The virtuoso in the element

 

There is yet another explanation as to why the basic rights of existence really have to be lived and that it is insufficient to simply not violate this law:

If we always have to watch out that we don’t violate the basic rights of existence in order to reach the permanent state of total harmony, we live in continual fear that we will violate the law in spite of trying not to. This would be a negative form of motivation: I learn swimming so that I don’t drown; I take part in a dancing course so that I don’t step on my dancing partner’s toes; I practise a musical instrument, so that I don’t produce wrong notes etc.

Will someone who learns to swim so that he doesn’t drown be able to fully enjoy swimming? Surely he will never feel happy but will always be battling against the fear of drowning. Will someone who only practises his musical instrument for fear of making wrong notes ever be a virtuoso musician? Almost certainly not. Fear has a counterproductive effect and cannot lead to enjoyment and fulfilment.

 

It is therefore certainly reasonable that in order to achieve the permanent state of total harmony it is necessary to live the basic rights of existence, to acquire an automatic mechanism, so that the law is automatically followed or even lived without the need for any thought about it. Just like a musician who fuses with his instrument and therefore can give a concert in a state of enjoyment and fulfilment.

To be able to feel happy, to feel he is in his element is only possible if that person is «one» with his corresponding activity, or if he is «wrapped up in it». This is only possible in the long term if we have internalized all the laws of the corresponding activity and know how to deal with them. Each person must have the certainty himself that he can master this activity like a virtuoso in every situation. In that this activity concerns the living of our own life, these laws are the basic rights of existence.

Objectivity and subjectivity - perceptive reality

Let’s first turn to the question of objectivity: How objective is our perception in reality? A statement is objective if it is neutral and not influenced by prejudices, feelings and interests. An objective statement is consequently independent of the person who makes this statement. The objective statement corresponds with the facts. We often tend to view our own perception of things or events as objectively correct. What others think of the same events or things we frequently categorize as incorrect or subjective (perceptive reality).

A good example is the weather: Two weeks of sunshine, high temperatures and no rain for many people is seen as desirable and good. The farmer however would like some rain in between times because otherwise his fields dry out, older people are not so happy with high air temperatures because it causes breathing difficulties etc. Who is being objective here? Obviously our assessment of the weather depends amongst other things significantly on what we want to do (swimming in an outdoor pool, working in the field, working in an office, travelling, resting etc.), upon our mood and our state of health. Exactly the same weather on a given day gives one person great pleasure and another one annoyance. But even within ourselves the assessment depends strongly on our plans: If we are working in an office three successive days of rain normally would not bother us too much. If however we are on a beach holiday we would want other weather!

We largely influence our perception ourselves as to whether we find the weather «good» or «bad». No one forces us for example to feel that hot summer weather is «bad». We are free to choose whether this is good or bad in our own eyes (perceptive reality). Each of us has certain individual claims on the weather today or tomorrow. According to what the weather is really like will we be more or less satisfied.

Just imagine how much trouble there would be if human beings could actually control the weather! Presumably you will agree that in our judgement of the weather there is no objectivity. Every opinion is correct, but every opinion is also subjective.

Let’s look at the question of the objectivity of our perception in another example: We will examine personal relationships between people and in particular here the relationship between man and woman. Most of us have probably already experienced more than once the end of a love affair: If it was not you but your partner who ended the relationship, with great probability you will have seen the end of the relationship at the time as being awful, unjust and wrong. Weeks, months or at least years afterwards people normally feel that the end of that relationship was a good thing. They are presumably happy about it because completely different options opened up for them.

What happened in the meantime? The event is still the same: Our partner left us. If we no longer judge this to be awful and unjust, but instead sensible and good, it must be we ourselves who have changed - perceptive reality. Our perception of the same event reflects this change (perceptive reality). Just like our example of the weather our perception with respect to personal relationships is also subjective.

