Why pressing our personal believes on the people is not good for the rawfood-world...
Why pressing our personal believes on the people is not good for the rawfood-world...
This pressing never helped and will never help, generally known from practices like
pressing on personal religion to other people. (there are 13000 types of Christians, suppose
all of these will start to press their little "truth" to eachother, LOL...).
For example: Why we shouldn't discredit healthy foods like acaiberries and why we shouldn't
press on certain diets:
* There are also millions made by selling blueberries.
Hippocrates Institute for example, is also to expensive, like acaiberries, but if I see what they do, and if
I put one glance on the medical industry and compare, I know this can not be the way to promote raw food for the next 30 years or so…, and I know I should defend their intrinsic value, and the price
issue can follow maybe in a future far away, when the rawfood world will be larger and there will be more competition..
In fact: I think for example goji-berries are not very much more expensive than bluberries over here,
because they are dried, and you need a lot less of them for the same amount of nutritional-input...
Further, a lot of berries are not for sale in fresh state in my country...
Further: We (well, at least I do..) also want to give the possibility to people in these producing-countries
to earn a living with their products, and acai seems to grow abundantly in these neigbourhoods...
Further: When we are attacking people selling so called organic superfoods, we may forget that these foods are better than probably 95% of all the foods which are being selled in the world..
It is not a way to attract people to the rawfood world I think, I mean they will loose their cooked food, and also
they are told to "boycot" other foods. Same with hardcore 80/10/10 approach: nothing wrong with 80/10/10
theory, but pushing it through the throat of people will do more damage than good for the number of people
being able to step into the rawfood-world.
If we want this rawfood-world to grow quicker, we should try to forget our personal religions/moral
and give people a wide possibility of CHOICES!
We, the informed people, should reach out the WIDEST choices to people, and THEY should themselves make an new, this time informed, choice.
We should learn from the sales-managers of the cooked-world: you will never hear Toyota say that Porsche is to expensive for example, they know this will not work to attract people to Toyota, it is a non-argument, living in a commercial world.
We should not discredit any food because the USDA/FDA is much better in doing this...
Don't you think there is enough supression on natural foods from that side?
I think they will welcome our volunteer-supression...
We also should not try to try to let our personal believes dominate, while we know this will
do more damage than good for the general population.
We should decide whether to attract people or scare them from us..
We should look at the horror on the other side, and make our real decisions..
This pressing never helped and will never help, generally known from practices like
pressing on personal religion to other people. (there are 13000 types of Christians, suppose
all of these will start to press their little "truth" to eachother, LOL...).
For example: Why we shouldn't discredit healthy foods like acaiberries and why we shouldn't
press on certain diets:
* There are also millions made by selling blueberries.
Hippocrates Institute for example, is also to expensive, like acaiberries, but if I see what they do, and if
I put one glance on the medical industry and compare, I know this can not be the way to promote raw food for the next 30 years or so…, and I know I should defend their intrinsic value, and the price
issue can follow maybe in a future far away, when the rawfood world will be larger and there will be more competition..
In fact: I think for example goji-berries are not very much more expensive than bluberries over here,
because they are dried, and you need a lot less of them for the same amount of nutritional-input...
Further, a lot of berries are not for sale in fresh state in my country...
Further: We (well, at least I do..) also want to give the possibility to people in these producing-countries
to earn a living with their products, and acai seems to grow abundantly in these neigbourhoods...
Further: When we are attacking people selling so called organic superfoods, we may forget that these foods are better than probably 95% of all the foods which are being selled in the world..
It is not a way to attract people to the rawfood world I think, I mean they will loose their cooked food, and also
they are told to "boycot" other foods. Same with hardcore 80/10/10 approach: nothing wrong with 80/10/10
theory, but pushing it through the throat of people will do more damage than good for the number of people
being able to step into the rawfood-world.
If we want this rawfood-world to grow quicker, we should try to forget our personal religions/moral
and give people a wide possibility of CHOICES!
We, the informed people, should reach out the WIDEST choices to people, and THEY should themselves make an new, this time informed, choice.
We should learn from the sales-managers of the cooked-world: you will never hear Toyota say that Porsche is to expensive for example, they know this will not work to attract people to Toyota, it is a non-argument, living in a commercial world.
We should not discredit any food because the USDA/FDA is much better in doing this...
Don't you think there is enough supression on natural foods from that side?
I think they will welcome our volunteer-supression...
We also should not try to try to let our personal believes dominate, while we know this will
do more damage than good for the general population.
We should decide whether to attract people or scare them from us..
