Dealing with the negative polarized

[Bring4th_Austin]

All is one and not all STS is about power over/under. Some people just prefer to be alone.

I do believe this perspective contains a fundamental misunderstanding of what we talk about in terms of "service to others" and "service to self" polarity according to how Ra describes them.

It is, of course, possible for every individual to have their own definitions and understandings of these concepts. If someone has a personal spiritual philosophy in which a "service to self" oriented individual possibly just "prefers to be alone," that is as valid of a philosophy as any.

But in an environment where we are specifically discussing and studying the Law of One, it's much more important to make sure that jargon is used in a proper way. And it is difficult for me to imagine any interpretation of the Law of One material in which a person who simply "prefers to be alone" is also considered to be "service to self." I don't think a preference for solitude really carries any innate implication of positive or negative polarity.

Ra explicates on the fundamental approach of the negative path in many places throughout the material, and the fundamental difference they describe between the two is a dichotomy of acceptance vs. control. This is both of self and of other-self. Unless a person is seeking solitude in order to refine and perfect the control of self in an isolated environment (and even then, with the ultimate goal of extending that control outwards unto others), then that is simply not polarizing STS as Ra describes it.

But, especially when examining the STS philosophy in relationship to other-selves, the simple preference to "be alone" is nowhere close to polarizing negatively. Ra describes STS individuals as attempting to control, manipulate, and enslave others. Their entire will would be bent upon the subjugation of those around them in more and more effective ways, and it's notable that the most effective ways would not be the most obvious ways. Lies and deception would naturally be a hallmark of this path.

So I think it's important to acknowledge that the jargon and semantics are important here. In a person's personal path, they might consider themselves to be "service to self," and have their own definition of what that means. And inherent in that definition is a simple preference to be alone, to improve the self, to focus on their individuality, etc. But when entering a space where "service to self" is defined quite specifically, it's important to acknowledge that the term means something more specific and implies certain intentions.

Having said that... I find it quite naive when STO people seem to feel like they're in the right, by trying to save STS or imply they'll get it eventually, like STS isn't part of the creator's plan and we aren't doing what we came here to do.
Most here choose the ironic path of excluding STS or acting like they're superior in their chosen perspective of all that is.

I do agree that there can be a certain naivety in STO individuals when it comes to both conceptualizing and relating to the STS path. Naivety tends to be a hallmark of the positive path.

The negative path is a valid path to the Creator. We all end up arriving at the same destination. I don't personally see anyone trying to "save" negative individuals, per se, but I do think that it's just innately difficult to grasp the negative viewpoint for a positive individual - thus attempting to rationalize it in some capacity that places their positive viewpoint as a more valid one.

But I do think that the idea of the positive path "excluding STS" is another misapprehension of polarity as Ra describes it. I suppose you could say that yes, the positive individual "excludes" the act of manipulating and controlling other individuals to their own will and desire. But I get the sense that's not what you mean. It's possible to "serve" the self as a positive individual, in the sense that you can improve yourself, focus on self-care, and honor your individuality. It's possible to "serve" the self by honoring a preference to be alone without stepping a single foot towards negative polarity.

I feel like the perception of STS is quite distorted, especially on these forums

I am wondering if this statement is made in awareness of the specifics of the STS path as Ra described it. I may be off base, but I get the sense that you have a generally positive personal philosophy that is more in line with STO rather than STS, as Ra defines them, but that you are applying a different definition. That could be very confusing to people who engage in discussion based on the specific jargon used by Ra. I think your points could use some clarity, if possible, perhaps with supporting quotes from the Law of One to help aid in mutual understanding.