*************
The following message is relayed to you by  trom@lists.newciv.org
************
Hi Cory,

Yes, your conclusion is correct but there are still three parts. If you are not into having a winner or a looser in an encounter with another or others, then there is no game by you. The other or others may not see it that way and are looking for a winner or a looser so it is a game for them. From an exterior view of an encounter, the encounter may be a game or not a game to all of those doing encountering. No conclusions can be taken until more actions have been taken and those actions are available to view.

The one who has 'Freedom from Overwhelm' and 'Freedom from Games' can be thought of as a stranger in a strange land and be very alone. This is why Dennis says that you will be alone as you progress through TROM and the only way to avoid this is to also take someone with you. I forget if he makes that statement after Level 3 or 4.

One may have his Ethics in and may not have a game within an encounter but the encounter is still the playing of a game and one or more of the encounterors may wind up exiting the encounter as neutral for they did not play the game to a win or a loose. They just participated and their underlying intention was for everyone to do well and not necessarily loose but not have to win. For those sticklers that have to have polarities, no matter what, it can be said that the encounter was a win-win situation. And again it can be said for a particular encounter as this, win-win, there is and was no game.

Keep on TROMmoing, Paul

On Feb 8, 2014, at 6:18 PM, Cory Keeler wrote:

I love talking about polarity. However what I see is that applying ethics is a matter of doing right or doing wrong. And any game is polarized, thus to have ethics in is to be good, and that makes it a game.

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 8, 2014, at 11:41 AM, Paul Tipon <pti...@proftitleserv.com> wrote:

*************
The following message is relayed to you by  trom@lists.newciv.org
************
Hi Cory,

Freedom from games is to not have the intention that there will be a win or a loss or both, a winner and a looser. Some will always come to a conclusion of a win or a loss or both but you don't have to. Some cannot see beyond having winners and loosers. One should be content that things can happen and happen for the better. In this way, Ethics can be applied without one having to enter into games. The physical universe is a force universe but it is not a necessity that it also be a two pole and have polarizing effects. There can be best and almost as good as best. We don't have to have the best and the worst.

It's all subjective even when it is objective and purely physical. What can you see?

Keep on TROMmoing, Paul

On Feb 8, 2014, at 2:26 AM, Cory Keeler wrote:

Just curious you wrote:

It is up to each individual to be free of games and have their Ethics in to avoid catching themselves up with out-Ethics and having motivators.

Is not having ethics in and being free of games impossible? Ethics involves games right?

Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
Trom@lists.newciv.org
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
Trom@lists.newciv.org
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom

_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
Trom@lists.newciv.org
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom

Reply via email to