I recently chimed into a forum discussing the subject of quantum physics, and the implications thereof.

Out of which came some ways of explaining my views in a more 'elegant' manner.

Following are my edited excerpts of my final few posts to this forum:

------------------------

Years ago, when in a self-development course, the teacher said "you're 100% responsible for your reality" ... me, in response "nah, that can't be true" (in class), He, "it's 100%". Me, "Nah, it can't be because ... yadda yadda". Class now cranky with me, an upstart who won't sit quietly and obediently listen.

Long story short. It is a literal 100%. I've done a lot of work over the years to nail the mechanics of how that can occur.

But here's the thing. If not 100%, then what figure is it? 100% has a certain 'purity' to it that I found compelling.

Science can't get near that 100%, blaming chance, or randomness or god knows what else. That's inelegant.

100% is elegant.

A while back I posted some ideas concerning the habit of categorising people into various groups -- tribes, astrological signs, enneagram and other groupings.

My anecdotal evidence is quite consistent -- women are far more likely than men to use or abide by astrology as a form of categorising people. Men, on the other hand, typically want to group people into opposing teams (sports), or other competitive entities -- part of the reason for the popularity of sports amongst the guys.

Contents:

• Introduction
• Background
• The candidates
• Table of comparisons
• Implications, clarifications and applications
• Purpose and benefits
• Conclusions

In brief

The Table of comparisons highlights a noticeable difference between the 3 methods of classifications. Column 1 (Seth) responds well to the question: "Where do those who belong to a particular category focus their energy, time and commitment for best effect and fulfillment?"

The Enneagram responds "less directly" to this question (in that the Enneagram may offer insight that one is a 'leader' but not where to apply leadership for best effect or fulfillment).

Astrological categories provide little if any meaningful answers to this question.

Astrology and the Enneagram are not in the least "systems-orientated". They do not take account of the interactive dynamics of biological, ecological or social systems, such as that of one's local community, or how the global economy impacts and influences behaviours and attitudes. They do not therefore provide substantial insights into how we ought best interact with the world around us. They, in effect, offer little guidance as to where we might apply our energy and focus for best results and fulfillment.

Introduction

The fields and disciplines of psychological testing, astrology, numerology and the Enneagram, are, like all fields of human understanding, based on certain beliefs about the nature of reality.

So when we seek to group people into meaningful categories it's prudent to first establish the belief-system by which those categorisations are made. If the belief-system is unduly limited, individuals and groups will necessarily be categorised or 'squeezed' into various psychological or astrological 'boxes' to fit the observed behaviours. In the process those capabilities and potentials that lay beyond the accepted framework of belief - which could otherwise be recognised and developed for personal and social benefit -- will be ignored or denied.

Do you genuinely seek answers to the deeper questions and problems of life?

Then you'll find some different and arguably deeper, and more congruent perspectives at this site. Hopefully they'll be of value to you. The ideas provided are based on timeless truths, and are (at least in my experience) able to be applied in all areas of life. Enjoy. Steaphen Pirie The Belief Doctor

The current hung-parliament situation in Australia is a wonderful catalyst for reflection on the deeper rhythms and energies of life. The fact that there have been similar hung-parliaments in the democracies of U.K and Canada is also a telling indicator of deep changes in the psyches of people around the world.

I've recently read that there's been a significant drop in the levels of empathy by young people. No big deal you might think in regards to achievement.

But, as Jeremy Rifkin's clever animation might suggest, empathy is likely to be the winning factor in future business relationships - simply because anyone with high levels of empathy will stand out like ... well, they'll stand out. They'll attract clientele, easy as.

The drop in empathy is clearly an indication that we're becoming more disconnected from those in our communities. It would seem that technology in the form of online chat-rooms, forums and social media (such as Facebook) is not bringing people together in ways that foster care, connection and empathy.