Quality of Viewpoint


How an individual carries him or herself is a demonstration of inner and outer arrangement, organisation and manifestation. This is, in effect, a balance of psychological and physical processes within an external environment comprised of various elements that may be good, neutral or bad, etc. Perhaps, at its greatest frequency of perfection, this type of co-ordinated expression may be described as ‘grace under pressure’, but grace can also be maintained whilst not under pressure. When a person sincerely holds a viewpoint, there is an assessment of ‘how’ that viewpoint is held, irrespective of the content of the viewpoint itself. For instance, a viewpoint may obviously be subject to scrutiny and judgement, but this process is very much after the fact. How an individual ‘holds’ to a viewpoint is also very interesting, and this has nothing to do with the content of the viewpoint itself. Others can be thoroughly admired for the manner in which they hold a viewpoint, even if those doing the admiring do not necessarily ‘agree’ with that viewpoint itself. Of course, the quality with which the viewpoint is held, can have a positive effect upon the opinions of others, and serve to influence and direct others in the same direction. In other words, a sincerely held viewpoint can spread a certain perspective amongst those who encounter it, but even if it does not, a good impression is left in the mind of those who encounter the holder of that viewpoint. Certainly, if the holder of a certain viewpoint sets a good example, the fertile ground is set to establish the transference of that viewpoint to others in a positive sense. A viewpoint that is ‘dignified’, is the basis of a viewpoint that is admirable to others. This is true because viewpoints that are negative, destructive, and generally demeaning toward humanity are not dignified in any way, and are full of negativity and fear. These types of viewpoints are spread and maintained by ‘force’ and not by reasoned argument or logical persuasion. Many religious cults and rightwing political ideologies function in this manner, and are premised upon the idea that humanity should not be granted ‘dignity’ or freedom of choice. However, a ‘considered’ opinion is a matter of maturity over time, and a certain ‘ease’ with the subject at hand, and not a situation where force is required, even if arguments are sometimes made with passion. Individuals that occupy the centre-ground of their belief systems are able to dominate the rhetorical (and literal) high-ground, and experience no need to react to others with unnecessary force or draconian measures – if others disagree, that is entirely their right (and their concern). When a viewpoint contains a true quality of structure, disagreement or agreement does not affect the strength of that structure, as it is self-contained and self-sustaining. Any change to such a strong and yet pliable viewpoint arises only within the mind of the holder of that view, who might evolve the viewpoint to a new level of understanding, if further reliable knowledge on the subject is attained. Of course, a viewpoint with quality does not have to kowtow to the status quo, just as it does not necessarily need to counter the status quo – as a quality viewpoint is shot-through with a certain strength in-depth that others might describe as being the product of ‘self-belief’. The point is that unless individuals hold ‘quality’ viewpoints a priori, it is doubtful whether science can be further evolved. Science (both inner and outer), requires a pristine and shining mind, unsullied by the vicissitudes of the material world. This is not a denial of the material world, on the contrary, it is the preparing of the mind to reflect that world clearly and in a truthful manner.  This is the most important aspect of the development of inner science, and comes down to a deliberate process of self-organisation. In the meantime, many individuals will arrive at this position quite naturally, and through all kinds of subjects, but there will be no over-all organisation that ‘pulls’ all this insight together. This ‘pooling’ of spontaneous human knowledge and wisdom is the next step in the development of better understanding.

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: