Rapid Polarization (vis-a-vis the power to abstract)

[Quantum]

...it might be a more fair statement to suggest that intuition is simply less trusted in the world verses it being more lacking, given all have intuition faculties. It is perhaps less trusted for exactly the reasons that Ra suggests as regards its unreliability, i.e. vagaries. For this reason I understand Ra to be suggesting that the faculty of abstraction is far more reliable than is the faculty of intuition, given that intuition may be far more misleading than is the ability to abstract. Perhaps it may best be stated that the faculty of intuition should not be the foundation upon which abstraction is layed, but that instead abstraction being the more reliable may be the foundation upon which then intuition may layed, thus granting greater power to the adept for it.

Actually, in one of the sessions with Hatonn, Hatonn stated that "Your intellect is good for figuring out how to chop firewood. Use it for that" and proceeded to advise us to utilize our intuition for serious matters, with the intellect being for functioning in 3D. (Does anyone remember which session this is from? I know it was on one of the tapes offered by L/L Research so I heard it rather than read it.)

Let us not mix terms. Hatonn speaks to the intellect; not to the gift of abstraction. The two are not the same. I would therefore argue that abstraction is not one and the same as intellectualism, notwithstanding that the intellect may sharpen the faculty of abstraction greatly and may create an incorporated advantage towards abstraction. Case in point, a gifted painter not possessing the power of the refined intellect may nonetheless have the keener ability to abstract than does the gifted intellectual painter. A pure intellectual, for example, having uncovered the ability of splitting the atom may go on to blow the world up as an intellectual exercise and pursuit, chopping it and burning it quite nicely in the process (this would in fact seem not at all as an abstract example, given its already been done). It seems self-evident as a case in point then for this exercise of the discussion of 'abstraction vs intuition' that Ra clearly gives precedence to the faculty of abstraction as a first primary exercise vs intuition as primary, but clearly goes on to state that intuition then needs be incorporated as a balancing between the lobes.

As to the point of balancing abstraction with intuition, I am left to ponder what Ra might be inferring as regards the word 'balance'. Although we quite naturally understand what the word balance means, what indeed does balance mean in this context? One typically might assume balance to almost always mean 50/50. In this case, as in many others, I think not. In this case ponder the possibility of inferring as an example, three parts intuition to thirty parts abstraction to create the balance between the lobes, as opposed to jumping to the conclusion that it means 50 parts of one to 50 parts of the other. One spoon of curry is plenty to the pot less you burn your senses with thirty. See my point?

I see your point, but the very act of trying to come up with an exact ratio is, in itself, a left-brain approach!

My example was an illustration as opposed to discovering an exact ratio of what balance means. Balance in this context is as individuated as is the circumstance wherein the balancing is required. The term "balancing" then might better be suited and defined as an art rather than as a science. To further clarify what balance then might imply, I am challenging the fact that balance is not always and immediately a 50/50 proposition as is almost always naturally assumed at first blush. I am attempting to point out that 3 teaspoons of curry to the pot is a balanced portion to the pot verses half the pot being filled with curry at a 50/50 ratio which would surely singe and sizzle the senses.

What then is abstraction? What did Ra mean by offering "abstraction" as a tool to Rapidly Polarize?

- the act of considering something as a general quality or characteristic, apart from concrete realities, specific objects, or actual instances
- an impractical idea; something visionary and unrealistic.
- the act of taking away or separating; withdrawal

This perhaps returns us more back once again to the ability of separating, challenging, disagreeing, examining, visualizing, conceptualizing, seeing it "other than", visualizing it as such, rotating it in ones mind, mulling it over this way and that, as if something visionary...and initially unrealistic.

Q