Deadlifts. Good for everything in life.

You can only be your best when you are doing what you want to do, and able to laugh and not take yourself too seriously.

It has to be something personal and cannot be tought by others. It could mean a life as a stand up comedian, or martial artist, or monk, etc, etc, etc.

This 'self improvement' malarky is often closely related to people with a low self esteem IMV. A lot of the stuff often relates to trying to inspire people who have no visions or goals to aspire to. People who have for whatever reason stopped believing in themselves, the world, etc.

Life?

Okay, I see that you are probably asking for concrete examples, but that would be a nonsensical question, or at least one that expresses a lack of fundamental understanding of the phenomenon I wrote about. There is no fear there specifically of any particular object of cognition. It precedes the cognition of any objects. Perhaps it even causes the notion of "objects" as separated entities, as mirrors of the image of self-separation that results from the life-fear.

Perhaps the fear is about is the fluid imminence of life. When everything is here and now and ever changing, nowhere does the self have any permanence to seek refuge in.

Thank you for your response.



Life-fear as cause of the seperated realities, by creating the illusion of seperated objects/entities? Is this idea limited to humans or is every fear any organism (/which can) experience based on life-fear? Why should life/an organism fear itself?




What "self" and why seeking refuge?

And there is, in the now, the silence, the ever present awareness, ultimate reality.

Haha.. I am having a hard time understanding.

tseuq

I don't think that every fear is rooted in perinatal trauma, where did I write or imply that? Also, I can only speak on behalf of myself, as a human.


The "thing" that you think and feel is you.

It can be a bit hard to put in words, because the issues are not just beyond words, they are before words. It is what you experienced and what you grew into before you had words.


Imagine being born into this world and experiencing that world as so hostile and threatening that you want to not be born into it. Then you might be seeking refuge from life.


Sure... Dream on. Perhaps when awake some times, you would like to read up a little on the phenomenology of traumatic dissociation.

Interesting you should choose the terminology of seeking refuge.

Does the atman have buddha nature?

It was a question out of my reflection and I see that I didn't understand your words properly.










It is magically beautyful.

tseuq

What do I fear of all the hostillity and threads? Death?

tseuq

I initially wrote immanence, which has some Buddhist connotations that you could have pointed to with slightly more relevance. But then, when I wrote that, I looked up the words and found that the word imminence says all that is required without the overloading with all kinds of spirito-religious, ahem, "brown substance".


Does this thread have an on-topic nature?

Not sure what you mean to say there?

I believe you were discussing the nature of the self a few posts back and specifically mentioned something about the self having no place to take refuge. My good natured prodding was intended to be tongue in cheek based on your specific word choices, however if you take a moment to to look into the definitions of my specific word choices, you may just find an address to your inquiries in there as well.

IMHO that was alreay sidetracking the topic. I am partially guilty of it, too.


Not really to be honest. The sense in which I use the word refuge was inspired more by the term "fugue state" than by some abstract ideals.

No offence given or taken to our collective buddha nature.

Here:

Granted, that doesn't cover 'all fear' necessarily, but where did anyone else imply that you thought thus?

I don't really do philosophy, and barely do logic, so I'll stop now.

So, going back to the OP, is a life coach somebody you pay to be more helpful to you than your friends would be?

Presumably a life coach isn't going to say, "F*** this, let's just get pissed," - then again, time has it that some of my more frank and useful chats have occurred after a few jars.

(Would that count as responsible alcohol use?)

And isn't payment a way a sizeable proportion of people would go about making a commitment to their personal development?

In my opinion, fear has to be related to something, it has to be functional for an organism to develop fear and the only reason I can image is in regard of its survival/maintanance (on an unconscious /primal level). The "separated self" creates and projects these objects/mirrors by "becoming separated/developing the illusion of I", otherwise it doesn't know anything but itself.

Image yourself as invulnerable, why should you be bothered by hostility and threads when there is nothing to fear of it more than what it is, a sensual input of some stinging, pinching and squezzing. If I "know" (unconsciously/ on a primal level) nothing can happen when "life" hostiles me, the function of fear would be superfluous.

