“Having preferences means having weaknesses.”
(Magnus Carlsen)
Preferences
“Having preferences means having weaknesses.”
(Magnus Carlsen)
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
“Having preferences means having weaknesses.”
(Magnus Carlsen)
Geir Isene - uncut 
I don’t get this one… come on.. if I prefer women for sex and not men, then I have a weekness, I don’t see that.. please explain – anyone who can.
Per: “if I prefer women for sex and not men, then I have a weekness, . . . ”
Chris: “You mean you don’t prefer men or you never tried a man? You never tried a man? . . . now my turn to say, “come on!” hahaha If you never tried a man, then how do you know you don’t prefer them? Now eat your broccoli! LOL
NO! Don’t tell him to eat broccoli! There’s no telling what will happen if he eats broccoli! It could be dangerous you know! LOL! 😀
Maria: It could be dangerous you know! LOL! 😀
Chris: Yes, Mr. Watson. Another broccoli related death. . . hmmm.
Chris,
How about kissing this broccoli? 🙂
http://tinyurl.com/Kiss-This-Broccoli-1-jpg
http://tinyurl.com/Kiss-This-Broccoli-2-jpg
Or you prefer to eat it? 🙂
Ohhhh the path of enlightenment contains myriad of obstacles and our fascination with these stumbling blocks which captivates us, In your case what is hidden behind the broccoli
Eliz: “. . . what is hidden behind the broccoli”
Chris: Pay no attention to the man behind the broccoli!
Frank: “Or you prefer to eat it? :-)”
Chris: hahaha, no thanks ! I’m on a low protein diet of Scientologist at the moment!
Per, I’ll take a shot at explaining it.
It comes down to context, frame of reference. You’re operating and talking in terms this sub-set called the physical universe. And I am pretty sure that this chess genius is operating in the super-set of Consciousness, where there are no confining frames of reference – or maybe we should say the frames of reference are limitless. Watch a few minutes of this video, starting from about 6:30, and you may be able to phrase it better than I can:
I’m in love with Tom Campbell. I wonder if he is single!
Good point Marildi and no doubt apropos. I am not going to take a stab at rewording what Tom says so well, and besides it is delicious to listen to him and watch his great sincerity and humility.
Maria
“I’m in love with Tom Campbell” – let me remind you that this is the no preference thread! How about other men? How are you going to transcend the mind in this way? He is indeed “delicious to listen to”….Is there anybody else you like listening to? Can be a musician too… I would love to see who else you like….why not? Some really cool guys….a kind of women’s preferences part here…
Marianne: let me remind you that this is the no preference thread!
Chris: Exactly. This thread has helped my self esteem immensely Now that I realize how many women prefer other men to me, I understand what a weakness they have for me! Must be the Norwegian in me!
Maria, I’m in love with him too! Never get tired of watching his video lectures or the Q&A sessions he conducts – and there are dozens of them on the internet. But yes, he’s married. He tells a wonderful story of how he “knew” at a very young age when and how he would meet his wife and that she would be his soul mate. In spite of that precognition, his first marriage was to another woman. But sometime after that marriage ended he met his current wife of many years now – and it happened exactly as he had foreseen. Dontcha love it? 🙂
Getting back to the OP, from understanding Campbell (and others) I think of Magnus Carlsen as simply being capable of going into a “superset state” where he sees the chess game in front of him and can visualize every possible combination of future moves. That’s why he says “I don’t have any clear preferences in chess. I do what I think circumstances require of me – I attack, defend or go into the endgame.” When he says having preferences means having weaknesses, I get that he simply means that with each move that’s made by an opponent he “plays the game in front of him” (you’ll recognize the paraphrase :)) And this is why “he barely works on the game outside of tournaments” – why would he need to!?
Marildi: Maria, I’m in love with him too!
Chris: Ah! Love preference for Tom Campbell . . . Therefore, weakness for me…hmmm! I think this Magnusson has something on the ball!
Okay, some kind of weakness for you. But for Tom it’s weak in the knees. 🙂
Per
I assure you it’s perfectly normal. But there are subtle nuances in it. Movie: Black Swan (though it’s about the female side). This question is basically about what “male” and “female” are. I can speak about an experience of mine. During awakening there was a fast “roll” of experiences-cognitons of the different qualities of what “female” is. The outcome is that any resistence I had before towards any “woman” form-quality in my mind and in life is gone. Like an actress, I can “imagine” and practically put into “action-form” different “parts” of being a “female”. That is, I am able and willing to create it. As everything, this is one awareness “level”….there are more….Here is a song. Do you know a good one for a “man”?
(also, Geir’s comment touches on a little “deeper”…).
