In many cases therefore sooner or later arises the desire to convince other people of his path. This person also wants to help others to find the «right» path. This often ends in great disappointment if the closest people such as his life partner, his children, parents, good friends etc. react negatively. Especially if they don’t wish to know anything of the «only correct» way, the best path or goal.
Although we have previously almost exclusively only considered the development of human beings, the basic rights of existence are valid for all beings. In this we must use the term «being» in a very broad sense: Under this heading – apart from all living beings on the earth (humans, animals, plants) – we also include the earth itself, every stone, all the water, air etc. All other beings as well as humans are in a state of development. In the model of the sphere we can therefore also imagine their abilities with respect to living the basic rights of existence as white spheres around their bodies1.
Could for example someone with a high awareness help other people unnoticed to select the basic rights of existence as their guideline for decisionmaking? Would it not be possible in this way to improve the whole world?
The effect of the mutual activation of tuning bowls and the overlapping of similar-coloured spheres in a group of people as mentioned above can easily be observed in seminars: Many companies and organizations allow their staff - and in particular management staff – to participate in further training courses. It is always amazing that in such seminars moral and ethical aspects are also tackled with great vigour and plans for solving such aspects are drawn up. People resolve to do many things, but later in their daily life back at the workplace, they actually do not translate any of this or at least extremely little of it into action. External forces are very often cited with great regret as reasons for this, which had the effect that the discussed themes could not be implemented by the person concerned. This person naturally hopes that all the other participants in the seminar will not find themselves stuck with such unpleasant constraints.
As we will soon see, we often also make the choice of which objective we will use as a guideline in making a decision in interaction with our surroundings. Other people, institutions, animals, plants, nature etc. can all have an influence on the selection of our goal in making a decision.
Let‘s consider first a group of several people with spheres of the same colour, i.e. all members of the group are pursuing amongst other things the same objective X. Let’s first remind ourselves again of the definition of the model: Inside the sphere are the fully-trained abilities to achieve the goal X. The size of the sphere is a measurement of the already developed ability to achieve this goal X.
In spite of this the question will certainly arise sooner or later whether we can positively or negatively influence our surroundings, i.e. our partner, our children, the neighbours, our work colleagues, nature etc. The question also arises as to what extent our decisions influence our surroundings. Although we alone are responsible for our decisions it is of course possible that in spite of this there will be some influence in one direction or another.
Right at the start of this chapter we established that abilities and objectives clearly mutually influence each other. If expressed according to our two models, we considered the relationship between the light sphere, which represents our abilities and the tuning bowl, which represents the corresponding objective. Apparently the tuning bowl and the light sphere cannot be considered independently of one another. There is mutual influence between them1.
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!