In the course of our personal development our perception changes. It is however true that no one can force us to develop ourselves further. If for example we want to be miserable for the whole of our life because of the end of a relationship, we can do so. The decision is ours alone and not that of our neighbourhood for example, or our previous partner!

We could still give pages of examples of such situations and events which we only perceive subjectively. It is therefore possible to put the opposite question as to whether we human beings can perceive things or events objectively at all!

The most obvious fields to consider here are those of science and/or technology. In these fields we can define a respective partial system and then establish the relevant laws in this partial system according to our current knowledge. Within this partial system and under the defined preconditions we can then make «objective» measurements and observations. As soon as we leave this partial system however it loses its objectivity since there the preconditions are no longer conclusively valid. It is only when we know and understand everything on the earth and in the cosmos, that objectively correct observations are theoretically possible. However we are still a long way from this...

• Before it was found that the earth was round it was assumed to be a disc. All the navigational calculations for ships for example were based on this assumption. Pity those who took no notice of this assumption.
• Before the discovery of the theory of relativity the corresponding calculations were made without the use of this theory. There was lots of evidence that the existing theory was correct and complete. No one said: «Stop, the theory of relativity is still missing».
• The model of the structure and properties of an atom has drastically changed in the last fifty years. Many times the scientists were convinced that we now know «everything» about the structure and properties of the atom.

We have tried to illustrate with these three examples that our knowledge is constantly expanding. Those things which we recognize as good and correct in science and technology today, can be proven in the future to be incorrect or incomplete on the basis of new findings. Looked at from the viewpoint of the whole «earth system», our perception within the scope of our science and technology is therefore also subjective.

Without wanting to interpret the above examples and elucidations as evidence, we therefore venture to make the statement that our perception of everything around us (perceptive reality) is purely subjective.

The glasses model - perceptive reality

The nice thing about subjectivity is the possibility of influencing the situation ourselves. If my perception is subjective then I – and I alone – have all the options of influencing or being influenced in a given situation. I alone decide whether I feel that something is good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant, cold or hot, beautiful or ugly!

We do not see our environment and the events around us as «objective» or neutral (perceptive reality). Instead it is rather like looking through a pair of glasses, which determines our interpretation of a picture. I hold these glasses myself in front of my eyes. According to the way these glasses change what is really a neutral picture of an event, the picture makes us feel for example fear, joy, anger or it makes us sad. We feel the picture to be good or bad, negative or positive, meaningful or senseless, dark or light, correct or false.

 

If we assume that this subjective influencing of the neutral picture happens in our subconscious, we can imagine there is a large collection of different pairs of glasses there. According to which pair of glasses is held in front of us by our subconscious state, we interpret the picture in a different way which then moves us for example to feel fear, anger, consternation, apathy, joy or sadness. Our perception is determined by the respective glasses.

Surely you have also noticed how a film can one day make you laugh and on another day and under different conditions you don‘t find the same scene funny at all. The scene is naturally exactly the same – it is your mood which has however changed, and therefore you interpret it differently. You have put on another pair of glasses.

It is very important - and also comforting – to see that our perception is not controlled externally. The subconscious is part of us, therefore we can influence it. We can also however allow it to be influenced by external forces. We will come back to this later.

 

What however has this digression into subjective perception got to do with personal development towards living the basic rights of existence? We set ourselves the question at the start as to how life confronts us with the respectively appropriate situations so that we can develop ourselves further.

One such opportunity is subjective perception: If we wish to develop ourselves further towards living the basic rights of existence, if we strive for perpetual internal harmony, then our subconscious can hold up the «correct» glasses for every situation. These «correct» glasses allow us then to perceive a given situation so that we can learn something from it – insofar as we wish to. In this way every situation finally offers us the chance of learning something. In absolutely identical situations different people can at the same time train themselves in quite different characteristics! The subconscious holds up the appropriate glasses for each person so that he interprets the situation accordingly.