Per…. one stimulates you the other dont…. and you know why that happens too,, because you know how that works..hehehe
and by now it is”’normal for man wanting woman” and the man wanting man is sinful.. or mant wanting goat that is double sinful… the law rules regulations … guidelines one must obey or one is out from the normal group.
Eliz: guidelines one must obey or one is out from the normal group.
Chris: Right. Main thing is whatever you do is sinful. If you can also feel guilty for anything you do, then you are on the home stretch.
In mathematics this could be truth but in the life of real persons there are more factors to consider, passion and dignity are just two of them.
Let me get this straight: he prefers not to have weaknesses because, ah, “Having preferences means having weaknesses.”
I’m guessing this struck your ‘funny bone.’
G.
Gary…..HaHaHa….you certainly struck my “funny bone”….love it when a guy goes into the core of a question and I don’t have to “brainstorm”…..I just love the me being “ignorant” and being “stupid” parts of the game too….
Alright Per, you started this sex stuff. I’ll change subject.
I have a preference for Mac computer. Means I have weakness in HP’s? Maybe? I think because enough education, experience and ease of use for my preference to be such. In this example I don’t really see it as weakness because I’m more than willing to learn if needed.
Have to think more, later…
After reading other comments and not knowing Magnus Carlsen, left me to take the question literally. So games it is, I see and so will leave it for the deep thinkers who can pick this apart and maybe I’ll learn something? ” 🙂
deEliz
HaHaHa…me too is leaving it for a while. In the meantime I am making some pancakes and listen to some music. Sure there will be some exciting things here to learn from when I come back here…..wish you a beautiful evening!
MT: “wish you a beautiful evening!”
And a beautiful evening to you too! 🙂
Geir is a crafty Norwegian and so is Magnus Carlsen.
“I’d call myself an optimist! In actual fact I don’t have any clear preferences in chess. I do what I think circumstances require of me – I attack, defend or go into the endgame. Having preferences means having weaknesses.” Magnus Carlsen
Magnus Carlsen – “I don’t quite fit into the usual schemes”
“After the Tal Memorial in Moscow Magnus Carlsen gave a long interview which has only just been published. It was definitely worth the wait, as it provides a remarkable insight into what makes the Norwegian stand out in the world of chess. He claims to have essentially developed as a player without computers, and that he barely works on the game outside of tournaments. He also gives a detailed and thoughtful account of his cooperation with Garry Kasparov, where it’s clear he doesn’t share what seemed to be Hikaru Nakamura’s view that there was little to be gained but opening knowledge.”
[http://en.chessbase.com/home/TabId/211/PostId/4007778]
I suppose If one resists that which he doesn’t preffer, he can limit himself.
Oh dear, what did I just say (flooding cogs).. I do that I do that I do that
If you insist to be ‘right’, you resist to be ‘wrong’. In which case you bring about the concepts of right and wrong into existence. Then you are stuck at being right, and you cannot ‘change your mind’ about things, because changing your mind would mean that you were ‘wrong’ about something.
LOL! (me too – flooding cogs!)
😉
To prefer some elements of a game means that you limit your freedom in the game.
Per; To prefer only women mens one limits oneself from a wide variety of sexual experiences. In totality, one should and would be both able and factually experience everything. Without preferences. Then one transcends the game. But one wouldn’t reach that conclusion unless one was at the very top of a game such as Magnus. For others and in other games it is way outside their reality.
Isene
Yeah…true. How about extending what you write. Having preferences before transcending the game can be a weakness. How about transcending the game and “coming back into it” knowingly and with ability and have a preference then?
(being able and willing to experience everything one can still have and only in this case can really have the free will to choose something or somebody that the person “prefers” to have or be with in life situations…so true personal will as not contrary to Free Will (of Life) Can it be so? (Batman)
Keyword: GAME
If you want to have a game must you make a counter-postulate?
MT.. have you any reality what scientology is all about and what scientologist [ ex or not] want to achieve? Reading your above post made make be believe that you dont, you dont have a clue.. but you believe you know…
Elizabeth
Would like to know how you came to this belief reading my above post….care to voice it?
MT.. …”How about transcending the game and “coming back into it” knowingly and with ability and have a preference then?
(being able and willing to experience everything one can still have and only in this case can really have the free will to choose something or somebody that the person “prefers” to have or be with in life situations…so true personal will as not contrary to Free Will (of Life) Can it be so? (Batman)”
Your answer
Elizabeth
HaHaHa….as I am looking at it NOW, I can’t find anyTHING called Scientology or anyBODY called a Scientologist, also there is nothing to achieve….
