What is "Mind?"

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 9621 - 9640 of total 22307 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

MikeL

Social climber

Southern Arizona

Jun 23, 2016 - 02:00pm PT

Jgill: It's too bad that Nobel Award scientists are "shoulder deep in delusion" as they toil away.

You seem to imply a number of value judgments with this statement, judgments that I might challenge. A few of them might be:

(i) Nobel award recipients are noble.
(ii) Being “shoulder deep” in delusion is a problem.
(iii) Toiling away is a good thing.

Would you say that any phase or state of development in evolution would be a good thing or a bad thing? Would you not perhaps say that they “just are,” and leave it at that? Does the configuration of physical properties of a duck-billed platypus strike you are poor, great, or neutral?

People and situations are who and what they are because that is their state of unfoldment. Good or bad is irrelevant; value judgments are a form of delusion. What I’m saying is that, in truth, delusion is a delusion. Everything is fine, infinitely fine . . . noble Nobel award recipients notwithstanding.

The Protestant work ethic of being and staying busy, of doing service for others, of being productive, of material productivity is a cultural, religious, and historical norm and value that has been inculcated throughout most Western and Eastern societies. It may be very difficult for some to see it for what it is. (Everyone tends to take for granted their own cultural norms, values, and beliefs. They are assumed implicit truths.)

When it comes to spiritual development, being a free and easy vagrant in the mountains or woods has often been advised by the masters in many religious traditions—Buddhism being one among many.

Be who and what you cannot help but be. If that means you are a vagrant, then fine. There’s nothing wrong or right about it. Ditto for a Nobel prize winner. Do and be what and how the body and mind most fully expresses themselves in the environment they find themselves in.

I am a teacher of business and corporate strategy, of embryonic industry dynamics, of strategic HRM, of professional service firms, and of multi-sided platforms. I see all of those subjects as inherently empty, *AND* I find that I express the self just about fully within my role as university teacher when I teach them. The “me” and the role of teacher interact such that neither “me” nor the role dominates the other. “I” “show up” in an unimpeded flow state that feels like a full-on, trance-like, out-of-body possession (wu wei) to me. When I go to class, my intentions are vague, I suit-up and show up (I look at some notes), and I open myself up to an uncertain and unpredictable dynamic environment (40-50 students who know I am there to challenge them). Viola: a multi-dimensional “dance” emerges. It operates on many levels: emotional, mythological, psychic, scientific, intuitional, and on some levels I don’t even know how to talk about. I don’t know my steps in the dance that emerges, nor do they. We improvise, we adapt, we connect to our unconscious, we interact non-linearly, we come to ideas and thoughts and feelings that we don’t understand where or how they arrived. We are alive.

Isn’t beautiful, amazing, wondrous rock climbing not like this?

You seem to hold many certainties dear. Maybe it’s the mathematician in you. Maybe that’s your role here.

What is the “I” that is fully expressing itself within that role?

MikeL

Social climber

Southern Arizona

Jun 23, 2016 - 02:10pm PT

"Still is still moving to me
I swim like a fish in the sea all the time
But if that's what it takes to be free I don't mind
Still is still moving to me
Still is still moving to me
And it's hard to explain how I feel
It won't go in words but I know that it's real
I can be moving or I can be still
But still is still moving me
Still is still moving to me"

"There is only one map to the journey of life, and it lives within your heart."

(Willie Nelson)

Largo

Sport climber

The Big Wide Open Face

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 23, 2016 - 02:52pm PT

It's too bad that Nobel Award scientists are "shoulder deep in delusion" as they toil away.
-

Depends what Nobel scientists you are reading about. The effect of an observer is nothing new in physics - the fathers of quantum mechanics themselves debated the role of the observer for decades: Planck, Pauli, Heisenberg and others believed that it was the observer that produced our perception of the world around us. This view is deeply rooted in the 'Copenhagen Interpretation' of quantum physics and eventually became known as the 'measurement problem.'

I had a prof in grad school (himself a math dude) who ranted on and on about this. His angle was that what we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness. An "external" reality, if it existed, would by definition have to exist in space. But this is meaningless - at last to this prof, because space and time are not absolute realities but tools of consciousness. What's more, he claimed the "problem" was not a measurement problem at all but an "observer" problem. It got fumbled as a measurement problem because folks claiming that Plank and the boys had "merely misinterpreted the data" were in fact "shoulder deep in delusion" because they were still fiddling about with WHAT was observed when Plank and others point was the primacy of the observer.

