these questions were based on the article
"The Conscious, Subconscious, and Unconscious, a New Look at an Old Metaphor"
This Week's Questions
[These questions were posed by E D.]
[Question 1] I do not understand the difference between "why logic" and the "natural why"; at least in a way that I could teach to another.
"Logical whys" imply cause and effect and that all things occur as a result of the passage of events over time. They result from the belief that by identifying these "causes," we can anticipate these causes and thus, keep our pain from reoccurring.
Being able to identify the "natural whys" in our lives is especially significant, in that we can use this knowledge to recreate the stages on which both submergences and emergences occur. In other words, we can use them to set the stage in us for healing.
Being able to identify the "logical whys" in our lives is significant in that we need to see past them in order to find the "natural whys."
[Question 2] I don't understand—and can't picture—how a "collapsing magnetic field" parallels the creation of a BLock.
[Question 3] I can't picture a vacuum.
[Question 4] I can't see how the "physical ability to see" affects the "visual ability to see."
[Question 5] I don't understand what being in the subconscious is like.
No coincidence that in those moments just before healing, our subconscious often floods with fleeting images we cannot quite make out. This is the experience of some blocked material emerging into the subconscious. Not fully healed. But no longer completely BLocked either.
[Question 6] I can't picture pain. I can't see how pain is present in an event.
[Question 7] I can't picture how a baby is consciously connected to the Divine. Or anyone else for that matter.
Babies begin to do this, at least qualitatively (as in "good" and "bad") at around age two. This separation, then, is what creates the human tendency toward moral judgments. More over, moral judgments are never "cause and effect" based. They simply are the result of us having split life into two piles; into what is good and what is bad.
[Question 9] I can't picture the "natural why." Nor can I picture the difference between the "natural why" and "why logic."
[Question 10] I don't completely understand how, or why, we try to fill in the vacuum of the startling moment with why logic; why that and not something else? What is the nature of why logic and how does it become the filler for an empty state of mind? Further how is it we are programmed to do so? How did it come about?
Thus, "why logic" is the strategy we develop in childhood in order to meet the demands of those around us that we somehow become able to prevent our suffering. More over, as we are by nature, programmed to fill in any and all voids in our minds, these "why logic" responses become the natural remedy to fill in these voids.