Interdependence Puns

Edit 2: Dammit, now I've set off the automod. Okay, I get the point, I'll go.

Edit: I seem to have stepped on some toes with this post, and I apologize. I didn't come to proselytize, preach, or convert, I came because I had a curiosity; if I didn't respect Judaism or Jews, I wouldn't have come at all. The best I can tell you is that I've come in good faith to learn and to ask questions, not to offend or convert, and I'm sorry that I came across otherwise.

The easiest way I can semi-explain non-duality from a monotheist perspective would be with the question: What if God was all there was? Or more, what if God was everything, and everything was God? (Using whatever definitions for "God" and "everything" are biggest for you.)

The notion being that all aspects of existence are, in a very literal way, unified, the same way atoms are unified in being a molecule, molecules are unified in being a cell, and cells are unified in being a body, we are unified in being a God/universe/Tao/is-ness. Likewise, one could go a step further, and say that each of those pieces are interdependent: If a cell changes, so does the body, and if the body changes it affects the cells; the identity of each piece is dependent on all the other pieces, none of them are independent, none of them could be what they are, on their own. If you change an atom, you change the universe, and vice versa; not only is no man an island, no man can be an island, nor can anything else (even actual islands.)

So that's the crib notes for nonduality and interdependence.

Lao Tzu called this oneness the Tao.

Hindus call this oneness Advaita Vedanta.

If you're into physics you might be familiar with the idea that our universe could be described with a single quantum wave function.... if we didn't know about quantum wave functions.

I'm a Taoist, I find the Tao a chef's kiss metaphor for the universe as I understand it, I think of it as "everythingeverness," though even that is limiting in its way. I just wondered if Judaism had any parallel or similar strains of thought? But then maybe seeing God in all things has some overlap with idolatry or something, I think I heard a Christian tell me that once, but they're weird.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time

So we're all here in this sub because we have codependent tendencies. I always HEAR about this promised land of interdependence but I can't imagine what it would look like at all. My mind has codependence and independence, but no interdependence. What is it supposed to look like?

Can anyone recommend a good human psychology book that helps explain how interdependence works? Or barring that, any kind of media? I'd even be curious to see popular culture references, like TV shows with a good interdependent couple.

I really just want to develop an intimate knowledge of what a healthy relationship could look like because I certainly don't have any experience of one.

Any thoughts or suggestions are appreciated.

This is the last post in my series of The Memorable Journey. It's been great getting all of your thoughts on what makes a memorable leveling journey for you all. As Pantheon talks more about class identity, I've been thinking about how that affects role interdependence in groups.

What, in your opinion, has killed class/role interdependence in the open world of current MMO's? Which MMO did it best and how?

My two cents are these:

- Damage classes being able to kill enemies faster than they can be killed combined with the ability of some pets to take tons of damage has killed the need of tanks (obviously still needed in dungeons).

- Crowd control classes disappeared in MMO's because tank classes became too strong.

Happy Interdependence Day to all ONANites! Gaudeamus Igitur! E Unibus Pluram and all that sort of thing! ✨🎉🎇🎆🎈🎊

As a German I've been excited about not needing to setup and consistently use FB just be able to buy and also keep games for the OQ.

But seems like nothing actually changed, yet. Or did I miss something?

Yeah he really says this and without a trace of irony.

I picked up some Alan Watts literature and read it real close, and I was really surprised to read him saying things like, "No one can choose to love someone else," and "spiritual teachers are really just there to trick you into accepting that there is no such thing as higher truth" and "good and evil are really illusions and don't exist" and "the real point of life is just to go deeper into ecstasy and pleasure and anything deeper than that is stupid" (literally he says "stupid")

That's not the vibe I got when I listened to him--it was like the person I see when I watch him on YouTube is totally different than the person I come across when I just read his literature, like his guru persona and his ideas come across very differently when the theater is stripped away and all you're left with is the words themselves. And when I read about his life in his biography and elsewhere, the picture that emerges is not super great and I was wondering if that's a thing people know about here at all??

For example, if someone gets an illness that is caused by environmental toxins or infection or genetics, is that due to their own karma? What if it is due to the actions of someone else--the chemical company owner who dumped those toxins, the person who spread the infection, the parent that chose to give birth despite knowing they have genetic illness ?

I know its said that only a buddha or arahant will understand karma fully. But I am also wondering if I am being offput by some ideas of buddhism because of a wrong view or subtle wrong interpretation... like I know karma just means causality and isnt supposed to always have moral import , but still , I dont understand why my chronic illness would be due to my own karma if it's something that is caused by stuff in the greater world...

Someone on this forum once said buddhists think some illness is caused by your own karma ripening and some is caused by natural causes.
Was that an orthodox view, and where is the line there?

Also, thinking about this aspect of karma just in illness led me to be much more curious about the way the concept is applied in general. If humans are interdependent, and can affect each other and their environment and stuff in various extremely complex and interlocking ways... which seems like something understood in buddhism, with indras net as one example of a metaphor for it --then how is it that what happens to one is always because of ones own karma... as if one is not affected by others. Is there a concept of collective karma? Is there a concept of codependent rather than dependent origination?

I'm seriously not trying to be ignorant or anything, this is just something that stuck out to me.

Hey, I’m writing a large piece on the normative and structural links between trade interdependence and the democratic peace (ie: are more democratic states more likely to trade with each other, and does this effect peacefulness).

If anyone knows any articles around this topic that would be very helpful. I know a few scholars in this field, but maybe there’s some obscure ones 🙂