Reply #38: the positive and the negative are both needed

[dusmcj]

a second aspect of reply:

the positive, or constructive, and the negative, or destructive, are both needed - Freud rightly identified that the first step in healing is identifying the problem, only then can you proceed to fixing it. The idiotic flatulence which has been emitted since Bush I from the Bush League wing of American society about "being Positive" (another in the list of cathartic/affective codephrases which that tribe has given currency) misses the point that internal virtue is not enough when confronting obstacles, you just die tired. A little healthy analysis, cutting with the sword of reason, identifies the nature of the problem and allows a far more efficient application of constructive energy to remediating the situation. We can reach for archetypal structures like the Hindu trinity of Creator, Preserver and Destroyer, but we don't need to, although they do give us historical validation from a tradition that has survived the millenia. We can see the practical need for the disassembly of defective structure before its replacement with new, more functional construction. Before our eyes. Strength and being filled with life's juices, ready to employ them against whatever adversity may arise, are just tools, and they alone are not sufficient, because like I said, employing only them, you just die tired. The willingness to fulfill our destiny as conscious, volitional individuals with a _chosen_ (as opposed to received) ethical and rational compass, and to place all such tools under the control of our own small manifestation of the Godhead (what in more religious times would have been called the Divine Spark, or the Image of God) is a requirement.