Point is, many have taken issue with Plank and all the others (functionalism) but it is in fact delusional to believe they never "stopped calculating and shut up." Or if they did, they were just fooling away some free time with metaphysics, when their real work, their heavy lifting was always with the ruler, then going from there.

BASE104

Social climber

An Oil Field

Jun 23, 2016 - 02:54pm PT

In general, one cannot take care of another until one has taken care of him or herself.

Oh, man, that is such bullshiit!!!!! Sorry to be so blunt, but it is. How you could actually say that just baffles me.

Waiting until you have taken care of yourself? What does that mean? Are you gonna wait for an enlightenment that may never come? If you have time to waste reading and hanging out on this silly website all day, then you certainly have enough time to go online and give to the Red Cross or other agencies that help people in need. Go to the poor part of town and hand out candy to the poor kids. Something. Anything. You will find that there is more need than you could ever satisfy. Just do what you can.

I started giving money to all beggars. Even if I knew that they were heroin addicts scoring their next fix. You see, it isn't up to me to judge these people. When you toss away judgement of others, the world becomes a simpler place.

There is probably no more important human act than helping those in need, and probably no worse human act than judgement of the poor or sick. I try to do good when I can, but there is more that I could ever do, of course. I'm not Mother Teresa, but I can now look at her and see that her endless compassion made her a remarkable human, and if we all did just a little, we could help out a lot of people. Together, we could do a lot.

You can walk out your door and go help people any day, within minutes. It isn't hard to find human beings in need, or who are suffering. There are zillions of support groups that you can join. I've found that helping others, when I can, are the proudest moments of my life. Far more important than some silly personal adventure. That mind frame didn't come over night. It took some self reflection over years. I had to look at myself truthfully.

We spend very little on the poor, but we spend HALF of our discretionary budget on weapons. Our country has gone to war or interfered with about half of the nations on this world.

Who are we to judge others? I'm not talking about nations here. I'm talking about people.

Seriously, that is the root of it all. You have to stop judging others, especially when it comes to their faults, which we all have. Judging is the only sin that I really feel is important, and we do it all of the time.

If you wait until you are Mother Teresa, you will never help people. If you are waiting for enlightenment before helping others, you are just plain old selfish. Anyone can help others, and there are always people who are in need. I have found that simple acts of kindness are by far the most satisfying parts of my life. What many would call the "spiritual" side of my life, but I do not believe in spirits.

Buddhism is rooted in compassion. I've never read anything that didn't make that clear.

My right wing Christian friends think that the poor are lazy, and get what they deserve. Welfare or food stamps are rewarding the lazy in their minds. They even think it is why we are going broke as a country! Geez, we spend half of the discretionary budget on weapons. They forget that the Gospels were devoted to the poor and marginalized. Jesus didn't hang out with the rich. How they can judge and refuse to help others is to me a huge lie.

There is something that I call the vaginal lottery. We here are lucky. Most of us fell out of a vagina into a middle class white family, in a rich country. They paid my way through college, as is probably the case with many of us here.

Most of humanity didn't win that lottery. By no fault of his own, a black kid can be born to a teenage mother and no father. He has no prospects. His future will be difficult. Blaming him for it is inconsistent with what Jesus said.

I once took in a homeless guy that I met and had a conversation with. It was the dead of winter, and he couldn't stay outside. My wife went berserk, but offering him some food and a warm bed wasn't much of a sacrifice on our part. We kept him for about a week, until we could arrange for him to stay with his very old mother, who was also very poor. It was such a sad story.

I'm friends of his to this day. He's in his 50's, and walks 5 miles to and from work every day, where he works in a fast food restaurant. He can't afford a car or insurance, but he works harder than me. Giving him a little help isn't difficult. It just takes a little bit of compassion. We text each other about NBA hoops almost every day. He has his own place now. He was just caught without a home for a short while. Circumstance that isn't likely to befall any of us on this thread.

I can say this much. He doesn't get to play on the internet while he is working.

Kenny is his name.