I definitely think, that pre and perinatal experiences are influencing an organism. More than that, it starts when the first cell splits and even this is depending on the genetics which are coming together through eggcell and sperm, which are also depending on their preivous genetics, and so on. Thus, we will go back to the "beginning/birth of life", this is where all the "drama" begins. Life and death, one.



Not exactly what you where asking, but an abusing behaviour, seen from a functional (=maintanance of existence) perspective, aims to suppress the upcoming of any topic-realted emotion/thoughts, because of their as uncomfortable/overwhelming/ultimately uncopeable (which would be a thread to ones existence and triggers fear) experienced properties.

tseuq

If there is a positive outcome, yes it does count as responsible use. I would also say that it is necessary to sometimes be irresponsible in order to become a well rounded person.

I think that in order to be our strongest person we need to be happy with ourselves. The quest for self improvement is a distraction from happiness and possibly a form of self oppression.

Thank you everyone for taking the time to give this your thoughtful feedback!



Many ideas indeed mate, and I find myself in the initial phase of sorting through these ideas and to play around with them to see what would be the most impactful - while remaining customized to individual's needs.



I haven't considered what the information model will look like yet, but I'm a firm believer in open-sourcing information. And though I didn't think about setting up some type of database, I think it could be a great model.



Certainly there are people like this - but the question is - what is driving them? Survival, security, growth, contribution? Each of these driving factors will have a very different effect on how coaching is done.

People and organizations are not so naive mate. There's a reason why successful corporations and professional athletes have coaches. Anyone can do basic arithmetic and determine whether investment in coaching is a net plus or net minus - and the practice would no longer continue if the result was not a net plus.

I too have had a couple coaches. It was worth every penny.



Good point about reaching the core and an interesting side-discussion about this subject.

I think it's important to get to the central element that is the driving factor for the particular individual. Though I wouldn't say that death is the ultimate driving factor - though perhaps a very common one. I think this "core" will be different for different people and perhaps even different for the same person, during different phases of his/her life.



Leading by example is certainly key and this is why this path seems to be the perfect fit for me. Because in order to help other excel, I have to get there first and walk that path - and I find that exciting and liberating

And indeed, one can find hustlers in all walks of life. There's a difference between causation and correlation.



I think this is a very interesting perspective and one that I've had conversations over with friends and given much thought to.

But the conclusion I've reached as of now is that it is indeed about "play" as you or Alan Watts say. But is it not play to find out how high we can jump and how far we can go? Is it not play to overcome our limitations and see how bold we can grow? Perhaps a matter of perception. For me, self-development is not "work." It is play.

And people play in different ways. Eckhart Tolle plays while sitting on a park bench for 2 years; someone else might play by seeing how far the human experience can be stretched.

And an important note to self I've made is to structure my coaching to emphasize that play.

You see, if I really love running and I don't try to consciously improve my running speed and stamina, I simply will not discover the upper limit. I might still have fun and be satisfied with that - and but that would be a different type of play.

Finally, I do think that people know how they would like to feel and what they would like to experience (though perhaps not all), and that is why many achieve the goals they set out for themselves.



One would hope so The goal would be to add value in any case and hopefully value that is worth the money.



Indeed, results are what matter - hopefully without compromising anything important. One must assess the value to risk ratio and determine the decision for him/herself.

Thank you everyone for your input! You've all been amazing

Ah yes, and let's not forget the social goods provided by corporations and professional athletes!! Corporate growth is especially meritorious, eh?

Give me a break

Now that's a different subject

A different subject? Hardly...

You contend that life coaching is meritorious because it's used by "successful corporations and professional athletes," regardless of the misguided people you acknowledge are drawn to this profession. I mean, even you showed up here saying, "Hi folks, I'd like to be a life coach, please give me resources." Personally, that sends a cascade of alarm klaxons off in my head when I see it. I've encountered too many would-be gurus for it to be any other way.

But that aside, you've literally said that the utilization by corporations and pro athletes actually provides evidence that the efficacy outweighs the problematic coaches.

And yet, corporations are tyrannical institutions that meet the DSM guidelines for psychopathy, and professional athletes present a whole litany of disturbing and problematic behaviors. So if these are your go-to examples, color me unconvinced.

Just for funzies: