The Balancing Act

Disclaimer: The phrase “the Balancing Act” in this essay, being a process of physics as well as a derived mental process, is partly speculative. The concept behind it is an idea of how things possibly work. It could just as well be different though. The idea is however not just an idea but an idea that seems to match with observation, my observation that is. Fundamental components of this idea are to be found in the glossary of definitions which is attached as an appendix. The essay on the Balancing Act reflects a thinking process. In the process I am repeating myself in order to help the validation of the thinking process. Hopefully this does not get in the way of a pleasant reading experience. The essay is mostly written from an I-perspective as it is reflecting a personal observation. In some cases the we-perspective is used when the plural is essential to the description of the situation. However, the statement in the we-perspective is still based on my personal observation. The statements made in this essay are not pretending to be factual or 100% accurate, but I think there is a good chance that they are or are getting there, which is the reason I have written them down.

*) means; See the glossary in the appendix for the definition.


See the appendix for the definition of terms.

The Balancing Act is the result of the combination of

  • Repetition
  • Systems
  • Diversity
  • Continuous change
  • A fixed Design

I can make a distinction between a physical balance and a mental balance. Some key elements of the mental Balancing Act explained in this essay are: relations and the extra step in managing relationships, perception, empathy, diversity and sharing. The idea of “the Balancing Act” is that I find peace of mind, being a state of mental balance, automatically when I am compliant with the Design, as the Design has designed me that way. When I am not compliant I will have feelings of anxiety. In order to try to make my situation compliant, I need to have an accurate perception of reality, an inaccurate perception will make my efforts miss the target. Reality is in a continuous Balancing Act of forces, in which Balancing Act I play my part, in order to find compliance. Reality around me forms a system, having sub-systems of processes being in a dynamic state of balancing forces derived from preferences, which preferences are leading to attraction and repulsion. The forces are in relationship with all other forces as they are part of the same system. The Balancing Act is performed within this relational context. The preferences are fixed in the Design. Physical preferences make up the laws of physics. Preferences for feelings make up the steering mechanism of my behaviour and of others. The systems making up reality, are the derived logical consequence of the combination of fixed preferences and the Process of continuous transformation or distribution of Energy. For me to be compliant with the Design, requires continuous adaption to the circumstances, which are changing continuously due to the Process of transformation or distribution of Energy. Due to the continuously changing circumstances, the balance of forces is being reconfigured all the time, in an effort to comply with the Design and to restore the disturbed balance, in a Balancing Act. This goes for the physical world having fixed preferences as well as for the mental world having fixed preferences for certain feelings. The balancing forces form a relationship and every force is in a relationship with other forces, making a network within a system. The Balancing Act is doing maintenance on relationships in order to make the relationships optimally beneficial, according to the Design.


Our world, as I observe it, is build up by repetitive processes making up structures*) of repetition. It is by repetition that I am able to observe, as my mind observes through recognition. The world consists of preferences, causing forces*) of attraction and repulsion. As these preferences are mainly fixed preferences, repetition occurs. This goes for the fundamental physical world, making the laws of physics, as well as for the social and mental world, which is derived from the fundamental physical world. All of these worlds are derived from the same Design*) and are systems*) of processes following the Process*) of the Design.

The world as I perceive it, is made of repetitive processes, as my brain is only able to register things which are repetitive. When I see an object, for example a chair, I can see this chair because my brain registers the shape of the chair which is projected in my eyes. I recognize the shape as I have seen it before. The very first time I see the chair my brain does not recognize it. Within milliseconds this changes, as I see it over and over again within milliseconds. If the chair was only there as a one-time event, I would not be able to see it, in fact I would not be able to recognize it as it is not present in my memory. The chair however is not a one-time event. It is indeed an event; not just a stand-still object, but a process. The chair consists of atoms and molecules forming structures in a process of many sub-processes on the atomic scale and smaller. It is because these processes are repetitive that the chair stays where it is and does not disintegrate. The chair is in fact a process of repetition. I can see the chair because of this repetition, which enables repetitive registration in my brain. Repetition is enabled by structures of balance. These structures are the result of the Design and the Process attached to the Design. The balance is in the heterogeneous diversity within a stable, dynamically balancing system, existing of patterns of repeating diversity, resulting in a status quo, a situation of relative rest, a rest-in-motion within the system.

The physical balance and the mental balance.

I can make a distinction between a physical Balancing Act and a mental Balancing Act.

The physical Balancing Act is the process in which forces are following the preferences as defined in the Design, leading to attraction and repulsion in a continuous dynamic of re-arrangement of structures of forces, due to the Process.

The mental Balancing Act is a similar process as the physical Balancing Act. My mental preferences are just as well defined by the Design and lead to preferences in feeling, leading to mental forces. The physical Balancing Act automatically and intrinsically follows the Design. As designed, balance is found through fixed preferences. The mental Balancing Act takes place in the mind, in a representation of reality*). The mental Balancing Act works as designed but its course depends on the accuracy of the representation of reality in my mind, on my perception*).

To illustrate the concept of the Balancing Act, here are a few examples of a Balancing Act in daily life practice, both physical and mental. First example is the dynamics between gravity and muscles, making me walk. This is a process of multiple forces working in togetherness in a system of action and reaction, in order to find the optimal situation in some dynamic form of balance, in a continuously changing circumstance.

