The truth about an obedient heart
Wisdom in most instances is attributed within the story of Solomon real name Jed something. Wisdom is not learned or from experience and is not fully understood so as far as truth goes this is something that needs to be explored.
If wisdom is not innate, then is wisdom or common sense installed during early years of life, this has been the basic premise of this topic however the heart in art is something regarded popular.
Solomon has been contested as being a heretic for his behaviours of faith. His faith was based on asking for wisdom from the heart which was rewarded with unexpected gifts. In his later work this is where the criticism comes into place.
The heart has many questions and when anyone finds out about the truth about the heart they want to get involved. The heart is also attributed with love this is where the confusion comes to fruition.
Queen Sheeba travelled many miles to meet up Solomon after words got around about his outstanding decisions in a Kingdom of chaos reorganised with difficult decisions during a time when law and order was not quite clear.
The right and wrong truth about the heart here is not the issue or was not at that time, in-fact it still happens today and is as old as the description of he, rather than we or she.
The power of truth is levelled out by other biblical characters, and Mary like Sheba is equally as iconic as Mother Teressa, but like these women many men truthfully admit to the ideology of Solomon's Temple.
The obedient heart is an idea, an ideal based on the heart being the reevaluating gauge to make the right decision, the decisions of the heart throughout time have been apposed it seems by other people and many organisations.
The long term risk of decisions for organisations has improved in-fact there are companies that specifically get paid for doing these things. Solomon never asked for payment in his prayer of the heart, but he got it anyway.
The thing is Solomon attracted many thing by channelling the heart, he was very obedient in this area, but it may have also gave him difficulty in saying no, not just with queen Sheba but also with the requests of wants and needs of those less educated in the Israeli Kingdom.
This is just my speculative observation. The truth that I compile has been compiled by other people, and many people broadcast this message because it helps them learn about discipline.
Here I am not contesting any of the value of all of this, but in the truth when the truth is determined by powers beyond my human capacity until I develop fully I cannot understand this truth. The irony of this is that I do not think capitalist society has progressed enough to speculate between the two either.
The truth about conduct in the marketplace
To not be a party to any agreement that unfairly limits or restrains access to the marketplace. So what does this mean, this is something, people online will ask themselves at some point.
Particularly if they want to speak about what it is they do, or how they achieved and got to where the readers might want to be. I will explain this as clearly as possible. I hope this helps, you may already understand this agreement, therefore you do not need to read this post, however I do think this valid and my research is merely based on creative commons openly online disclosed information. If you have a background in law this post will not entirely be of use especially on a local level. This post as a disclaimer again is simply exploring a question that had me stuck for a short while.
If you are researching the same thing and do not wish to be in breach of anything untoward then you may get something from reading this post, if anything it may save you a bit of time, surfing the internet and exploring Wikipedia . Members of associations and certain bodies need to understand these guidelines before they subscribe to these types of helpful organisations.
Predictively I will imagine this post will be perhaps to broad since the information is global and the different organisations that follow particular guidelines are governed at a more local level, ethically though this is not quite clear.
Understandably I will only be able to explain the basics, strangely enough I am still researching this topic today so if anything is missed out or irrelevant I welcome your input in the comments and apologise for creating any misconceptions to contribute to our understanding, I am sure though there is good reason why this has not been fully explained.
Since this post is just one explanation of the guidelines of actually conforming to just one of the ethical practises for wanna be keynote speakers, associates and those wanting to take the initial plunge into being accepted as a member, paid or concessionary. The last thing anyone needs is being in breach of there investments, but similarly should not be seen as something that should stop them in the path of progression, nor should it be a transference of information from a small fish to a larger fish, sadly I am afraid to say will happen.
That said, I am very grateful for information available and will keep it as brief as possible and do my utmost to honour the codes laid out by law in 2011. Subsequently, rather than send you all around the world globe trotting, or persuade you the value in future skills of having public speaking knowledge, I will just get on with explaining what you originally came to this post to read.
So what does not being a party to any agreement that unfairly limits or restrains access to the marketplace really mean. Lets brake it down, lets take a look at the historical implications and try a sift straight to today's standards and instrument some sort of clear statement that does not need explaining in a court of law and instills some common sense understanding of the basics, so we can begin practising ethical procedures and not be displaced in understanding the semantics (Strate, Fordham, 2011). This does happen, and if your education is restricting you from this as another disclaimer I do recommend you invest in your own education, if this is something you wish to do.
As you can probably see I am struggling with this question, so lets drill down further and reveal my findings, rather than set you up with more problems and contribute to the slowing down of your own progressional ethical code, which I am sure you have, which I know will develop overtime, which I also hope will make you a better person, more honest, understanding with a good knowledge of THE TRUTH ABOUT THINGS. Well versed in whatever you read, less inclined to waffle, more able to recognise knowing and identify someone who does openly not know.
The first thing we need to understand is copyright, now I know this is going to hurt a few people, that said copyright is there for a reason and its know different in personal or corporate copyright. However common law does differ across the globe. Wikipedia clearly states origins in two bodies within the topic of copyright. One is a convention and the other is a treaty, the morals change over the globe, so the literate among you will identify the need to distinguish between morals and ethics, but I will not be doing this today.