We should look at the horror on the other side, and make our real decisions..
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Alicia A. on -
I'm not bashin' you, Stephanie.
I'm merely noting my preference is to be open to new information and for constructive debate. Also I really love that saying. It's the most useful piece of advice my dad ever gave me, besides maybe "always be nice to secretaries, because they run the universe."
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on -
Sure Cherry Kiss, as a lot of people are unable and unwilling to have what I call real and open discussions,
and many people not realy want to receive info but just want to ask questions for reasons of false politeness
(because they already talked about the wheather...) the following tactics I can advise if you cope with people you don't know from head to all below..
1) Only give info when asked on terrains like rawfood
2) treat Babies with baby-steps...Always put the initiative on THEIR site, give just the tiniest info
and wait for reaction, wait to see if there is hunger for more...
3) Ask questions like "Why do you ask this"? , because many people don't even know what the source of their questions is. Try to ask more questions than you are giving answers. For example: you could have asked:
Why do you think humans are carnivors?
If there comes an answer, you can ask: Where did you read this...
Just keep questioning till the other has no answer anymore (and many times they don't, because
the questions are fake conditioning..)
4) Most difficult: try to temper your tone/voice, keep away from emotion.
Face-to-face debates are coloured most by emotion, not by content, because we live in a exterior-orientated society.
5) Be glad if you fail in this, but try to think it over and learn from it. Only by failing you can reach to the highest techniques. Remember there is no absolute truth in language, only in nature, you will
always have disagreements, even with family and friends, unless you don't debate/argue...
6) Have the REAL debates, fun with your friends and people you love!
7) Keep us informed, if it works, LOL, we would like to know!
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on
-
Quoting Stephanie:
"I am not here to learn"
No, you are certainly not here to learn, that is obvious, glad you know that
! But I am here to learn with others and from others.In fact I always learn the most from people who's discussions are impossible to follow.
Only a mind unable and unwilling to grow can't learn from the opposite.
Yes and amen belong in the church and not in the learning school of life
I have learned enough from you, more learning is impossible, that's the reason I am not going to discuss a single thing with you anymore.
Of cause I am free to start and open threads about anything, as you are saying yourself,
but this is my last reply to you in a thread.
I don't think anyone will feel grieve about that.
And it is not ironic that I learned from you, I made many thinking hours, and my mind feels gratitude.
I hope many people learned with me, because I don't wanna learn alone.
-
Permalink Reply by Freelee on -
Some interesting thoughts there lightlover, thanks for sharing.
Im curious when you say... we 'shouldn't' do something isn't that imposing our personal belief on others?...Arent' we doing the very thing that we are protesting against?? Trying to control others...
But then again we can never really impose our beliefs on others.....do we/corporations posses that power over an individual? Isn't it ultimately their choice as to what they 'let past their radar' & accept as truth...
Making a conscious decision is so empowering.
Quote;
"We should decide whether to attract people or scare them from us...."
- Doesn't the individual have to decide this? what attracts one person might scare off another? eg- A thread/topic about losing weight may attract an overweight man but scare off a guy who thinks he's skinny and wants to 'bulk up'?....same with different methodology, some people love the 'hardcore' style others hate it & prefer the 'softer' approach....explore & reflect on 'why' one method doesn't resonate, why we allow it to evoke certain emotions....its a great oppportunity for growth, treat the methods we don't like as an opportunity to make a conscious decision.
but hey its ultimately our choice to create a world that makes us happy & a good start is by only letting in what resonates with us.
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on
-
Some interesting thoughts there lightlover, thanks for sharing.
Im curious when you say... we 'shouldn't' do something isn't that imposing our personal belief on others?...Arent' we doing the very thing that we are protesting against?? Trying to control others...
Very good question Freelea. Difficult to answer, because how better the question is, the easier
is an answer face-to-face, and the more difficult is an answer on paper, because little details
can be missed, but also the temptation to answer correctly is bigger, so here we go:
What I implied to say is that we shouldn't have a discussion, when what we realy want is to impose
a very limited and stricted believe on others and when we are not prepared in advance to move a milimeter
in our points of view.
When we are PROPERLY protesting we are not doing this kind of imposing, our PURPOSE will be:
* We will ask to the other to ground his opinion with arguments,
* We will let the other know we are not convinced by his arguments ( if this still is the case..),
* * We will give arguments for the reason we are not agreeing,
* We also will ground our own point of view with arguments
* We will never in our discussions incite to hate or physical violence on purpose,
* We are openly going to have a discussion about eachothers arguments, not only our own
* We will try to temper our voice/tone during the discussion, because EMOTIONS sometimes
develop in the biggest argument and will direct the discussion, and that is not what we want..
