RYUC symbol

 

Grounded and ungrounded assessments

 

A Releasing Your Unlimited Creativity discussion topic

Copyright 2009 by K. Ferlic, † All Rights Reserved

 
RYUC Home   Why free?    Contact     Links     Programs     Services      Contributions   List of Topics
 

In working with the ego and the story we tell there are two type of assessments that we make in our story about ourselves. They are grounded assessments and ungrounded assessments. Grounded assessments are those that can, or would, or could, be agreed to by one or more impartial observers such as a set of jurors in a court. Ungrounded assessments are the conclusions that would not be supported. Jurors look at the facts as they relate to the law as the standard for comparison as to the truth of the situation. Was the law violated or not. In regards to a assessment we make about our life - part of that story we tell, the observer(s) would look at the facts and see if our conclusions are supported by these facts as to the way things really are and not necessarily perceived by us by how we choose to view life through the illusion of mind. The more we can tell our story from the perspective of the detached witness, the greater the portion of our assessment will be grounded.

In telling our story, we should become aware of what assessments we make about our life are grounded and which are ungrounded. In telling our story, one needs to review both the grounded and ungrounded assessments. Ungrounded assessments need to be reviewed and understood as to why they are ungrounded and how and why we are seeing the situation in an ungrounded fashion. For example to say, "I was a poor student in grade school," when in fact you were a average student getting all "Cís" on an A through E performance scale is an ungrounded assessment. That is, it is not supported by the facts and what the letter "C" actually means. Reviewing ungrounded assessments usual look to see if any standard of comparison is being used and whether or not that standard of comparison is a valid assessment or if it biased or limited in its view.

Additionally, we also need to reviewed the grounded assessments. Grounded assessments need to be reviewed to determine what standard of comparison is being used to determined if they are grounded. The reason for this is that there is what is called a "relative" ground. That is, we make an assessment against a standard of comparison that looks as though it is the truth of the situation when in reality there is a deeper truth that is available to us to use for comparison. For example we can say, "I am a good person because I can show you the receipts as to how I have donated money to worthy causes." We give as our reason the fact we can point to the standard of comparison that society says, "A good person donates money to worth causes," and we have the facts to support our assessment. Hence our assessment looks like a very well grounded assessment. We have all of society behind our assessment and the receipts to prove it.

However, if the standard we use is in any way flawed and not in our best interests as a unique creation, we will be creating a situation that actually harms us and is, in fact, an ungrounded assessment for there is a deeper ground that is governing our life. For example in donating, some are encouraged to give to others before they give to themselves. In principle sounds good and noble. However, we cannot give what we do not have. If we give to others and donít do our own minimum internal maintenance we will not function properly. In doing so, we will be robbing ourselves and teaching others how to rob themselves. It is much like a car. If we do not give the car gas and change its oil it will not function and it will be unable to do what we need it to do when we need it.

So too with our own being. Many live what appears to be a very grounded life but it is grounded in a set of standards that is doing harm to them at some level of their being. There is here, of course, a very find discernment between what we need and what we want. Each of us needs to explore ourselves very carefully to discover and explore exactly what are our needs such that if they are not met we will not function properly. On this point, our wants we can do without. It needs to be clearly understood is that what we need is unique to our being and most probably will not look exactly like anyone elseís needs. On this note it also needs to be remembered that the body has need that the mind does not understand so one cannot always use their mind to determined what the body actually needs. We have to learn to feel what the body needs by what gives it life and sustains its life.

In a similar way, ungrounded assessments are not necessarily bad. If we have facts that others do not have, they will view our assessments as ungrounded. However, if they had the facts then they could see our assessment as grounded. The issue then arises as to what standard are we using such that we see things differently and that would allow for other to see our assessment as ungrounded yet, when they realize the basis of our assessment, our assessment can be shown to be grounded. To communicate with another, we will have to share our standard to find agreement. Of course, the other individual(s) will have to accept our standard. For example, a physicist will say light can exist as a wave or a particle. To the casual observer, they will say the physicistís has an ungrounded assessment about light since light is not normally experiences as a particle. However, when the casual observer can use the same standards and facts as the physicist, the physicistís assessment becomes very grounded. What needs to be understood is no matter what assessment we make about our story of life, and how we perceive life, unless we share the same standard of comparison our interpretation will always appear to be ungrounded to another.

To know reality as it is, we must use a standard of comparison that is as close to the real workings of the universe as possible. To see the universe as it is, we must step out of mind and what we think and look for that most fundamental truth that never changes. We need to realize at the most fundamental levels, Creation does not always work the way we think it does. For example, water falling into the mountains will always ultimately flow to the sea. There may be many huge lakes along the way that causes the flow of the water to appear to stop, but the flow is always towards the lowest point, which is the ocean. Rain falling in Canada can flow into Lake Superior, then into Lake Erie and then into Lake Ontario only to flow into the Niagara River over the Niagara Falls and into the Atlantic Ocean. The ultimate ground point of the flow is the Atlantic ocean although the flow may look grounded if the water is stopped in any of the Great Lakes. Nevertheless, the ocean is the final point of flow for the rain that falls into the mountains that drain into Lake Superior from Canada. So too with any story we tell about our life. There is an ultimate ground point to our story about our life. The ultimate ground point only reveals itself after looking beyond the story we tell and the standard of comparison we are using to tell out story. We need to see where the real and ultimately flow of energy is going. In this regard, our life is a trajectory and only the whole life itself can give an indication to where we are going. To look at any segment or piece without considering the whole will be an ungrounded assessment.

Related topics
Creativity perspective and truth
Allow effectiveness to be our measure of truth

The Password Protected Area provides access to all currently posted (click for current loading) Releasing Your Unlimited Creativity related discussion files and applications.

Top

RYUC Home   Why free?    Contact     Links     Programs     Services      Contributions   List of Topics