A similar dynamic is working in my soul*); the combination of mind and feeling. The main forces here are feelings and thoughts*), in combination with the intrinsic preferences that I have for various feelings, resulting in a dynamic of attraction and repulsion in my soul. An example of the dynamic in the soul is the dynamic between personal interests and group interests. I can only think of my own interest or I can be totally dedicated to the group. Those are the two extremes of the spectrum. In order to live in a stable situation of peace of mind and good feeling, I will need to find the balance between these two extremes. This happens in the context of a continuous process of adaption to new circumstances, in which choices are made in a continuous process of evaluation, in order to retain and restore some form of balance near an optimum*). In theory this goes automatically as long as preferences are being followed according to the Design. The optimum takes care of all interests, in a way that is in accordance with the Design. In this essay this process is called “The Balancing Act” and can be physical or mental, as seen in the above two examples. Another example is the situation of me feeling hungry. If I do not get food for some time, certain processes working in my body, having physical forces, move away from the balance which resides near the optimum, as it is designed. I am designed in such a way that I will feel hungry as a result, which I regard as a non-preferred feeling. The Balancing Act will make me start to eat, in order to restore the balance between forces of preferred attraction and repulsion and this Balancing Act will also make me stop eating at some point. 

Mental forces depend on perception. When perception is accurate in its representation of reality, the mental forces align with the Design, leading to a mental balance, a peace of mind, intrinsically. However, when I’m in a situation of disturbed balance I may feel troubled. This is the case, for example, in a mental Balancing Act where something is expected from me which I find difficult or which I can’t deliver. Something is expected from me, which makes me feel threatened. I feel forces of expectation, of risk of failure and of risk of disturbed relationships. The Balancing Act I’m in, is about managing my relationships in the context of reality. In case of failure of living up to expectations, I may or may not be able to repair the involved relationship. However, in any case of failure, I can rely on the Design, which I am part of, to find a new optimum for my situation according the Design and find renewed peace-of-mind in this, according to the Design.

Balance is found in repetition.  A balanced situation, forces being in a balanced status quo of attraction and repulsion, may seem to be static but does in fact consist of multiple processes which are repeating in some kind of rotating fashion. This happens on the relatively small scale of atoms and molecules forming patterns of matter. It also happens on a larger scale. For example, the process of orbiting planets, the rhythm of day and night and my well-being being dependent on the alternation and the combination of leisure and work or of moments of pleasure and moments of hardship. These are rotating patterns of processes in repetition over a comparatively long time-span and are similar to the patterns on the small scale and short time-span. Both are the result of forces being in a system of forces of preference, pointing to different locations, to different directions, forming a dynamic balance around an optimum as designed, moving to and away from the optimum but in a repetitive manner, not moving away further than designed.  A Balance is never static as all is in continuous movement of change, due to the Process, yet a balance is in a status quo consisting of dynamically repetitive processes.

Being aware of the Balancing Act in nature, as a logical structure of diversity, can help me with having a sound mental state-of-being, as it helps with aligning me with reality. A sound mental state-of-being means feeling good in a structural way. Performing a “reality check” is helpful in life as it makes what happens next, more predictable and reliable and it enables anticipation on what happens next. Anticipation is essential for life*). The Balancing Act is a physical process but has an equivalent in my mind as my mind holds a virtual view of reality. The Balancing Act as a mental process, is in the anticipation of the Process and in trying to be accurate in it. The Balancing Act as a mental process, is being aware of reality in an accurate manner which entails awareness of the dualistic or heterogeneous nature of things and entails for the mind not to be one-sided in thinking. Physical balance exists in the fullness of reality and is in the inclusion of diversity within a system. My mental imbalance is in the incomplete perception of reality when part of reality is being overlooked and essential inclusion of diversity is missing. My mental balance is in the awareness of the full diversity of the forces which exist within a stable or dynamically balancing system. Balance occurs when a system exists in diversity, which diversity brings certain dynamic stability. The Balancing Act, mentally, is in the awareness and inclusion of the whole system, taking into account all relevant aspects not just a part of them. The Balancing Act is like bookkeeping; make sure to book both credit and debit and to have a bottom line which is 0 (in balance).

So far,

What is said in this essay may not be very clear or may not make much sense at all. In the next lines I will spend some more thoughts about what I have stated above, hoping to make things clearer. In the process, I am repeating myself as part of the thinking process and in order to make my point. Hopefully this does not get in the way of a pleasant reading experience. In order for the reader to know what I am talking about, I think it is necessary to give attention to the definitions which are mentioned in the appendix. Some of these definitions are explained in more details in other posts of “Blogpondering”. Meanwhile, I think it is helpful to think of the world around us as being processes, including ourselves. I am a process, part of a bigger process, connected to other processes and consisting of many sub-processes. This means I am not a static system and not a stand-alone system but I am in a continuous flow of development, in connection with other processes. Just like everything and everyone else.

The Balancing Act.

All I am is the result of and can be traced back to, the processes in nature and the laws of physics. My behaviour and my needs, my economy*), it all is derived from the laws of physics, the Process of cause and effect and the preferences that are set by nature as the rules to play with. It is these rules of preferences which point the processes, being part of all this, to an optimum. I myself am one of these processes. All around me and in me, there are points of optimal functioning, according to preferences, as designed. The Balancing Act is continuously looking for the optimal way of functioning in ever changing circumstances having fixed preferences, set according to the design. The Balancing Act is having an anchor in the Design and knows, through the Design, what to look for as an optimum while continuously being confronted with the Process of change.

The Balancing Act is about the dynamic processes that are part of the unchanging Design. In order to feel at ease, structurally, I need to comply with the Design, which means I need to comply with the way I am designed. The Design is a fixed given, but part of the Design is the dynamics of the Process that presents me with an ongoing stream of changes in my environment and continuously changing values of parameters that I need to adjust to. So in order to comply with the unchanging Design, I need to continuously adapt to the circumstances which the Process is presenting and confronting me with. The optimal situation for me to be in, is living in compliance with the Design. If not, I have trouble to anticipate the Process, which increases the chance to find myself in a situation which is not beneficial for me. I feel comfortable when compliant with the Design because I am part of the Design; the Design designed my design and my design holds feelings in which I have preferences and which guide me towards a direction determined by the Design. Not being compliant presents me with unfulfilled needs and unsustainable provisions. The Balancing Act is a continuous movement to and from an optimum. I can reach an optimum but not for long as circumstances are changing at all times. I can stay close to the optimum of the Design if I can adapt to the changes in circumstances accordingly. Being in the vicinity of the optimum I feel relatively happy or calm or carefree.

Imbalance is the result of the continuous changes around me and in me, due to the Process, in combination with the need to comply with the never changing Design. As I am subject of change, I need to adjust in order to stay compliant. The changes due to the Process, however, are derived from the Design and are in compliance (or trying to get there) by definition, except those which derive from the mind and are the result of an inaccurate perception of reality, intentionally or by lack of understanding*). It is the view in my mind which is incompliant. The Balancing Act is the continuous struggle for me and other people, to comply with the never changing Design in the ever changing circumstances, due to the Process. However, as long as I can synchronize the virtual reality in my mind with the reality around me, I can follow the Design and be balanced according preferences automatically. The problem is that this synchronization does not happen automatically. In order to have this synchronization I need my mind to adjust to change, all the time. So I may find balance within my confined system of processes at some point but it will never last for long since I’m not able to adapt instantly to the ever changing circumstances, be it within the confined system or be it because there is always some interaction with the outside world.

An example of disturbed balance which troubles me, is sickness; I’m in pain and I feel sad. I feel the forces of disturbed processes of anticipation, which my life and the biological processes in me, are. Balance will be restored when I am healed but there is a possibility I will not be healed in which case I keep being confronted with a reality of disturbed balance. The Balancing Act in these cases is problematic as there is a lack of physical balance. It may help me in my mental Balancing Act, in which I need to find the optimum in the given situation, to accept the situation I am in. I can accept the situation as a situation which is, in the end, part of the basic principles of the Design, which I am part of. The key to acceptance is the fact that I am part of the Design and what happens to me may seem to me as an attack, but it is not an attack on the Design as it belongs to it. What is happening to me is all part of the game and does not happen to me only. Therefor I can still feel belonging to the Design, included and loved. I may feel lonely, abandoned and betrayed but I have reasons not to.

If I do find balance, it means nothing is pushing me or pulling me at that time. It means I’m living in harmony*) with my surroundings and my surroundings with me. In this situation, my surroundings and me, are together forming a system of processes, having several forces due to preferences, pointing to different directions in a compensating way, which results in a balance of satisfaction, in accordance with the Design, leaving me without the pressure, from the Design, for me to adjust. This situation is soon to be disturbed by forces from other interacting processes. The Balancing Act is a relational activity, as the demand for adjustment is coming from my connections with the world around me.

Relational. *)

When feeling anxious I can ask myself, is there a physical reason for it? The answer may well be no, in which case the reason is probably in my relationships. I may have a disturbed relationship or I may see a risk of having a disturbed relationship. Often it is just me criticizing me and often I do this on behalf of criticism of others which in many cases is actually imaginary. The mental Balancing Act starts with accurately recognizing the imbalance, being a physical imbalance and/or an imbalance between forces in my relationships. A reality check is a prerequisite for performing the mental Balancing Act. For the physical Balancing Act there is no need for a reality check, by definition. The mental Balancing Act is intertwined with the physical Balancing Act as mental balance is derived from physical balance. That is why my health has priority. 

A balance is a system of forces which are in relational togetherness. One needs the other, in order to find an optimum within the system. The optimum is determined by the fixed preferences in the Design. In order for a system of two forces to be in balance, they need to be each other’s opposite, meaning point in an opposite direction*). A system of more than 2 forces can have forces which are pointing in a similar direction and still be in balance because of the compensation of the remaining forces within the system. I reckon it is a matter of combination of two possibilities; a force which attracts and a force which repels.

Because I’m not a stand-alone system but connected with my environment and with humanity, I am in a dynamic environment which presents a continuous challenge for me to try and stay in compliance with the Design. The Design is a fixed fact but the Process which comes from the Design is highly dynamic. In combination with the relationships I am in, which are part of my environment, this results in a complex of dynamics in which I have to find my way back to compliance with the Design in a never ending effort not be driven off. I call this the Balancing Act because I need to find the balance, in which all involved relationships are beneficial for all who are involved. This results in a field of forces working on me, working on how I feel. All these processes are part of the Design and for me to feel at ease, my mind needs to be compliant with the Design, with how things are. That means I have to work on a fruitful relationship with the processes around me as far as these processes are part of the Design. Everything is part of the Design, except some of the processes which come from the mind. These are the processes coming from a mind which has an inaccurate view of the Design and of the reality derived from the Design. These processes are prone to be non-compliant with the Design. I am a process which is part of the Design and so is everyone else. My perception of the Design, concerning the reality around me, is often inaccurate. As a result, what is going on in my mind is not in compliance with the Design.

Once I am in tune with the Process, feelings of anxiousness disappear. I am in harmony with my surroundings and I do not feel pressured to adjust. Once I am in tune like this and aware of the reason and mechanism behind it, taking all relationships into account, a resonance of combined added value can occur and an annihilation takes place of steering feelings of anxiety, resulting in a feeling of inner peace, satisfaction and joy, in which I feel appreciation for my relationships and for myself and in which I experience my relationships as being of beauty*). 