At the start of this section we mentioned as an example the «ability to let go» as a possible learning step. If someone works on this learning step a lot of things will be «taken away» from him in his life: Perhaps his children will move away to a foreign country, many acquaintances will go away, he may even be made redundant by his employer, although he wanted to stay until he retired, perhaps he loses a valuable clock, his case is stolen, someone else gets the credit for part of his work etc. Naturally these are all everyday things which can happen in everyone‘s life and they are not in the least spectacular. With the glasses through which he observes these happenings he will classify each of the enumerated events himself as tremendously tragic and will presumably suffer greatly because of them. Until one day he has learned, of his own free will, to let them go. Similar things will thereafter still happen, but he will feel quite different about them since he is now looking through other glasses.

 

This is not all about always wearing rose-coloured glasses, so that everything is felt to be «good». It is of course possible to be tempted to outwit our subconscious by some kind of technique so that we see everything through rose-coloured glasses. However in the end we would be deceiving ourselves to the extent that we would be fighting the symptoms and not the causes.

It is much more sensible each time to observe ourselves and ask ourselves why we have felt a given situation in this way and why we have reacted in this way. This question is particularly important if (negative) emotions are linked with our reaction! Fundamentally however we can learn something from every reaction we make, as long as we establish that we judge. We can then work consciously on the causes of this and thereby develop ourselves further. Finally the corresponding glasses will «disappear» so that in future we will react differently to similar situations.

 

Earlier we have described how the objective of all human beings is to live the basic rights of existence in every situation in order to attain a permanent state of harmony within ourselves. With the «glasses model» and subjective perception we could also describe this as a state in which our perception is no longer impaired by glasses, in which we no longer judge but we can accept everything calmly as it is.

This parallelity should not surprise anyone: If my mood and my behaviour can no longer be influenced by external things – in other words no more glasses leading to the judgement of a situation, then I can be in a state of permanent peace and harmony with myself. Otherwise this harmony would be constantly spoiled by the judgement of all kinds of events.

This once again makes it clear just how high is this goal of permanent harmony with oneself and the non-judgement of everyday situations in deed and in truth: Each of us indeed has his weaknesses which can easily disconcert us. These can often be such banal things as a car driver behind us who hoots and flashes his headlights or makes an «explicit» sign to us with his finger. Your child which does exactly the same thing which you have strictly forbidden him to do two minutes before with the threat of punishment. A third person who spreads lies about you in the neighbourhood or at the workplace. A computer which crashes for the n^th time without any obvious reason etc.

We must emphasize once again however that this calmness must not be confused with the wearing of rose-coloured glasses which allows everything to appear cheerful and good. The rose-coloured glasses would also be a judgement which - it is true - would normally appear to us to be pleasant. However we would then judge everything in life to be good and go through life like a lunatic with a fixed smile.

A great risk in connection with this is also the taking on of other people’s glasses: We frequently allow others to influence our perception or even determine it. Such people may be our parents, teachers, friends, partner and organisations, but we may also be influenced by newspapers, magazines, the Internet, radio, television, films, adverts and much more. Certainly in the case of the media, which frequently quite deliberately tries to manipulate our perception, we should be careful not to accept the judgement of the rea­lity by a third party. The decision as to whether we permit such influence or not is ours alone.

 

To illustrate this let’s consider a war which is perpetrated in a foreign land by one or more nations, for example «on behalf of UN (united nations)». The Government in the country being attacked (often one individual person) is branded as a symbol of everything which is wicked and bad. Attempts are made to legitimize the violation of the basic rights of existence by military intervention in the foreign country. If we accept this judgement we are producing for ourselves a pair of glasses which conveys exactly this picture.