Largo

Sport climber

The Big Wide Open Face

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 23, 2016 - 02:58pm PT

BASE said: "I started giving money to all beggars. Even if I knew that they were heroin addicts scoring their next fix. You see, it isn't up to me to judge these people. When you toss away judgement of others, the world becomes a simpler place."

You're missing the point, BASE. There is no material or actual line you cross where the "work on yourself" suddenly becomes real or valid. You had worked on yourself or were just born at a level that giving money to homeless was what you did. If you start at that baseline, and work on yourself, then your next act of graciousness might have an even greater effect. But the next level is the consequence of self work, which leads to grater understanding, and in turn, more effective actions.

A practical model of this are the instructions you get on an airplane in the event of an emergency. You FIRST put on your oxygen mask, THEN you put the mask onto your child. If you pass out first, you both die.

WBraun

climber

Jun 23, 2016 - 03:16pm PT

Yes

Sometimes this stuff goes right over the top of Base104's head. (Knee-jerk reaction)

They say in YOSAR we save lives.

We've never saved anyone at all ever.

All we can do is help save a body but we we are useless to save anyone's soul.

The soul (the real you within the body) will leave the material body at the designated time regardless of any material action.

Is your car YOU? Are you your car? No you are the driver and not the car.

YOSAR is just tow truck drivers for human material bodies to be fixed later in the human body shop called hospitals.

If your vehicle (human body) becomes damaged you'll be very unhappy.

It will need to be fixed. When it becomes beyond repair you'll leave that vehicle.

When your car dies do you say I'm now dead? (crude material analogy to life)

No you go and get a new one according to the means you have at that time and circumstance.

Giving money to heroin addicts is called "giving in the mode of ignorance" ......

MH2

Boulder climber

Andy Cairns

Jun 23, 2016 - 03:35pm PT

It's hard to get certain items up here on mars so if you come visit could you bring some balsamic vinegar , and some good sun screen.

Is that mars or Mars?

Either one the answer is yes.

MH2

Boulder climber

Andy Cairns

Jun 23, 2016 - 03:40pm PT

next level is the consequence of self work, which leads to grater understanding

We are cheese.

MikeL

Social climber

Southern Arizona

Jun 23, 2016 - 07:57pm PT

Base: You have to stop judging others, . . . .

(Ahem.)

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Jun 23, 2016 - 07:58pm PT

We are cheese.

no, our understanding is...

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Jun 23, 2016 - 08:11pm PT

Kenny O'Brien did his best to change the outcome, but the sophomore couldn't will George Washington past Virginia as the Colonials lost 2-0 at Davenport Field on Tuesday.

Kenny O'Brien gave the Cavaliers fits on the mound. Virginia managed just three hits off of the Colonials' pitcher, who allowed no earned runs, walked two and struck out one during his four innings of work.

Twenty-seven Colonials came to the plate and the Virginia pitcher vanquished them all, pitching a perfect game. He struck out 10 batters while recording his momentous feat. W. Roberts got Ryan Thomas to ground out for the final out of the game.

Tom Gately couldn't get it done on the rubber for George Washington, taking a loss. He went three innings, walked two, struck out one, and allowed two runs.

The Cavaliers went up for good in the fourth, scoring two runs on a fielder's choice and a balk.

WBraun

climber

Jun 23, 2016 - 08:16pm PT

And machines write more and more stories

A machine can't write any stories period ever.

It's a live person that requires input to start the machine to begin .....

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Jun 23, 2016 - 08:36pm PT

thank your mother and your father... braun

jgill

Boulder climber

The high prairie of southern Colorado

Jun 23, 2016 - 08:48pm PT

Target rich environment here . . .

When I go to class, my intentions are vague, I suit-up and show up (I look at some notes), and I open myself up to an uncertain and unpredictable dynamic environment (40-50 students who know I am there to challenge them). Viola: a multi-dimensional “dance” emerges (MikeL)

Damn, you're having all the fun! If I had known this I would have become a business prof. I wonder if this approach might have worked in calculus? The "dance" part sounds weirdly wonderful.

Depends what Nobel scientists you are reading about. The effect of an observer is nothing new in physics - the fathers of quantum mechanics themselves debated the role of the observer for decades: Planck, Pauli, Heisenberg and others believed that it was the observer . . . (JL)

Thank you for reminding me of this. It had completely skipped my mind.

