then try it with the exact same scenario, except substitute human for animal. Then it will be quite clear. The mechanism of the heart is exactly the same. The only difference is mental conditioning, due to societal speciesism.

...