Nothing and no one can force us to allow ourselves to be influenced from external sources. If we do allow it, it is of our own free will. As a consequence of this however we must normally accept that there will be backward steps in our personal development. For at some stage we will have to also let go of every pair of glasses which we have acquired or taken on. The acceptance of judgements by others or allowing them to influence us therefore creates more work on our path to a permanently well-balanced nature and to living the basic rights of existence in every situation. Thereby it is of absolutely no importance from where we take on such judgements: For example whether we accept them from advertising or from a religious leader, it is exactly the same for our own development!

Subjective perception (perceptive reality) is a very powerful aid to personal development. So that it can function properly it needs only one – but very important - precondition: Of our own volition and without conditions we must want to respect the basic rights of existence in every situation. This development does not take place of its own accord.

Definition of objectives

  When we talk about an objective or a goal we mean a state which we would like to achieve in the future. The term state is however interpreted here extremely comprehensively, for example to have emigrated within 10 years to a particular country, to have successfully completed a particular educational course, to have a family with children, to gain certain abilities etc.

In terms of pictures we describe an objective as, where we want to be at a particular time. On the other hand the path to this goal, that is how we wish to achieve this goal as well as the necessary negotiations and decisions, is not a component part of the objective itself.

Partial objectives

  The further we are from a given goal the more abstract this goal appears to us. We can only imagine with relative difficulty what it must be like when the goal is achieved. It is also correspondingly impossible to plan in detail how we wish to achieve this goal. In such cases it makes sense initially to strive for partial goals, which can be brought to reality more quickly and therefore appear to be more practically attainable. These partial goals can lead us like signposts to the greater goal. In doing so it is entirely possible that we do not reach the greater goal by the most direct route but take certain diversions.

We can compare this with travelling to a far-away destination: If I wish to travel by car from Zürich to Warsaw, I first of all establish on an outline map the stopover points of my journey. There are naturally many ways of getting to Warsaw from Zürich by car. Whether I travel via Germany or Austria is thereby not important. I simply decide on a particular route and then set off.

If on the other hand I wish to travel to Warsaw from Zürich on foot then this venture would take several weeks, and because of the many influences which are still unknown at present, it is very difficult to plan in detail. I will therefore generally establish the route and then make concrete plans in advance for two-three days at a time. Under way I will meet lots of other people who will be able to offer suggestions for particularly attractive routes. In addition my physical state will also have a great influence on the plans. With the relatively late fine planning I will remain flexible and easily be able to adapt my route to the changed situation.

This procedure is obviously certainly not revolu­tionary but it has proved to be valuable over many years in business life. The long term objectives are initially set up as goals for the next twelve months. To achieve these goals we then split this year further down into quarters, months and weeks. It is only the short term objectives which are planned in detail each time.

Compatibility of objectives

In the above example we have already indicated that there are many different ways of travelling from Zürich to Warsaw. The closer I get to Warsaw however the more I have to watch out: If for example I take a wrong turning to the east 2 km south of Warsaw, my distance from Warsaw will soon become greater again. I get further from my goal again instead of getting closer to it. Suddenly I am twice the distance from it than I was before!

We therefore distinguish between partial goals, which bring us closer to a goal, and those which take us in another direction. If we aim for a partial goal, which leads us further away from the greater goal, then we are in the process of making a diversion. This still does not mean however that because of this we will not reach the goal.

We describe therefore all the partial goals, which bring us closer to a greater goal as compatible goals. The faster a partial goal brings us to the greater goal, the more com­patible is this partial goal with the greater goal. If we want to achieve a goal as quickly as possible the targeted partial goals should therefore be as compatible as possible with the ultimate goal.

 

Figure 3: Village with mountains A, B and C

In the above figure the mountain peaks A, B and C represent objectives. Mountains A and B are on the same side of the valley, the path first leads to the mountain hut and then separates relatively soon after this. C is on the opposite side of the valley. As we travel towards the village in the valley we get closer to all three mountain peaks, these three peaks are therefore still compatible with one another. In the village we then have to decide on either mountain peaks A and B or peak C. As soon as we climb the side of the valley leading to C we get increasingly further away from A and B. The objective C is now no longer compatible with A and B. We can no longer simultaneously get closer to all three goals.

