Exactly what I'm saying. Some folks have a need for this concept of "being and becoming" to feel fulfilled I guess. However just because spiritual spokesperson says it's a common uh "motivation I suppose", doesn't mean that it is. Maybe it's a real "motivation" for some or maybe some have just been convinced it's a motivation they should have.
It's interesting how you see this as a "concept". I've encountered this perception multiple times in my interactions with people in online discussions about things like spirituality, God, Enlightenment, etc., where it is viewed as only residing in people's conceptual frameworks. That fascinates me actually, as I've taken the experience of these things almost as a given of reality, on some level or another within most individuals.
What I'm saying is that for me these are not conceptual, but rather descriptions of actual experienced reality by those who use such terms as "being and becoming". It very aptly describes actual lived experience for me, and to have that viewed as being a conceptual framework of reality in how I hold that for myself, is very and oddly foreign to me. It's like saying my lungs I breathe with are a concept to me. To me, the struggle is more for the most aptly, and possibly poetic way to describe these things. Not everyone starts from speculations. Some start from experience and work their way out from there.
But to your point, no not everyone will hear it and respond to it from the same place. Many will conceptualize it as a placeholder, if you will, that they look to with their minds. Granted, that is not uncommon at all. But I'm not sure what the concern is about motives in this discussion? Of course people are motivated to seek God, and yes, for them the need to get something they lack spiritually, and by that I mean the complete fulfillment of their lives, is what gets the ball in motion. Once they have actually drunk of that cup and experienced that fulfillment, then their lives move from a different motivation, which is to give and create and be.
And to add, what I just said is a description of what is experienced, by many. These things were actually researched, if you aren't familiar with Maslow, et al. They aren't just high and lofty spirit-speak, if you imagine that.
Ok, but if you're not "seeking" in the first place it shouldn't be a problem right?
Haha! Yes, there is always that response. I like to say that just slumping back into the couch with a beer and doing nothing is not what is meant by "not seeking". One is actually motivated, but eventually we quit trying to make it happen by doing. We are motivated enough to "quit trying". Think of it like riding a bicycle. You don't think about taking your hands of the handle bars, you simply feel it and do it. You don't "try" to ride like that. You let go and do. That is what is meant by "don't seek", not be a lazy couch potato turning our brains and bodies into oatmeal.
Sure, but these desires are then replaced by other desires, or motivations as you like to call them. You class some motivations as higher, some as lower. If that helps provide you some insight on how you believe things to work, that's ok.
It's how the research has studied and mapped these things out. And yes, this data is helpful. That's why I like sharing it for others who care to look at what we have learned in these areas. I've already given you Maslow. I could give you some more well-respected names if you'd like?
I don't see much need to seperate them out like that myself. A motivation is a motivation, if they happen to change they do and you move forward with the new motivations.
That's an unfortunately limiting view. I think if you look into the research you'll see it's not quite so block-like.
Ok, but you're assuming there is a necessity to change from "deficiency" motivations to "abundance" motivations.
I did not say that. I'm say that when that happens, that happens as a shift of the state of one's person. Once all the deficiencies are fulfilled, then the self-actualized individual, and you can reference that here for more info
Self-actualization - Wikipedia, has "needs" as well, but the basis of the needs has shifted. These things are seen in other developmental models that researchers show in their respective lines of investigation, such as the stages of faith development by James Fowler, stages of moral development by Lawrence Kohlberg, Jane Loevinger's stages of ego development, etc.
I don't really see a need for the classification other than some folks feel there's a need to seperate the motivations they themselves see as spiritual from those they don't.
One doesn't need a car, but having one makes it a lot easier to navigate the countryside.
But speaking of motives.... you seem to ascribe ego motives to these researchers, "wanting to see themselves as spiritual"? Isn't that like the creationist seeing scientists who map out how evolution unfolds the species of life on this planet as being motivated by their atheism and hatred of religion? I say the data is the data, and leave that ascribing some weak ulterior motivations to the researchers distraction elsewhere.
One view I suppose you are championing, is the way to deal with motivations is to replace them with motivations you consider more "spiritual"?
Nope. I say look at what motivates us, and it is important to understand that as to examine ourselves. The goal is personal growth, not "feeling superior to others and thinking of ourselves as more spiritual than others...," and all that childishness. The competition is ourselves, and the goal is to realize the fulness of ourselves in our life. The reason, the motive behind this is hard to actually describe. To touch the face of the sun which gives us life?
Now, you may try to imagine that's about everyone's ego or something so cynical as that, and for some the spiritual ego can be a real trap, but at a certain point none of that matters and more and is let go of, and something shifts. It's beyond ego at that point. As the saying goes from Zen, I believe, you have thoughts, but you are not your thoughts. you have a body, but you are not your body," and you have an ego, but you are not your ego. People who are here, care not one stitch about impressing anyone. They just simply are who and what they truly are and see only love as they see others, not a competition of the ego for the sake of self-identity.
Ok that's fine but I see it more as a personal prerogative than necessity. You feel you are better off with whatever you feel are the correct motivations it's not for me to say otherwise. I just don't see where these "correct" motivations are anymore correct or have to be correct for anyone else. In my case I just see them as more motivations to move things along. No need to classify them as being necessarily the correct motivations for anyone else.
You completely supplied this "correct motive" stuff to me. Why is that? What is t you assume others are expecting?