I had a prof in grad school (himself a math dude) who ranted on and on about this . . . An "external" reality, if it existed, would by definition have to exist in space. But this is meaningless (JL)

Please tell me this is not so. Please tell me he was not a mathematician. Please tell me you did not accept his argument. Please tell me he was instead a psychologist or philosopher who was obsessed with "0".

I bet this prof is one of the creators of the Meta Mind Project.

MikeL

Social climber

Southern Arizona

Jun 24, 2016 - 06:31am PT

Jgill: I wonder if this approach might have worked in calculus?

Just how curious are you?

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Jun 24, 2016 - 10:17am PT

One can say, well, the story is reducible to the marks on the page, which sources the story. But in fact that fails to recognize the consciousness that originally cooked up the black marks which were drawn from experience.

one has to consider the consciousness of the reader too, (isn't this a part of the deconstruction canon?).

When reading the article, who/what-ever wrote it the reader plays an important role in creating the "story". Now as Paul (and I think Largo) would complain, if you were "tricked" into believing a human wrote an article (or you just made that assumption, since, as Largo opines above, machines can't write articles) and it was actually a machine, you chalk it up to your inattention to detail.

That is, you believe that if you examined the article closely enough, it would reveal the nature of the author.

This is a point I'm trying to make, the finiteness of our ability to apply our criteria, in this case to determine whether or not a human or a machine wrote the piece. It is in the spirit of the Turing Test, but we actually use this test (with much less strict criteria) when deciding that other people (or other living things) have consciousness.

Machines write quite a lot these days, and they have access to a huge body of work by human authors. And while that may be considered "unfair," (the ability for the machines to derive from that work styles that sound human), it is exactly what sycorax teaches and Largo learned as the craft of writing, that is, studying different authors and understanding their work. I suspect that the machines may be superior to many of sycorax's students.

We can object that machines aren't up to human creativity, but that is coming with techniques like Bayesian inferencing applied to machine learning.

And machines can design and build other machines, and turn their own switches on...

However, all that is a distraction to my original point, which was that the meaning of the story comes from the arrangement of those physical symbols on the physical pages of the book. The story comes from that physical representation as interpreted by the reader, independent of how they were written, for instance, by a human author or a machine author.

The argument here is how does this undeniably physical medium produce the story? Is the story physical, or is it unphysical?

An object?

Largo

Sport climber

The Big Wide Open Face

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 24, 2016 - 10:28am PT

Another crucial factor is to recognize that if a machine was to write a story, it wouldn't be doing so from a first person, experiential conscious perspective because so far as we can tell, machines don't have an interior or experiential life.

I don't think you can make that assertion... that "as far as we can tell..." because of precisely the difficulty in then claiming you know how other humans "have an interior or experiential life."

And machines write more and more stories, and are undetectable by the humans reading them...

Kenny O'Brien did his best to change the outcome, but the sophomore couldn't will George Washington past Virginia as the Colonials lost 2-0 at Davenport Field on Tuesday.

Kenny O'Brien gave the Cavaliers fits on the mound. Virginia managed just three hits off of the Colonials' pitcher, who allowed no earned runs, walked two and struck out one during his four innings of work.

Twenty-seven Colonials came to the plate and the Virginia pitcher vanquished them all, pitching a perfect game. He struck out 10 batters while recording his momentous feat. W. Roberts got Ryan Thomas to ground out for the final out of the game.

Tom Gately couldn't get it done on the rubber for George Washington, taking a loss. He went three innings, walked two, struck out one, and allowed two runs.

The Cavaliers went up for good in the fourth, scoring two runs on a fielder's choice and a balk.
--------

Ed, you have given a perfect example for me to riff on and make a simple point.

I have said all along that the Turning test is nothing more than a data vehicle, that a Turning machine, whatever that would look like, would simply be doing data processing and presenting it in a presentational style for which it was programmed, mimicking a human being.

Several key things to recognize here. First, what you have in your "story" examples above are not stories (experiential) but data (journalism). A story or a narrative or literature is something entirely different because it first involves (mostly but not always) the SUPRESSION of data in the service of related personal experience (Hemmingway wrote out that "rule" in the 30s). Second, the experiential angle relates not only impressions and feelings and thoughts and all that stuff we draw but being alive in time and space, it also draws from the experience of being conscious, not something you can ever "prove" from a 3rd person perspective because there is no "thing" about consciousness you can see because consciousness is not a 3rd person or external item. It does not exist in this way.

The task with a machine to write stories would be to have it forgo writing in the 3rd person omniscient about external things like games, and to write about the experience of being at a ballpark, sitting in the stands and being present with the crowd and it's own interal life - WITHOUT cutting and pasting in any way the words of what others have written about being in such places. In other words, it cannot violate the first rule of honest writing: It cannot plagiarize the words and experiences of others and present a pastiche sourced the experiences of others. And it has to supress relating data so far as it can.

Also worth noting here is that it is conceivable that one could input all the experiential writing ever written into a supercomputer which could then output some pastiche version of a story based on other people's experiences. But even if this external product (the story on a page) could pass as the work of a conscious person, it is still sourced not from an internal consciousness but from an external data bank. The machine would thereby only be replicating or faking what it does not actually have: conscious experience.

My take on this is that in some minds, if a machine can fake or replicate what it does not have to the extent that it can fool an external observer, then in some way the fake is just as valid and genuine as the real McCoy. The pity here is that the value is placed on the data of a lie, as opposed to the value of what is real. That is, the illusion of having experience is given equal value to having the experience itself, and ultimately, a certain mind could believe that so long as the data was in keeping with the actual experience, the illusion and the real deal are selfsame.

Take for example a person who has read every word ever written about climbing El Capitan, has downloaded into his brainpan all the scenarios and feeling and rants about sunsets and being scared shitless and the transcendent moments on bivys and so forth. He's literally read tens of thousands of these trip reports and topos and all the rest and has a flawless take on other people's experience. So he decides to sit down and write a faux first person account of climbing El Cap. And he does so in a way so convincing that he fools every person who has ever logged onto Supertopo. Then it comes out that the writer never actually climbed the Captain, he only said he did.

How would people react? First the writer would be accused of being a fraud. He reported an event that never happened. Second, we would feel sorry for the poor guy because perhaps he thought that faking the climb was every bit as good as doing the climb itself, so long as he got the data right. Why might we feel sorry for anyone doing that? Because anyone who has actually done a climb knows that no matter how much data one reads about or even writes about climbing is small beer compared to consciously climbing and having the experience of climbing.

I have to work now and shouldn't have taken the time to even do this but my point is that no matter how well a machine can fake having experience, it is no substitute for experience itself, and just because a person or a machine can fool readers that actually climbed El Cap (and had a conscious experience of doing so) does not mean that in the real world it actually "did the climb."

Bottom line, data is never the proof of experience, nor is it the equal to or substitute for same. At least not in my book.

Jan

Mountain climber

Colorado & Nepal

Jun 24, 2016 - 10:29am PT

I say both, just as the critique of a piece of writing or a painting often reveals interpretations which the author had not thought of or ever intended for it to mean.

BASE104

Social climber

An Oil Field

Jun 24, 2016 - 11:09am PT

Sometimes this stuff goes right over the top of Base104's head. (Knee-jerk reaction)

Fine. You can diss me all that you like. I know that the best moments of my life are when I help someone else. Especially with a guy like me, who spends 12 hours a day, alone, working complex geophysical data in front of an array of giant monitors. I'm not typing this on my f'ing cell phone. I post here while my software is working a problem. To be honest, I don't think it is healthy to get sucked into the void that is the internet, and the main posters on this thread have the time to read every post. I don't. I just try to interject when I see something wrong. I try to talk sense into people who are hell bent on senselessness. No-thing is a very personal project. Is it selfish? Answer that.

When I go out, or have a meeting downtown, I always see others who are in need. On Mondays and Thursday evenings I go to a group, where I can help others because I've been where they are now. Those moments are the ones that are most real to me.

Saying that you can't help others until you've got yourself squared away is baloney. I'll probably never get myself squared away by the standards of religion or many of you people.

What I do like about religion is some of the moral lessons. Some are BS, but some are deeply true. That's why I spend some of my free time reading about religion. Religion is a construct to keep people in line. Another form of control. I refute that control, absolutely. It doesn't mean that everything in the Bible is bullsh#t. There are some wonderful lessons in the Bible, that anyone can take away.

I urge all of you to help others. There are different types of suffering out there. Werner physically saves lives, but does he recognize the every day suffering that goes on around him? Does he forgive people for their weaknesses? If you go around thinking you are riding the white horse, you are sadly mistaken. We are all weak, and we all have baggage. Just ignore it for a little while and look around you. Don't look in. That path is vanity.

I just know that the more I get into this, the more I lose the ability to judge people, and by that I mean to judge them as people. I just can't do it anymore. I know that I won the vaginal lottery. Everything went right with me. Sure, I've worked hard to get where I am, but I had a lot of opportunities that other people in the world can't even imagine. It comes down to the fact that I can no longer judge others, especially the least of us.

Jesus did say, What ye do for the least of them, ye do for me. A beautiful statement. I'm not religious, but I can learn things from the texts. Buddha said that all life is suffering. Even people with tons of money can fall. I know a guy who is stinking rich from inherited oil wealth. He goes to AA meetings and helps others. That is a good example.

So do what you can. Simple gestures mean a lot. Don't judge the beggar. Don't think to yourself that he is lazy and undeserving, or that he should just get a job. Don't think anything. Just be thankful that you are there when that person holds their hand out, and that you can do a good deed.

This is the same thing as Karma. A concept many of you know about. I'm not a believer. I think that when we die we turn completely to dust. No soul. But in our lives, we have the capacity to do good. So go out and forgive someone for their weakness. You can forgive the biggest jerk on Earth if you adopt this mindset.

This has nothing to do with mind. It has little to do with religion, although I know a super religious guy, a fervent Baptist. They found out that there was a homeless encampment in the woods along the river. They got together and bought a boatload of stuff (food, stoves, fuel, blankets) and hoofed it through the trees to give to those people. They may have pressed a few bibles into their hands, but their love was not conditional. It was real, and I respect that guy so much for that. THAT is behavior that should be rewarded.

There are always things to do. I have a friend who had a massive stroke and is hampered on his left side. He can walk with a 4 pronged cane, but only barely. He can't really speak, despite years of speech therapy, and he is extremely frustrated. I can sense his hopelessness. I can barely understand his speech, but he is still all there in his mind. He just can't find words for thoughts anymore, which is called aphasia. Strokes and aphasia has now hit two of my friends. I see them more than anyone. When you get sick and can't be social anymore, people desert you. Don't desert those people. They are in need of simple friendship. An act that is very simple, yet means so much to these folks.

After his stroke, this one guy, who was very outgoing and super cool, has slowly been forgotten by his friends who have their own lives. I'm headed out right now to walk over to his house to hang with him. His wife has told me that it does him a lot of good, because this very active guy is now reduced to watching TV all day. I converse with him, although it is difficult. I know that it means a lot to him, so I go over to hang with him. He is great on fixing things..anything. So I ask him to help me out. That helps him feel like he still has a purpose.

A very simple gesture of friendship, which helps a guy out. You don't have to be enlightened to just do that. Everyone knows people who have fallen by the wayside. Reach out to those people to let them know that they aren't as alone as they feel.

Doing good is also good for you. That I can promise. I give street people what I have in my wallet. Sometimes it is 3 bucks. Sometimes it is a hundred. I always feel good when faced with this. Thousands of people walk right by these humans like they do not exist. Politicians don't want to help them because they are apparently lazy. Dudes. That is judgment. Free yourself from judgment and the whole world opens up to you. Only the truly evil are to be shunned. A simple person in need is most likely a person who fell off of the train of life. I just can't put blame on them.

Yeah, I am harsh on Largo, but Largo is doing quite well, I know. If he has any needs, I don't know about them. If he did, I would be willing to help him just like anyone else.

We are a social species that is also sentient. We aren't ants, who eat their soldiers after they get injured. We have the capacity to do good, and charity is one area of good that is very personal, and very rewarding.

That's it.

I'm not talking about a theory of mind or any of that crap. I'm talking about helping people, usually in very simple ways. I don't means test beggars.

That is the most important thing in my life. It isn't trying to get rich anymore. It is recognizing my own humility and not placing yourself above others. It is very simple and highly rewarding. How to do more is always in my mind.

Yeah this is off topic, but I don't care. This is something that I feel very strongly about. If you get all tied up in religion or yourself, you become blind to the suffering around you. That isn't good.