The Balancing Act is about relationships being optimally beneficial, according the fixed preferences of the Design. These relationships can be between physical forces (according laws of physics), between physical and mental forces (my adaption to nature) or between mental forces, which are human relationships. In order to find the optimum in the Balancing Act, all parties involved in a relationship, need to be satisfied. The optimum, the bottom line purpose of the relationship, is not in this, nor is it in the satisfaction of any of the parties involved. The bottom line, the optimum, is determined by the source of the relationship; the Design. The relationship, as being a dependency, exists as a result of evolution and selection. The relationship as a product of evolution, is the result of approval by the selective process and stems from the cases where there is mutual satisfaction in the relationship. These are the relationships which will evolve to the next generations. If not, the relationship will not survive the evolutionary process. This is the consequence of populations being less able to perform well, without the members working together. That is the reason why we can find the optimum at mutual satisfaction, as long as this satisfaction is based on reality. It is not because of my own interest that I find an optimum but it is because it is how things are designed. My personal economy is dependent on the surrounding economies which I am connected with. These economies are all equally important as they are all the result of the selective process of evolution. My Design tells me to take the feeling of others into account. My Design does that by using my feelings. This has to do with the interaction which follows after connected economies are satisfied or dissatisfied. It also has to do with the potential of cooperation. Due to continuously changing conditions, the field of forces, which forces represent the involved economies, is in continuous motion, presenting the need for me to perform in the Balancing Act, which is continuously looking for the optimum, in the direction which my feelings are pointing me to. In order to feel good I need to make sure I have a sound relationship with the people around me; these are relationships without unresolved conflicts and without feelings of threat.

The extra step.

I can also take an extra step, not just taking the relationship for granted but taking joy in having the relationship. The extra step is being aware of the value of the relationship not being neutral but being valuable, having added value. I can feel a great difference in having relationships holding fear, anxiousness and grudges**) on one side, relationships having a neutral feeling on another side and last but not least, relationships which I value and in which I can see beauty and joy. The latter relationship contributes in setting me free from a feeling of loneliness and it enables me to contribute to my surroundings by being part of the network of the relations around me. Being aware of this contribution, as it utilizes my intrinsic valuable natural properties in accordance with the Design, brings me a feeling of satisfaction, calmness and joy. In this way, I am part of the optimization of the function of the network, which is in fact optimizing the top level (e.g. humanity) of a breakdown structure, and I can feel joyful seeing the beauty of the added value of the individual people around me, including my own. All, just because it is according to the Design.

In theory I can have valuable relationships with anybody. In practice this appears not to be so easy. What helps me in making my relationships valuable to me, is looking at people as being processes and of a person as being a process, which process is the result of an overarching parent Process, all processes being part of the Design, just like me. All these processes have feelings, the same feelings I have, and they all have a personal perception, which is inaccurate, just like mine. However we do share the same feelings, working as an incentive, in the same way, as Designed.

**) When I hold a grudge, I’m not looking at someone according reality but instead I’m looking with a double standard; “I’m more important than you are or my feelings are more important than yours.” This double standard is not accurate, not from the point of view of the Design. The attached attitude does not contribute to cooperation. Apart from being based on a double standard, a grudge is also typically looking at the past (where as jealousy is looking at the future). What is relevant however, is the now and the anticipation on the future. Lessons from the past can be used to help anticipating the future but a grudge which is persistent, is blocking the anticipation, needlessly as it looks at the past and it disturbs relationships in the presence. A grudge does not serve any purpose other than my own feelings from the past. It does not benefit anyone. It is helpful to get rid of the grudge, to forgive and get on with life and to act according reality, the reality of now. Getting rid of the grudge feels better and benefits all. In terms of the Balancing Act, I am talking about forces, mental forces, being a representation of reality, which need to be aligned accurately with reality. In order to anticipate the future, it helps to have the virtual reality, which exists in my mind and memory, to be resembling reality as close as possible. Then, a balance occurs, having the sub-processes, being me and the people around me, working together, as one system, with the different forces, being different personal interests, preferences and feeling, pointing in a variety of directions in a way that is complementing and supporting each other, having all forces taking part in the Process that the system is designed for, making it optimally productive, anticipating the future as designed. This applies to my virtual reality as well as the virtual reality of others. A grudge gets in the way, as it does not hold the reality of the presence.


The Balancing Act is relevant in dealing with perception; dealing with my personal perception and the perception of others. The Balancing Act is looking at things from different perspectives, from different angles, from different points-of-view and is taking them all into account. Together these perceptions form the collection of forces which are balancing within the system.

I tend to see me as the centre of the universe. My personal perception in everyday life, seems for me to be of an absolute character; I tend to see things as the truth, as how they really are. I tend to see my reality as how it really is. That is because, often, it is all I know and I have to deal with it the best I can. It holds the interests which I seem to have and which I try to satisfy, but I will easily overlook some of my interests, as my perception of reality is not very accurate. My perception is one of the many ways of looking at things and my personal interest is one of the many other personal interests around. There are as many different perceptions of reality and potentially as many different interests as there are people, have been people and will be people. However, all these perceptions and interests are derived from one and the same reality, as in one and the same Design and one and the same Process. I can say everyone is living in a different reality as everyone lives in one’s personal space and time, having different experiences and dealing with different personal properties. We all experience reality differently, in our own distinct way, creating a personal virtual reality. The point is, that our personal space and time is a part of one and the same reality as a whole. We are sharing the same reality but looking at different parts of it. The view in my head which I see as being reality, only exists there, in my mind. It is not reality, it is a representation of reality and not a very accurate one and far from complete. At the same time we all live our unique personal lives in our own right, being part of reality. In order to find balance between my perception and seeing things in different ways, I need to be aware of my perception existing in my mind only, it is not reality. The mental Balancing Act is in giving all perceptions, having inaccurate representations of the forces working within the balancing system, but being representatives of those forces, the weight and recognition they deserve, not more and not less, including my own perception. 

The Design is static; it holds fixed preferences, preferences of physics and preferences for feelings. The preferences of physics lead to attraction and repulsion, interacting in the dynamic Process of continuous transformation or distribution of Energy, leading to a fixed pattern of cause and effect.  An accurate view on reality holds the steps of cause and effect, in the correct order. Mental compliance with the Design, is found in the static preferences as revealed in the laws of nature, combined with the adjustment to the dynamics of the Process of continuous transformation or distribution of Energy derived from the Design, which combination results in a reliable view on the process of cause and effect. I am in a relationship with the process of cause and effect, meaning with all processes around me. A complicating factor in this relationship occurs when the surrounding processes are not in compliance with the Design, which is only the case with processes derived from the mind.

The mental balance is a balance of forces like; male and female forces, work and leisure, freedom and discipline, pros and cons, good and evil, personal interest and interest of others, positive and negative, short term gain and long term gain, glass half full or half empty (= luxury problem) etc. These forces are human preferences, revealed by feelings. These are examples of dependency, of relationship; one cannot exist without the other. The balance however is not so much between the two, it is between many forces, many pros and cons. It all depends. The dependency of the two is based on the two being one, being one concept, being sub processes of one system, resulting in forces pointing to different directions within the one system, interacting in some kind of balancing way around an optimum. For example; Most of my problems I can consider as being luxury problems; I see a problem because I compare my situation with a situation which I prefer, but when I compare with another situation, the problem may disappear and may even appear to be the opposite; a blessing. It all depends on how I look at the situation and which forces in the system I focus on. Something similar happens when I try to find someone to blame for my situation; I focus on a particular force (my interest and perception) without taking the other relevant forces (other interests and perceptions) into account, resulting in a feeling of anxiousness (anger and frustration); mental imbalance. Another example is the concept of good and evil. There is no such thing; good and evil are evaluations of human interest and exist as such only in the mind. What is considered to be good and evil depends on who is judging, it is arbitrary. If, for example, humanity does not survive, we would say that’s not good, but the rest of the world (not being humanity) may well think differently. Good and evil, as being human evaluations, are part of one system, being humanity or perhaps a group of people or just one individual. It depends on what is being taken into account and the result depends on who is evaluating. Good and evil are relative. The evaluation is based on feeling and having preference for certain feelings. Forces are the result of preferences. There is attraction and there is repulsion; as if the world is digital. And there is balance in the combination; a balance between + and -. These two possibilities are the building blocks for systems consisting of dynamic balance.

Relevant to my well-being and the only things relevant to my well-being, are the processes in my mind. These are the processes which are prone to be incompliant with the design and causing imbalance, causing a movement away from the optimum. The Balancing Act is a process to retain or restore balance. The physical balance in the world around me is not primarily relevant to my well-being, as it is often a given. What is relevant to my well-being is my adaption to the physical world around me. In order to feel good I need to find surroundings which I am adapted to, meaning surroundings which fit my preferences, as developed by evolution, or I need to adapt to my surroundings. I can find this feeling either by changing my surroundings or by adapting myself to the given surroundings.


The Design has introduced feeling as steering mechanism in order for my life to comply with the Design, meaning in order to steer my reactions and adjustments while I am anticipating the Process. Feeling is the incentive which determines my choices. Feeling is a key ingredient in the process of anticipating the Process of the Design, which anticipation is typical for life, and feeling is as such, the indicator to reveal balance and imbalance. My feelings give an indication whether I am accurately anticipating the Process or not, taking into account all that is relevant to the system. The mental balance is found when all sub-processes involved, are recognized as being sub-processes of one parent process, in which process, the sub-processes in togetherness, make up a balanced system of diverse forces, following preferences of the Design. I see this as a breakdown structure*); there is one main process, consisting of many sub-processes which have sub-processes of their own and all the sub-processes together make up the main process. The Design has introduced feeling as a set of standard types of feelings and emotions, universally present amongst people. Types of feelings like happy, sad, scared and angry. One of the key ingredients of feeling as the steering mechanism, is the dependency of having a good feeling, on how others feel. This feeling is called empathy and it facilitates social behaviour. For example; I cannot be happy amongst others and hurting their feelings at the same time. Empathy makes clear that we are evolved as one species which depends on social cohesion. As a species we depend on each other. Empathy makes sure that the parent or hosting process is given the priority it deserves according to the Design. In order for the parent process to survive, it needs to protect its building blocks. In the case of humanity, this is the people. Empathy recognizes the dependencies in the hierarchy of the break-down structure of the total. It is not for people to decide who deserves a well-being and who does not, who may live or may not live or who is more important. It is up to the Design and the Design will tell us so, by means of empathy. I mean by empathy in general, as a phenomenon. That does not mean that individuals showing a lack of empathy, are not following the Design’s will. After all they are part of the Design but the Design’s purpose with empathy is effectuated by the population not by an individual. All individuals deserve a well-being in the same way as everyone else, regardless of the position of the individual in the hierarchy of the break-down structure and regardless of human judgement, unless it is decided differently by the Design. Empathy is aimed to protect the species rather than the individual. It does this not by logical thinking of the individual but through feeling of the individual. This results in different choices compared with an individual just using logical thinking, as empathy focuses on the feeling of others, trying to protect them. It is not based on human thinking, it is based on the Design. The aim is to serve the species and this can only be done through the individuals which the species consists of. Empathy is part of the Design and so is the diversity in empathy; some people experience more feeling of empathy then others. Diversity is a key ingredient in evolution and in the Balancing Act. Diversity is needed in order to have a process of selection, and diversity is needed in order to have dynamically balancing structures being fit to handle change and develop. Certain tasks are easier to do for people with less empathy and for some tasks it is the other way around. The Balancing Act is also applicable here; diversity in empathy forms a heterogeneous component of one system; people with different levels of empathy need to help each other by complementing each other, or compensating each other if you like. The use of variety in levels of empathy is comparable with, for example, people having fear of heights and people without fear of heights. People without fear of heights are useful for climbing on rooftops and building cranes, while people with fear of heights are useful in reducing risks. In case a task is performed by people with a low level of empathy, by leaders for instance, it may be wise to check whether the hosting process, according the Design, is getting the right priority, which is a task for the people having a high level of empathy. This also goes the other way around. The hosting process is the Balancing Act of the involved system, including all connected systems. Diversity in empathy amongst people, is part of the reality around me. In order to have an accurate view of reality I need to combine mine with the different perceptions of the people around me, together with other possible views or at least take them into consideration. This goes for perception of people with high level of empathy and for perception of people with low level of empathy, for perception of people with and for perception of people without fear of heights etc, etc.