The second thing is identifying the modes and memes of your industry for which you may or may not get to expose your audience to further down the line of public speaking. Obvious answers are music, books, journals, coders, gamers, recreation and hospitality, mathematics, bankers and investors other blogs, other speakers, other dancers, movers, shakers these are just some who may be looking to make more business and understandably see value in the laws in place to protect there personal and corporate property tools and methods of approaching these communications.
One way of answering the question is going straight to the president of the bodies you wish to join, but this may come across as a complaint, but not understanding and complaining is very different so do not be intimidated by anything. Some things may seem like common sense but, ethics in society can differ depending on support, upbringing and determined by local educational methods. This will make you more inclined to relate with the local requirements, but may not give you an introspective model for understanding global retrospective jargon.
The memes (Dobbs or Dawkins, DobbsTown, 20th Century) of communication are the mediums in which communications and telephony takes place as it transfers between ideas and ambiguities (Stevens, The Media Coach, Sept 2011).
Truth about things: Action and thought
Now it is the same but as we see in different news the objectives and the audience in which the delivery is made has many values. These values are linked from location; communities that have different links and celebrations, that in order to incite happiness have to be covered.
Coming away from false beliefs is not always necessary when thought, sound and entertainment is based on a couple of needs.
A need to know in relation to what has just happened or what we presume is known. False beliefs are suggested in a world of distractions and different topics.
Education is trying to cater for all these needs, and as set up in the conversation between Dr David Bohm and Jiddu. Jiddu does not by his own admission have a knowledge of the more recent train of thought forced through Psychology, supported by the western proof that cognitive ways of acknowledging outside interpretations can be altered and controlled.
Jiddu talks however, about consciousness and the future of man. He is a speaker, but in the dialogue with another thinker, he is consistently trying to convey his simple message. Consciousness and sub consciousness is a similar topic as reality and illusion. With this understanding Jiddu draws the line between the two; one being sanity and the other being insanity. In order to stop the insanity of man we see Jiddu highlight the avoidance of these thoughts in a world that needs peace.
As consciousness develops the repetition of each others thoughts seems a logical solution, because from this dialogue we can begin to understand the reservations and look beyond the pace the answer seems to be answered, and is notably is only based on two individuals knowledge.
In the Youtube video we see the two guy's surrounded by books giving us the assumption that they are thinking of many different types of books. To understand someone's knowing we would have to know previous conversations, know which chapters of all those books each had absorbed, and the amount of books surrounding oneself could also be a distraction. Without those books being there we could see some kind of rules in this game.
A game is set on a playing field where both teams recognise a similar place to play. It is often assumed that when a team travels away it is at an disadvantage, and the home team has its local fan-base. As individuals and both speakers addressing an audience and then highlight the difference between active students and students who guide and educate themselves.
Both forms of mind growth are based on location. For example if you were in a book shop in India many of the books would be in Urdu, and in New York many of the books will be in English, French, Spanish, or other languages at most.
Each language has its own alphabet and each letter resonates and evokes different types of knowing. To build a synaptic link between these differences as they explain the events that occur from key points in time of conflict or what is perceived as negative decisions and the retention this thought of man, is...
The expression of man is freedom.
One is selling freedom and the other is presuming that freedom creates the problem.
The dialectic between the two is based by my interpretations as the boundaries that grow between the two.
Each individual goes between agreement and disagreement. They both use similar types of repetition and revalidate each others values and what seems equally valuable in this conversation is the use of memory, the signpost of using ones own experience to hold onto the voice that resonates without any sign of emotion and self examining pain.
Later they move into the crucible principle that justifies the idea of conflict brings about change and new realities. This is them moving into the shared reading of someone else's interpretation of pain and suffering brought about by conflict, loss and by all observations depression at the lower levels of consciousness, or perhaps the higher levels of emotion.
Jiddu throughout by all admission looks for the difference between peoples statements and facts and questions intelligence as being the sub consciousness in a dream fantasy world trying to solve realities when the two are obviously not congruent. However parallel worlds are proving to come together and creating new ideas and answers but the end goal is not constant because there is always as they both agree more to learn.
How the two react to what other people do and how the relationship and pretential bonds between the two are based it is clearly based on wanting, the desire for wanting, Jiddu sets up the reminders and disrupts this by saying this cannot happen. Love and compassion is a necessary part and understands this dialect however he rightly highlights his boundaries of sexual love based issues. Its good that they both draw the line at this unity, because this discussion is about the future of mankind for the next generation of children people, and society.
The machines and extensions are justified then by blaming of the increase in things going wrong affecting the natural life-cycle of the planet and the synaptic links between earths over population and mans use of these new tools and instruments. Throughout the conversation they do both use there minds to measure and interpret what it is they are saying. They do not spend much time on this statement and both agree to I assume to avoid something they know not enough about apart from the fact it is something man uses in society to makes things easier.
The dialectic between the two highlights two differences between knowing and knowledge. The record of data, the inbuilt memory of man and the limitations of one individual to another.
But the reality as we are finding out of the machine or rather the computer is still based on old memory that is reconfigured throughout time and most of the database is being wiped or transferred to allow the new programming to do its work. This statement is an acknowledgement of how memory is limited, how quickly both we and machine forget, but if we are shaped by memory we should always consider and retain as much memory as possible, in order to progress and not get stuck on a merry go round of repetitive mistakes.
Video Sources:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Professoranton
http://www.youtube.com/user/KrishnamurtiArchive
http://www.youtube.com/user/robbwindow