* We want to learn, not dominate our own ideas, we also will learn if the discussion gets NOWHERE..
* If we are wrong, we adjust our opinion...
* We will stop the discussion immediately, if we feel the other is not respecting the MINIMUM of the rules above of a proper discussion, we will realize that the fact that language is the highest expression of freedom in the universe, is untill NOW in history not been used by humans at all (mainly because there is big governement-supression and self-supression), and is more a theoretical habit of the language ITSELF, and that will set us free.
* We will learn this to our children and others..
Of cause this is only for very important discussions, not if you have a quarrel about who is going
to do the laundry or so (lol...).
** Yes, we can realy impose our believes, look at the governement making decisions WITHOUT or with false arguments, look at the FDA/USDA, yes they take away your freedom in a HIGH amount,
that's imposing, and no sometimes this lack of freedom can't be compensated in anyway.
Quote;
"We should decide whether to attract people or scare them from us...."
** Point of this remark from me , is only to point to the proper discussion methodes described above.
With the word "decide" (not the best word-choice..) I wanted to say that we have to realize
that our method of discussion will attract or scare people, and that we can choose for one of the two. And that our method of discussion will decide whether we are imposing believes or whether
we, due to effort, give the other THE WIDEST RANGE of POSSIBILITIES (arguments, hidden info..)
to from a new, informed opinion, IN FREEDOM LIKE HE/SHE IS BORN NAKED..
Is this how you feel..? Can you compare all these possibilites of an open discussion with "imposing"?
Can you see why I think the biggest problem in the society is the lack of quality discussions
anywhere?
-
Permalink Reply by Freelee on
-
Lightlover thanks a lot for taking time to answer in so much depth :-) Its fun to explore eachothers thoughts, we are different after all...
Quote from LL:
What I implied to say is that we shouldn't have a discussion, when what we realy want is to impose
a very limited and stricted believe on others and when we are not prepared in advance to move a milimeter
in our points of view.
- Interesting but is it really up to 'us' or an individual to say/decide that another persons view is very limited & restricted? Are we that person? Can we truly 'read' their thoughts?....
Maybe that individual feels their view is actually limitless & abundant...
Further more maybe that individual feels that in their hands they have the knowledge that can positively change another persons life....wouldn't that then be an act of selflessness rather than the opposite to what it is being potrayed here?...
Quote from LL
When we are PROPERLY protesting we are not doing this kind of imposing, our PURPOSE will be:
Personally I haven't heard the term 'properly protesting' , my interpretation of 'protesting' is that it is a very personal thing and varies greatly amongst the masses & if I was to tell you how to protest (properly or I what i thought was proper) then would it work for you?Maybe not.....some do it by screaming & yelling abuse, others do it by supporting industries with their dollar that support the environment & peace, some write letters and never speak of it, others research & document studies, some do all these methods & also share what they have learnt on forums in a way of promoting or 'protesting' their truth....Maybe the people referred to as having 'limited & resctricted views' are actually just 'protesting' in their own ways??
the goal of the protest I guess is whats of utmost importance....it may just come down to the question....
Is the purpose of the protest promoting peace & supporting the betterment of the planet at the same time? (sure some other variations can work here!)
Speaking from ones open heart to me is an 'open discussion'. The range of possibilities is endless if we only open and up and 'receive' them.
There's plenty of room here for me to say here that I feel I am having 'beliefs imposed on me'... because we tend to differ win our methods & opinions... but its not the case, you are simply sharing your thoughts which I appreciate muchly because they are very deep & thought-provoking & the most important part.....promoting peace & betterment of the planet at the same time in your personal style (which we need).
I chose and made a conscious decision whilst reading that you are speaking from your heart and that's all that matters (no matter how its worded), you could say I have my 'heart monitor' on!
You are entitled to share your thoughts in whatever manner works for you, thankyou lightlover.
I love this quote (but nobody has to) from Jim Dreaver;
"Normally we avoid, deny, resist, or try to push away unwanted experiences, but if you are facing conflict, upset, or suffering, you must learn to welcome, or at least accept, it. After all, it is showing you where you are not yet free."
IN FREEDOM LIKE HE/SHE IS BORN NAKED.. - Beautiful LLover
Lovefreexo
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on
-
" Interesting but is it really up to 'us' or an individual to say/decide that another persons view is very limited & restricted? Are we that person? Can we truly 'read' their thoughts?....