If we decide to climb up towards the mountain hut, then we get further and further away from goal C, but we do get closer to A and B. Until we get to the mountain ridge behind the hut, objectives A and B are still compatible with one another. At the fork however we have to make a decision: If we approach peak A then we get further from peak B and vice versa. After this fork the objectives A and B are no longer compati­ble.

In the final climb to peak B (see Figure 4) there is an ice field. With the right equipment we can cross this field and thus stay on the direct path to the peak. If we don’t have ice equipment we can make a detour around this tongue of ice on the path marked. It is true that this is a diversion but if we don’t have ice equipment it will bring us faster to the peak than if we tried to cross the ice. Both routes in the final climb to peak B are compatible with the greater goal. According to our equipment the route over the ice or on the detour around the ice field is the more compatible since it gets us more quickly to the ultimate goal.

 

Figure 4: The climb to peak B after the mountain hut

This example should serve to show that the compatibility of our objectives also depends on our location on the route to that objective. In order to really achieve a goal the selection of compatible goals is that much more important the closer we get to our goal. In the section on concentrating our strengths we will come back to this. In addition this example shows that the choice of the optimum route to an objective is very individual. It strongly depends on our own capabilities and experiences (in the above example this is represented by the ice equipment).

Pursuing different types of objectives

  We can naturally pursue several greater objectives. No one forbids us for example from striving for both great financial wealth as well as from living the basic rights of existence. Whether these two goals are compatible with one another depends on the state of our personal development. The closer we get to the goal of permanent harmony the greater the chance that these two goals are not compatible for us. As we have already emphasized many times, we can select our goals for ourselves, but we also have to live with the consequences. The more incompatible are the goals we pursue the more strictly we have to divide our time and energy. Correspondingly the possible progress becomes fundamentally less with the increasing number of incompatible goals. In extreme cases we divide our energies to such an extent that no progress at all is possible – we stay in one place.

Let’s consider in the example of Figure 3, with the mountain peaks A, B and C as goals, someone who wants to reach goal A as well as C. Let’s assume that this person pursues goal A for one hour and then pursues goal C for one hour, then A again and so on.

As long as this person has not yet reached the village in the valley he makes good progress since both goals are compatible with one another. From hour to hour he gets closer to the village. However as soon as he reaches the village he will climb for one hour towards C and then for one hour towards A. This however is exactly the opposite path to which he has previously travelled. This person therefore returns to the village. He then decides again on the peak C and turns around …etc.

 

No matter how persistent this person is, he constantly shuttles backwards and forwards close to the village without ever getting closer to either of the two goals. He might just as well sit down and rest – instead of which he chases around and gets tired at the same time! He wastes his energy and achieves nothing. He makes no further progress.

When making a decision we select one objective each time as a guideline for this decision. Our behaviour in a given situation is primarily determined by our current objective. In the example with the mountain peaks the person decides initially for example on goal C. In the next decision however we can already select again another goal as a guiding principle - in the above example the goal A. The currently-valid goal can therefore very quickly change.

 

If we pursue several objectives which do not complement one another – in other words are not compatible, then there is a permanent sort of competition between the individual objectives as to which objective can now have the upper hand and hence become the guiding principle for the current decisions.

Let’s assume you would like to be your boss’s deputy, although amongst your work colleagues there are more suitable people. At the same time you want to have a fair and friendly relationship with your work colleagues. As soon as your boss appears you will behave differently because you want to show him that you would be the best deputy for him. When the boss is not around the objective «good relationship with work colleagues» has the upper hand. As soon as the boss comes in again the current objective changes to «become the boss‘s deputy». Because of this the work colleagues will sooner or later feel offended, which will spoil the friendly relationship. Since – as this example assumed – there are better candi­dates for the position of deputy, these two goals are not compatible. Advance towards one goal therefore leads to backward steps with respect to the other goal.

This is true both for the short term as well as for the long term greater goals. According to whether the goal is to live the basic rights of existence or whether the goal of amassing material wealth has the upper hand, a person will possibly behave differently or make completely different decisions in a given situation. The pursuing of different objectives can go so far that as a result of this quite different personality traits can occur within one and the same person. Typical for the modern western world for example is that there is a great discrepancy between the moral behaviour of people in their business life and their private life.

The hierarchy in personal objectives

  At the start of this treatise we considered the needs of humankind and during this we referred particularly to the hierar­chy in human needs using the example of the Maslow theory: At the lowest level were the existential needs of a person and at the highest level the achievement of a state of lasting happiness, self-realization, salvation of the soul, harmony within oneself or whatever we like to call this state. On the basis of these needs the human being sets his own personal goals according to this theory. If for example his existence is assured, he attempts to realize the needs of the next highest level of hierarchy by setting his goals accordingly. The hierarchy of needs, which we have referred to already many times, therefore corresponds with a similar hierarchy of objectives: Our own goals can also be hierarchically arranged.

In other words: According to the needs which we wish to satisfy, we should select our goals from the corresponding hierarchical level. What sounds so simple and logical is however frequently a cause of disappointment in our personal development: Needs and objectives don’t correspond but often even contradict each other in a flagrant way.

Many people set their goals in the material area such as for example financial income, property, possessions, and are surprised that they are not at the same time happier, calmer and more composed. Material objectives correspond with the lower hierarchical levels of human needs, in that they mainly ensure the basis for existence. As important as this is, it is then possible for a person to turn to other goals with confidence once the material existence is ensured. Otherwise this person remains fixed on these needs in his personal development too.

 

The need to safeguard the basis of existence more and more strongly can be compared with the taking of drugs: A certain amount of the drug is first taken to experience a given feeling. As time goes on greater and greater amounts of the drug are necessary to experience the same intensity of feeling. A switch is then made to harder drugs where the same process is repeated. This can continue as far as self-destruction.

When setting our objectives for life therefore we should take note of the hierar­chy of objectives: If we seek happiness and harmony in our lives then we should select goals which correspond with the highest level of human needs. In plain language this means: The respecting of the basic rights of existence in every situation should become our highest personal goal.

Concentration of strengths

  We can fundamentally freely divide the energy or strength, which is available for our personal development, between various goals as we wish. For example one person can use 20% for the capability of increasing his material wealth, 50% for the capability of attaining power over others and the remaining 30% for the capability of increasing his personal standing in society. As long as these goals do not contradict one another then he will be able to develop his capabilities according to the amount of energy devoted to each of them.

The glasses model of subjective perception is automa­tically used for every random objective by our subconscious for the development of the corresponding capabilities. It is therefore tremendously important that we set clear priorities for our objectives.

 

From a certain capability level progress is only possible by concentrating on very few goals and finally on just one single goal. We can compare this with the climbing of mountain peaks in the example in the previous section: The starting point for the climb may well be the same for many peaks, but the higher a person gets the sooner he must decide upon one single peak. I cannot be on both peaks at the same moment and if I wish to climb both peaks one after the other I will have to go down again by a certain amount from the first peak.

The necessity of concentrating on a single goal is, by the way, well known in sport. At the level of a normal healthy sportsman it is possible to enjoy the most diverse types of sport without any problem. But if you wish to pursue top-level sports then it is only possible to achieve outstanding performance in just a very few related sporting areas.

In other words: The closer we get to a goal the smaller the number of incompatible goals which can be pursued successfully.

Objectives as self-motivation

  How would you react, if your seven year old daughter declared that she would like to be an airline pilot? Would you immediately order a registration form from the national airline? Move close to the airport so that the daughter could visit it frequently later on? – Probably not. You would certainly be pleased that your daughter has this objective, but you would also explain that she will still have to go to school for a few more years.

And if ten years later your daughter decides upon a course in physics, or training as a gardner, would you be disappointed? – No. Your daughter has developed in the meantime. Perhaps she has even developed thanks to her objective of being a pilot. She knew that «If I want to be a pilot I will have to be attentive at school». She had thus become engaged, and in her own interests – without external pressure – had learned from it.

The goal of being a pilot had helped her to develop, although in reality she hadn‘t realized this goal. In everyday life this is frequently the case: Objectives serve as the motivating force for us to do something. A long-term goal is best divided into intermediate goals which can be achieved more quickly. The feeling of success when we achieve these intermediate goals can additionally act as a motivating force.

 

An objective can also serve as a signpost for us during particular stages in our lives, without actually having to achieve it. It is therefore necessary to look at our goals periodically to see if they are still valid for us or whether we wish to adapt them.

Objectives as an aid to success

  In setting our objectives we instruct our subconscious to help us in realizing our goals. As an example of this we discussed the glasses model in the previous section. The subconscious creates the preconditions so that we can more efficiently achieve the desired goal. In the above example of the daughter we saw that this would also provide for example a good motivation for learning at school. She had considered the learning materials through a pair of glasses which had made them appear interesting.

In top sports events so-called mental training has been used for many years to achieve tremendous levels of performance. In essence this is virtually the same as what we are discussing here: The subconscious helps to focus our strengths and abilities on a concrete objective. Our performance with respect to the goal we are striving for can thereby be tremendously increased.

Sportsmen, who want to belong to the winning group and who for inexplicable reasons can demonstrate a series of successes, are therefore frequently said to have great mental strength. They are determined to reach their goal, they believe in their success and therefore give their subconscious strong signals. In this way the subconscious can correspondingly support them – and the desired success comes. This success in turn has a further strengthening effect and leads to an even stronger belief in further success, which again strengthens the signal to the subconscious and so on.

Let’s compare the help provided by the subconscious with other everyday situations: If our goal is to become a good hurdler, then our subconscious in a manner of speaking provides us with the running shoes and the hurdles. If we wish to become a good mountain climber it provides us with rope, pickaxes and crampons. It is however thereafter up to us as to whether we actually use these aids or prerequirements or whether they simply remain as good intentions.

A long-term goal is normally divided into intermediate goals, the intermediate goals are achieved by solving concrete tasks. If my goal is to be a competent mountain climber perhaps I will set as my initial goal the achievement of a high level of stamina for the climb. Therefore as concrete tasks during the next few weeks and months I go mountain walking until my condition has improved. After this I aim for my next partial goal and so on.

In most cases a goal can be reached in the most diverse ways. By selecting partial goals and tasks we establish our own way. The future mountain climber would also have had to first attend a climbing course in a gymnasium. Possibly for him personally the experience of nature during mountain walking is however very important and during his training in the gymnasium he would perhaps soon have lost his enjoyment of climbing mountains which would have turned him away from the goal.

 

The selection of partial goals and the tasks which we undertake to achieve these partial goals represent our personal route to the goal. The choice of the route is similarly very important, because this is what finally determines how easily we reach our ultimate goal.

Pursuing your own objectives

  Our goals lead us to the situation where we do certain things in our life and leave other things aside. We can therefore influence other people in a simple way, if we influence their objective or at least the choice of their partial goals. Our deep longing for peace, happiness, calmness and harmony – as described in the highest needs of all beings – is also at the same time our weakness.

In the advertising field this longing, which is deeply embedded in every one of us, is exploited in more and more refined ways: By linking a service or product with a blissfully happy person or a harmonious situation, it is suggested to the viewer that thanks to the use of this product you will become successful, beautiful, desirable, rich or whatever – and this will (also) make you happy. We have already dealt with this briefly in the section on the needs of humankind.

 

Why does advertising promise us harmony and happiness? In the objectives of companies we don’t often read that they would like to make people happy. On the other hand they do speak more frequently about maximising profit and suchlike. Although advertising naturally is also intended to convey information, the statement «buy our product so that we can obtain a higher profit» would be much more honest in most cases¹.

Therefore once again the question: Why does advertising not just communicate matter-of-fact things, why does it appeal to our feelings and longings? The answer is clear: As we have already mentioned several times, in every person there is embedded this longing for the highest goal of perpetual harmony. This longing can also be exploited to maximize financial profit, to achieve power – yes even to manipulate other people. A great majority of people in the «developed» countries allow themselves to be manipulated or at least be strongly influenced in the way described above of their own free will.

What can we do to extract ourselves from this influence? The answer is: We must know what we want in our lives. Set our own clear objective. In this way we will finally do what we want and not what others would probably want us to do.

He who doesn’t pursue clear objectives can easily be used by others to achieve their own goals. A goal can only be reached when a goal exists. A goal which does not exist is impossible to reach!

 

Let’s summarize the situation up to this point: Our behaviour in a given situation depends on our own objectives. What we can achieve in our life depends to a large extent on which objectives we are pursuing. It is therefore worthwhile taking time to consider our objectives.

The course of our life depends on whether we strive for goals and which goals we are striving for. Whether we strive for our own goals or allow others to set them for us. We can distinguish between three fundamentally different options in setting our long-term objectives:

1. We wish to learn to rigorously respect the basic rights of existence in all our decisions.

Here we provide our subconscious with a clear signal, we can build our pyramid and take off our glasses of subjective perception.

2. We set ourselves other concrete goals, for example power over others, financial wealth, fame, helping other people etc.

Here we also provide our subconscious with a clear signal. It will also support us in reaching these goals. The longing for harmony however will not be satisfied by this.

3. We set no goals for ourselves. Or we set several mutually-exclusive goals for ourselves.

Since the subconscious has no clear guidelines it cannot support us. There is a great risk of being misused by other people for the achievement of their own goals.

People who can be classified in category 2 of the above list are frequently seen by us as being successful and they are admired. Since they normally rigorously pursue their objectives they will probably achieve them – as do those in category 1 by the way.

Much more tragic is the fate of people in category 3: Very frequently they have not set themselves any goals at all, or if they have they are the sort of goals which are mutually exclusive. The pursuance of mutually-exclusive goals is frequently synonymous with the state of having no goal. They are dragged backwards and forwards between these non-compatible goals, since progress towards one goal is the same thing as a step backwards from at least one other goal.

He who, like the people in category 2 for example, wants to strive for power, wealth or fame needs as many other people as possible who will give him this power, money or admiration. Naturally it is primarily those people without their own clear goals as described in category 3, who are useful here. Those who don’t set their own goals can more easily be manipulated by others.

 

Have we therefore found the «culprits»? Are the people in category 2 the «baddies» who are responsible for everything that is wrong on our earth? Shouldn’t we at last tell those people who strive for example for power, wealth, admiration or fame what’s what?

Again this connection is however not as simple as that! Another person can only influence us, exert power over us, receive admiration from us etc if we want it or allow it. We are not helpless creatures who can be exploited by others against our will. It is only if we permit others to have influence over us or exercise power over us that they can also do just that. If we allow ourselves to be controlled and influenced by others we should not blame «the others», but rather we should see this as our own problem! It is entirely our responsibility not to allow this to happen if we don’t want it to happen.

Most people in our society today do not give much thought to their goals in life – or maybe they do shortly before their death, when it is already too late to change anything in this life. Because of this the chances are very great that consciously or unconsciously they will be used by others in order to achieve their goals.

If we set ourselves clear objectives and also if we pursue them, we will prevent others from being able to exploit us. We more-or-less work on or for ourselves– and this must surely be more satisfying than chasing one way after this goal, then another way towards that (externally-set) goal!