Each mental process which deals with self-interest is in fact a way of anticipating the surrounding processes (See blog post “Life”). When dealing with my self-interests I encounter many hurdles, the interests of others, for example. How to deal with a conflict of interests between people, if the interests are in contradiction with each other? The answer is found in the Design, as the Design does not regard the 2 interests as separate entities. The Design looks at the 2 as being 1 system. The relevance of the interest is not about the individuals but it is about the species. Yet for the individuals, only one thing counts and that is their feeling. Therefore, a solution which is satisfactory for all involved, needs to take care of the feelings of all the individuals. In fact this is the key to the solution by Design, as the solution indeed takes both parties’ feelings in consideration, not just one, and the Design includes a steering mechanism for this; a feeling we call empathy. The conflict between people’s interests is only present in the mind, and in the case of the mind evaluating the interests separately, as separate units using different (double) standards. Using double standards is an inaccurate view on reality, which creates an imbalanced, unreliable perception. However, the imbalance is only created in the mind. In reality, in the reality of the Design, there is no such thing as 2 distinct interests which are to be evaluated separately, using different standards. There are 2 distinct interests but they need to be evaluated as being one, according to the Design. There is no solution if one of the interests is not taken care of, as both are equally part of the Design, being equally relevant and are to be evaluated with the same standard. When this fact of the Design is ignored by my mind, then any other option that is presented by my mind as a solution, will proof not to be a sustainable solution. In the end the Design will take over, inevitably.


I depend on others. We need each other, we cannot be just on our own. In terms of balance, I am living in a system of diverse forces of many distinct personal interests which are not pointing in the same direction but that need to find a balance together in order to survive and develop. This means that the forces need to coexist together within the system, since the forces depend on the system and the system depends on the forces. And on top of that, the forces need to adjust to the ever changing circumstances in order for the system to develop in the direction of compliance with the Design, which Design is represented by a Process of change. When I am talking of systems which are life, this adjustment is in the direction of anticipating the Process of the Design. In terms of mental balance I need to be aware of this Design of diverse forces depending on each other in the world around me and then to find the right mix of serving different interests. This means I need to find the direction for my own force to point to, in such a way that optimally contributes to the total, which includes all. The reason for me to do so is that it follows the Design, including my own Design and this results in having a good feeling.

The principle of systems, being sub-systems of the Total, existing by coexisting diversity in forces, is widely applicable and is relevant for a wide range of areas in my life. In order to have a stable, developing, evolving system, it needs to consist of a heterogeneous balanced variety of diverse forces, which are coexisting in cooperation, being complementary to each other.

People are united in diversity. I am not a stand-alone being, I am a piece of the puzzle called humanity. All human pieces of humanity are unique, showing a variety of diverse combinations of properties and perceptions. Diverse combinations are not only made by combinations of people, the puzzle pieces, but are also made by combinations of properties existing within one person, within one puzzle piece. It is the endless possibilities in combinations of properties and perceptions that makes up one person, which makes us unique human beings. This is the result of evolution and evolution does not occur on the level of individuals, it happens on the level of populations, over a timespan of many generations. It is the assembly of the variety of a population that is selected to be the optimal performer under the circumstances. The result of evolution is variety in a certain bandwidth, delivering specialists; unique special performers, which hold potential for added value to be released, when working together. On one hand I have my added value in my uniqueness and on the other hand this value is meant to be used in the context of the assembly, in cooperation. Outside the assembly of diversity of human beings, being on my own, my unique talent is going to waste. It is when I utilize or the assembly utilizes my uniqueness to the benefit of the assembly that I am optimally coming to value. In which situation I can feel good about myself and feel satisfied. 

Human relationships are about economics, interests, feeling and how all these depend on and interact with, others. My relations in daily practise, are often a one-to-one relationship, in which case it appears that a balance needs to be found between the interests of two people. However, the mechanism at hand is not one-to-one, the forces in the system are not just 2. The one-to-one system is part of a bigger system, containing many one-to-one systems, many one-to-many systems and many many-to-many systems, all being systems acting as sub processes of one overall process. This is the area of human relationships. (Something similar happens on the individual level; the human mind is dependent on numerous subsystems in the body. How I feel, depends on numerous physical factors within numerous subsystems in the body, being cells, organs and processes between organs, for example.) Looking at the one-to-one systems, these may well have their own unique details but the mechanism of a one-to-one relationship is the same for all one-to-one relationships. Regardless of the details, the one-to-one relationship is about interaction being optimally mutually beneficial. That is the principle of a relationship and anything else, meaning anything less beneficial, results in conflict, being noticed in a range of severity, going from mild to serious, depending on the perceived amount of deficit. In order to accurately determine the amount of benefit or deficit of a relationship, the relevant relationships which are connected, need to be taken into account. For example; I can have a relationship with my friend and be upset with him because he keeps me waiting as he is late for the appointment I have with him. At this point I can feel the benefit of our relationship not being optimal, at least not for me at the moment. However, the reason for my friend to be late could for example be, that he had to help his daughter or a friend or any other relation. In this situation, being on time for the appointment would deficit his relationship with the other and therefor it would deficit him and apparently deficit him more than being late for the appointment I have with him. When I take all these relationships into account I can come to the conclusion that my initial “calculation” of the amount of deficit for waiting, is not correct. I cannot ignore the economies of the relations that I am connected with, as I depend on these relationships and I therefor need to include them into the equation. Often I do not clearly see all the values that are part of the equation and I jump to conclusions, which are incorrect or inaccurate. I need to be aware of the fact that I often cannot see the equation in total, in which case I need to restrain from drawing conclusion and withhold from a calculation. Often it is the one-to-one relationship that is most prominent in my daily life and seems to have the most impact on my wellbeing and emotional state of mind. In maintaining this relationship I need to be aware of the context it is in. I am not a stand-alone being and in the same way, my relationships are not stand-alone systems. In fact, through the network of humanity, I am connected with all human beings and so are my one-to-one relations. In order to have my relationships being fruitful and optimally beneficial for me, I need to take all connected relationships, having an impact on me through the network and via my day-to-day relationships, into account. In this, I have to deal with enormous diversity in all my relationships which makes this a Balancing Act. Fortunately, what is collective between people is enormous too. For example, our DNA is the same for more than 99%, meaning we are processes all built on the same best practices, as determined by evolution. In a way, everyone is a different version of me and v.v. Performing the Balancing Act, I need to know that I’m a sub-process of the Process and so are all other human beings. To the Process, I’m not more important than other processes, we are all of value. When we get in each other’s way, chances are that we are not living to our full potential value. To live our full value we need to encourage each other and work together, in favour of the Process we are part of, which in return will result in our favour. At the same time, while doing this I need to maintain my unique authentic self, as the uniqueness of the people within humanity, is essential in this system. In this Balancing Act, it helps when I think of the people around me as being different versions of me, instead of seeing them as aliens. This helps me to recognize the similarities and the differences and see the value in it.


The Balancing Act is found in sharing; to give and to receive. It is said that it is better to give than to receive. This may not be agreed upon by everyone but I think everyone can agree that I am in a better position when I am able to give, compared to when I’m not, and that by giving I can have the satisfaction of being a contributor. Still, for me, giving is often not an intuitive thing to do. An additional incentive seems to be required; a clear sign of purpose for the contribution, which contribution otherwise may feel like being a sacrifice. So, is it better to receive than to give? I reckon the answer is yes and no; both giving and receiving need to go together in order to have a good feeling about it and in order for it not to be perceived as sacrifice. The feeling can be found in sharing; a system of giving and receiving in a mutual way.

Sharing is beneficial for all within the system. In order to see the benefit, it is essential to oversee the total system involved. It is a “1 and 1 equals 3” mechanism as sharing enables cooperation; added value is being generated. People may think sharing is not beneficial for them, as they are not overseeing the total system involved. The point is, that it’s not their benefit that matters, it is the benefit of the system that matters and that will automatically benefit them as well, provided it is handled correctly. In many cases our feeling will guide us to work according to the 1+1 equals 3 mechanism, as most people will feel good about it. That is why, in the cinema, I feel less anxious when the villain(not sharing) dies a horrible death, compared with the hero(sharing) dying like that; I recognize the difference in added value. I feel more empathy with the oppressed, compared with what I feel for the oppressor. The villain and the oppressor, trying to rule the world, stand for unwillingness to share. The act of sharing, in combination with empathy, gives certain feelings as reward; feelings like feeling loved, included, valued, worthy. The villain and the oppressor however, probably feel different and will not agree with me. For people who do not experience the reward of a good feeling when they are sharing, sharing can be difficult, especially when they feel better off, when they do not share. I think we all are in this position now and then; I can be a hero and I can be a villain and that is where the Balancing Act comes in again. Where we find the balance, the optimal situation, which takes care of personal benefits and the system’s benefit as well, differs per person and per situation. It depends on my personal design and preferences and on the scope of the systems to be taken into account, the scope of the systems to be part of the equation (the equation as mentioned before). To find this optimum I need to be aware of the relations I depend on and aware of the effect these relationships have on my feeling. All these relations make up the equation which needs to be balanced. There seem to be two forces at work here, one telling me to give, the other telling me not to give. What I will decide to do, depends on my vision of the attached benefits for myself and for the system, for my relationships.

As I know I depend on my relationships, I know the optimal balance is found in sharing; giving and receiving in a certain ratio. The ratio needs to be determined in the context of the relevance of the contribution or in other words, of the contribution to what is relevant. What is relevant is my own well-being and that of man-kind. To what extent I am willing to share, depends on how I feel about this relevance; how the importance is felt (perhaps intuitively, in unawareness) of the well-being of man-kind, relatively to my personal well-being and v.v. All this is done by setting priorities.