Maybe that individual feels their view is actually limitless & abundant..."
Freelea, there is never a last word, although people are always reach out to take it.
So if I call someone restricted I will listen to the response, it is not the last word I take.
It is not about thoughts of the other, I am talking about people who are exposing their limited believes.
Like someone told me a few days ago: YOU don't know what the world is...
I don't think limited believe is a subjective question: if someone says god exist for everyone
it is just more a limit than saying I don't know whether god exists (leaving ALL posibilites open).
It is only: the one with the limited believe, will believe that his believe is all there is for everyone to believe and that it is open and total and not limited at all, because it is TRUTH....
I am not talking about people willing to "negotiate" opinons, but hardcore pushers, which is not selfless but ego-playing with damage for society...
And that's the end of the discussion I think, there can be no talk anymore...
because these people many times are not seeing that they are turning a limited believe into
a general truth in their own mind..
It is the same with proper protest: When the protest becomes a self-centered ego-religion
without possibility to cahnge the own point-of-view, it can be of no use to society...
Differnce of opinions is something other than oposing opinions, because we all have different opinions
there are ALWAYS slight or BIG differences! But oposing them in NOT necessary...
Sharing them with enthusiasm is enough and human.
-
Permalink Reply by ErinBrennan on -
Right. Blueberries are far better than what most people are eating. Any amount or raw food is better than processed food, but any baby step toward health is promising...even if it means eating organic cooked or semi-processed food over complete garbage.
People generally respond better to a shining example of radiant health and happiness than having a non-mainstream viewpoint pushed onto them. The more we push, the more they resist. Offering options and advice (when asked for) is a much better and more welcomed path.
2 articles related to this idea: Diet or Dogma? and Addendum:Diet or Dogma?
-
Permalink Reply by telefunken on -
durianrider said: lets say there is 3 paths to walk in a forrest. 1 path has many thorns. 1 path has much less thorns, and the final path has no thorns...ie: shouldnt we just tell people the safest path to walk?
the actual problem is that you think you know the "path with no thorns"
some would say presumptuous egomaniac....
some wouldn't disagree....
----tele
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on
-
"some would say presumptuous egomaniac...."
A little to strong. I would only say this if someone keeps on pushing ego-documents
and rips my mooks out of my head..
-
Permalink Reply by telefunken on
-
mooks?
Latest Activity
That might of been me that said that as I thought I'd read it somewhere. I don't know what they are but I have them also
Alright! Did you volunteer? What work did you do? Did you have a wonderful time?
Bloody Oath. But ah ya know, no wuckers
LOL! Funny! Tra la la! My daughter loved those (Capt. Underpants) books. You guys're cute as anything! :)
Too cute! What a terrific treasure in the basket :)
good distinction, Loren. As usual, 'You da Man'!
Thanks Loren. Makes sense to me. My problem is that when I blend (which means more volume of fruits) then i am more regular with my bowels. What I can eat & chew doesn't always trigger peristalsis in the same way. I had chemo a few years back and ...
You could try clay compresses - they work deep - because of the earth factor.
Send me a message with your email and i will send you an e-book on hydrotherapy.
Hydrotherapy does not cure - but it's the variation in temperature which gets a reacti...
Walter Cronkite saw UFO destroy a U.S. missile
http://www.examiner.com/x-2383-Honolulu-Exopolitics-Examiner~y2009m7d18-Walter-Cronkite-saw-UFO-destroy-a-US-missile
man is mortal because we don't have a perfect balance on metabolism. this is unachievable. but getting your metabolism balanced as possible - is the key to healing.
The nerves run at about 1/40th of a volt.
I believe it.
I don't know.
But a chiropractic subluxation means that you either have too little or too much electricity flowing to your organs.
Too little means your temperature will be below 37 degrees. And you probably lack energy and may have chronic dise...
A new finding in India: Extraterrestrial UFOs have the capabilities to disable all nuke missiles in the world including that of India, Pakistan and China
'India Daily'. Taken from http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/1656.asp .
Sunday February 20,...
Not me - i remember the old series. I can see Dick Cheney or Rumsfeld anytime i want to by doing a You Tube search so no no need to see actors transform on the telly! ;-)
Something to write home about. VERY intense. Well, It's California, for starters, and airplanes, hotels, where's my stuff? Oh, there it is, I'm spoiled, and I like to sleep and meditate and all that, and it all gets interrupted, and it's time to g...
congrats Renee u do have a gorgeous smile
blessings kim
Community by WLIR:
© 2009 Created by Dhrumil