But that depends on how you define the game in the first place, and all games include limits in freedom, so there will always be weaknesses if you want to have a game.
You could define a game so open as to include sex with animals before you could transcend it.
And I don´t mean it in a bad way, what fascinates me about Hannibal Lecter is that he transcended his own game. The proof is that he factually enjoyed eating people.
I understand weaknesses better as adding your own limits to the original limits of the game.
Breaking with the original limits of the game is just another kind of game, but you would still need to add some weakness to keep it going 🙂
Hey! maybe what science is all about is breaking the limits which exist only in our minds…
Rafael was that a cog?
You know that is the only limitation one has: ones very own belief.
The Wonder boy Magnus C. proves that.. There are so many of them out there in different fields. The BT’s who have received lots of auditing have taken on a body.
Rafael: The proof is that he factually enjoyed eating people.
Chris: Heck, so do me and Elizabeth!
LOL!!!
Have you eaten any Scientologist yet?
Rafael: Have you eaten any Scientologist yet?
Chris: I don’t because I don’t like vegetables. But Elizabeth is vegetarian so she has about one a week. Are they tasty Elizabeth?
They are good to keep your cholesterol down Chris, you should have at least one per month .
They are not.. they need lots of washing-soaking and tenderazing.. because they are saturated with toooooo many conflicting considerations and those really hardens solidifys the meat..
This post is about Preferences yes… going back to my favorite horse : auditing, in session one weeds out ones reality what one dont like and have session on those items and the cognitions remain as ones preference… the rest is as-ised so I have reality on why one has preferences.. and how one is influenced by those…
Ya , I munched on few but I always gotten a hostile after taste, could have been because they were not clear?
Should not be eaten raw, hardboil them first.
Rafael: Should not be eaten raw, hardboil them first.
Chris: Don’t they come that way?
Chris: Don’t they come that way?
Rafael: You are absolutely right, my mistake.
I was looking at the recipe for hardcore critics.
you want them dead or alive?
Eliz: “you want them dead or alive?”
Chris: Hardboiled Scientologists are always dead on arrival – if you want fresh, you have to get them early before they are boiled or else reverse the hard boiling. A hardboiled Scientologist doesn’t taste as good as fresh but their shelf-life is longer.
LOL!
Eliz: “you want them dead or alive?”
Chris: Hardboiled Scientologists are always dead on arrival – if you want fresh, you have to get them early before they are boiled or else reverse the hard boiling. A hardboiled Scientologist doesn’t taste as good as fresh but their shelf-life is longer
Rafael: And if you are going to skin them don´t forget to get them alive and rub their skin with tenderizing lotion during three days before slaughter.
LoL… you are a nut…but I like crunchy skin will I still get that after 3 days of aplication of lotion? ”.after that I am thinking of barbequing of course!!
Eliz: “…but I like crunchy skin”
Chris: OMG! hahaha – you two crack me up!
Rafael” . . . and rub their skin with tenderizing lotion during three days before slaughter.”
Chris: Oh! – hahaha.
No! you use it to make a skin dress:
Hehehe , yes, good idea, I can do that and by now the body is 73 I will have some left over [skin] I can make a pillow !!! hehehe
Geir will kill us when he reads all this, I am going into hidding for sure .”)
Rafael, but we are doing the right thing after all this post of Geirs is about “”Preferences””
we are just reversing the brainwashing, we apply ”humor tech’.’and it works..
Rafael: “No! you use it to make a skin dress:”
Chris: hahaha! damn!
Rafael, you stated it very well.
Hola tocayo!! 🙂
Hi tocayo, glad to see you ( virtually of course )
Rafael SN: Rafael, you stated it very well.
Chris: +1
Geir
“In totality, one should and would be both able and factually experience everything”. Doesn’t this “everything” include “preferences”, “weaknesses” ? I know how you meant the above and it’s just semantics….but why is there a “should, would”? Allowing myself, surrendering to being “weak” and “prefer” what do I get?
What do you mean by “factually”? Examples….?
Marianne, wonderful post!………. ”Allowing myself, surrendering to being “weak” and “prefer” what do I get?”
El: what do you get? Experiences, more you have regardless whatever you experience, because of having them you are a richer wealthier because you experience.. Surrendering simply means experiencing, facing …and keep it in mind that one only can have one experience at a time.
“one should and would be both able and factually experience everything” – I said it was true. Now I am modifying my view. It is perfectly enough if one is WILLING to experience anything. That frees the mind. It means whatever comes your way, you will not have any resistance to experience it. Life will solve the rest as by this, one grants Life Free Will to show the one experiences which otherwise cannot be postulated by one’s mind.
Geir, go and rob a bank instead…:)
God has no preferences.
There is no God… and that is a fact….unless by “God” you mean consciousness.
Fact? How so?
you really believe that? Did you had that view when you were one?
freebeeing, how do you know ?. your comment seems like God is a kind of confused soup.
AllThatIs could not possibly have a preference. If God had a preference would it not be manifest? Identities have preferences.
freebeing: All That Is could not possibly have a preference.
Chris: Yes she could.
freebee, I don’t believe in identities and it is my opinion that there is a manifested preference by God .
Rafael…”Should not be eaten raw, hardboil them first.” by now you too need MSG, you old bird! nice to see you!
E Nice to see you too 🙂
– “Having preferences means having weaknesses.” –
That can be. But it also can mean enrichment.
It is not possible to be without preferences. So life itself would be “weakness”? Is it??
Having all the people around who have different preferences is a tremendous enrichment for me. I enjoy it!
Examples:
>Somebody studies nature and tells others about their experiences – I find it very interesting.
>All those artists who have preferences for different directions – It gives me tremendous joy.
>Even in the negative I am profiting. I don’t like accounting and am glad there are people who do it, so I don’t have to (I admire them for sitting all day long in an office doing this “boring” book keeping – without walking away).
>All the different professions the people have preferences to do and do it good. Great!
>The different (even sometimes weird) hobbies of others. Interesting and even sometimes amusing to me regarding what games a person can construct and spent their time on.
>All those abilities which go along with preferences. I would not want to miss it.
It depends on what you DO with the preferences!
Preferences means differences! And when it is not used in a negative exploit in the sense of “us vs them” or in a suppressive manner – great.
I really appreciate most of people’s preferences. Even if I have no interest in it, I appreciate the existences of the differences. It gives character.
THE SPICE OF LIFE!
me: “It is not possible to be without preferences. So life itself would be “weakness”? Is it??”
Chris: Maybe try playing off Geir’s “preferences” against the word “choices” and see how preferences is slanted and weighted as compared to choices. I am mincing a little bit but the difference is there (or can be made to be there!)
I swapped out preferences with options and that works really well for me.
Keep those options open! Choose among options based on current circumstances instead of pre-selected options or habitual choices of options.
I like this word options.
Options, optimal, opt — Latin optionem (nominative optio) “choice, free choice, liberty to choose”
yes Maria… you have picked your apple from the basket.. to you option sound smoother, that word holds less energy than preference, in fact optimum even has musical sound to it. Its color is yellow, with a though of orange and some infuzed silver, preference has colors of gray, washy oranges and it is less lively in movement,
Yes. I can make a magnum opus out of options!
hehehe yes you can.. I am going to take a look what words mean to you, since they flow like river .. Oh I got it….you are playing with a golden ball, tossing it in space.. of course you dont have a body, totaly invisible, tossing that ball gives you Joy..you love it..and you love the eartly expression which are the words, composition of words 🙂 lovely
Maria: “I like this word options.”
Frost:
TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;
Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
Chris: “Preferences, Choices, Options, or Iterations???”
Chris: Preferences, choices, options AND iterations!! YES!!!!
Tks Chris. Yes, I thought at “choices”, actually at “decisions”- which are very often influenced by preferences. Of course there can be weaknesses with it, in the sense that you can be stuck with decisions in one direction due to preferences, excluding the other directions what then can lead to limitations, mistakes and ignorance. But I didn’t want to see “preferences” only from the negative side and then all the positive, enriching sides came to my mind.
(“It is not possible to be without preferences. So life itself would be “weakness”? Is it??”: This was more an uncontrolled spout of thought) 🙂 – Karola
Karola: (“It is not possible to be without preferences. So life itself would be “weakness”? Is it??”: This was more an uncontrolled spout of thought) 🙂 – Karola
Chris: Not bad! We do understand that to play a game we have to give up some strengths.
Good reality! Wight you are…
the above should read ”right”
Preference: first choice, partiality, favourite, fondness, liking, inclination, penchant.
To me preference is when I look at the subject, object, I evaluate compare judge asses what is its value importance and that comes from just how much understanding I have about that subject, item and I choose accordingly and we know we doing that act because we are stimulated.
One no longer have preference when one gives up judging .. then there is no value.. But I rather bite into a sweet juicy apple than a sour one, so I judge.
The young man, chooses his next move in order to win, it seems winning is the way out when one play any game.
me
I get you! Like what you write!
MT….
HaHaHa….as I am looking at it NOW, I can’t find anyTHING called Scientology or anyBODY called a Scientologist, also there is nothing to achieve….
Elizabeth……Wonderful for you that no matter what you look at you can dismiss, let go, not-is, deny that it is something, has meaning, has existence.
I wonder why are you blogging, there is not much point doing that since you are not writing about anything which has importance therefore it has no valueless, it is meaningless and we really gotten your message by now that you are nothing.
Since you are not here to learn because you already know all there is to know because you have arrived in to the high state of Nothingness in to total Enlightenment.
Since you have no explanations, you can’t even teach ”nothingness” since we too know all about that subject.
If you are here to show off that you are superior because you float in nothingness no point doing that either.
You see Dear Nothingnes: who sees nothing, feels nothing, please listen: when we look into the mirror we too see the same.. as you do, nothingness because we know that image in the mirror is not us but the body.
So let’s go from here, talk to us ….
Elizabeth
LIKE you….really, really do….that’s how I feel now!
delighted, so there is something than ? since what one feels is not nothing..
You GOT me! I posted some stuff earlier….I especially liked that song that just came up intuitively…listen to it if you like….it’s on the U-logy thread…yes, that no-thing is not nothing…sometimes this, sometimes that….whatever is being created…
Ohhhhhh than I wonder who enjoys that nothing and who judges that there is something that one song is better than the other, who feels good when listens to s song, when have sex or eats pankes.
You talk of nothing-ness yet you only SEE Mest. you are what its called talking out from both side of your mouth in other words double talker..
You say you only create in the moment… yet you continualy refer to MEST and you only experience MEST, and nothing but MEST.. so dont ask me to swallow the Enlightenment bit… I never read any other reality, view than what is around you.. music, sex, eating, more music,
yes…one “side” is no-thing, the other “side” is every-thing….love both
MT ””LIKE you….really, really do….that’s how I feel now!””
E; care to explain what you mean by that? I am totally clueless..
“like” means that when I read what you write I feel “your” attention, care, kind of “positive” “flow”, also “humour”….these are words, but I feel them as an “energy” “package” in a very “clear space” – “good” to “get it” – that’s LIKE for me NOW…..
yes, some describe that space as ”vastness” and they feel safe in it.
I have received more than a few emails from those who has similar experiences.
In case anyone is interested in “personal will’s falling away” …..(it is connected to preferences as I see it).
(also,you can google “surrender” by him)
MT
“In case anyone is interested in “personal will’s falling away” …..(it is connected to preferences as I see it).””
could you explain what you mean by that?
Elizabeth
Being the experience itself in the “now”.
MT… I thought you are going to say something which will explain what you have written.. What do you mean ”by falling away?”
I am aware of the ”now” bit.. that you dont need to explain.
Elizabeth
Thanks for your question….it has helped me to cognitions! I will answer tomorrow as it is late here now.
Very good and I want to read what was your cog too. Jo eszakat!
Elizabeth
Cognition: the falling away of the belief that ” I ” can cause any effect on “anybody” or “anything” except myself. In other words, I am the cause over the illusions I create, which have an effect on nobody else than me. The falling away of the belief that ” I ” am in control of anything or anybody except my own illusions. The fallling away of the illusion of the ” I ” as a separate “entity”. The falling away of any “preferences” in the “now” which have their origins in some “values” that ” I ” created in the “past” and I am still creating them….
More to come….
thank you Marianne!
Elizabeth
Cognition: the ability of not believing (finding truth) in a thought. A thought is a conclusion which was created when something was not perceived as it was. A thought becomes a “value” to hold and rely on for “future” use. The basis of a thought is: I like it or I don’t like it. I like it, because it is a pleasurable sensation. I don’t like it because it is not pleasurable. Both are based on the fear of not being able to create again whatever was created. Whenever the ability to create anything is there, the “need” to create is gone. There is the ability (choice) of being “still” (not creating) or creating without the “need” to create. So there can be clear perception of what there is.
again thank you….
Elizabeth
There are some more too but I don’t want to take more space here….what Adyashanti is speaking about in the video is pretty much the case with “me”. I couldn’t describe it better…for me it’s not quoting him….its experience preceeded what he is speaking about.
That’s why I “found” him….
He’s right, but Magnus quotation reffers to chess first of all…When I was a child (11 y.o) I was the 3rd chessplayer in Bucharest (Romania) at my age group. Unfortunately, I’ve had “preferences” (football and music) which turned to become…”weaknesses”… Right now I still love chess very much, but due to my “preferences” I never become a champion.
In conclusion, Magnus Carlsen is 100% right. You want to achieve a specific goal in your life, forget about preferences….
Dragos: “He’s right, but Magnus quotation reffers to chess first of all…”
Chris: Cool. I understand it better in the context of your reference.