I am able to give by using my talents, creating added value and I’m able to give money, when I’m in a situation of relative wealth. Sharing this may support the economy of my surroundings and may, as a result, improve my own economy. Even if I do not see any improvement, sharing may just feel good.

In fact, what I am giving is what I have been receiving, be it with or without working for it. Whatever I share or could share, I have received first. I may have received it because of my own doing, as I have earned it, but even that is only a part of the reason I have received it. Whatever I have, I could never have if I was just on my own or when I was in bad health or unequipped. I need to receive, in order to be able to give and I need to give in order to expect to receive, in relationship. Having a process of giving and receiving in place, builds the economy. Sharing with others, is enabling the utilization of the potential which resides in diversity.It is not so much the blend mix of diversity but it is the combination of distinct uniqueness; the best of both worlds so to speak, that provides for the added value. Sharing is not a balance in mediocrity but instead it is a balance in an economic optimum which maximizes people’s contribution. The quest for this balance in sharing, is part of my design. In my personal economy, I’m not only taking my materialistic wealth into account, but, ultimately, a feeling of satisfaction and happiness. That feeling is what I’m after. I am designed to only be happy and satisfied, in a situation of balanced sharing. Without this balance, this optimum, I have feelings disturbing me, like guild, jealousy, anger, fear, etc. I will have these feelings of anxiousness in both imbalanced situations; whether I’m rich or poor. This is because the anxiousness originates from the conflict in relationships I have. In a situation of shared balance I have peaceful feelings like being loved, included, valued and worthy.


The physical Balancing Act is the result of diversity in preferences in combination with the dynamics of the Process, all as set in the Design. The Balancing Act is a generic process in reality, which process applies for the virtual reality in my mind as well. A system of diverse preferences leads to balance which automatically adjusts to change. It is the preferences that are leading. The preferences determine the forces in the Balancing Act, in togetherness. In nature the preferences are fixed. That’s why we have laws of physics. In the human mind, preferences can change. In fact, my preferences are fixed, it is just that I’m not always aware of its settings. When I change my preferences, I mean to do a correction, hoping it is the correct one. My feeling is leading me but my feeling is under the influence of my perception of reality. An incorrect perception can lead to feelings which bring me to incorrect choices. In this situation the process of balancing forces due to preferences, easily results in a situation which is not aligned with the outcome of a balance which is according the Design. The problem I face as a result, is difficulty in anticipating the future, meaning difficulty to live. When I am capable of anticipating the future I experience a stable feeling of satisfaction, away from anxiety. Anticipating the future is knowing how to balance the mental forces which are at work, which means knowing how to maintain my relationships. The complication in this Balancing Act is that it depends not only on my own perception and anticipating capability but on the perception of others as well, all of them being inaccurate to a certain degree.

An accurate perception of reality is vital for anticipation. When my perception is inaccurate, the mental forces can deviate from the intentions of the Design, resulting in difficulty to anticipate the Process and causing feelings of anxiety. In case of an inaccurate view of reality, reality may appear to me to be unreliable. In fact it is the virtual reality in my mind, which is unreliable. Reality itself is not capable of being unreliable. I am dealing with reality through a virtual reality which resides in my mind. I can live in a virtual reality which is a fantasy, but that will present me with the problem of anticipation. I am a living being and life exists as a process which is anticipating the future. In order to survive I need to anticipate the future, meaning I need to anticipate the Process that is around me as set in the Design. In order to be able to do that, I need to have an accurate view of the Process around me. My perception of the world around me, of reality, needs to be as accurate as possible in order to effectively anticipate the future, anticipating the next steps in the process of my life. In my mind resides a representation of reality which I use as an interface in the interaction with reality, with my surroundings and with my relations. I order to minimize misunderstanding in my relationships and in order to optimize anticipation, I need an accurate view of reality. As I realize reality is in a Balancing Act, I need to incorporate this Balancing Act in my acts of anticipation. In fact, I don’t need to do anything other than getting the correct view of reality. If my virtual reality, the image of reality in my mind, is corresponding with reality, the Balancing Act is incorporated in my virtual reality as well. I can rely on it as this Balancing Act automatically balances according to the preferences of the Design. An accurate view of reality includes an accurate understanding of the sequence of events of cause and effect. It includes an accurate understanding of the context of this sequence which the present is in. An accurate view of reality enables an accurate setting of priorities in the mind, accurate for optimal anticipation. Priorities derive from the sequence of events in combination with preferences according to the Design.

The Balancing Act in nature is based on relationships, on any relationship which is following the Design. The Balancing Act is to be followed in all my relationships, in order to be able to anticipate optimally. This, however, can become complicated as the relations are actually living in a virtual reality in their minds, just like me. The complication starts when these virtual realities are not very accurate in representing reality or when they are deviating from mine. In order to maximize capability to anticipate the Process, it helps to have an accurate view of reality and in order to optimize anticipation with others it helps when the others have an accurate view of reality as well. Still at moments, it is possible for me to feel satisfied and happy in a virtual reality which is inaccurate as a representation of reality. This feeling, however will not last as the virtual reality will proof to be unreliable at some point. Within this context I can perform the Balancing Act with my relationships and aim for an optimum, meaning getting close to the preferences of the Design. The result is a good feeling.  

Appendix; glossary

“Reality” is what is making a difference, what exists. This as opposed by what is in our minds, being thoughts and perception, not being reality but an image of reality. Reality exists as a process of cause and effect that is generating time and space. Reality can exist in the now, the past and in the future, here and elsewhere, which means reality is what is making a difference, what was making a difference and what will be making a difference, what exists, has existed and will exist.

“the Optimum” is the situation or the human condition which follows the Design and approaches the purpose of the Design as determined by a mix of fixed preferences, as close as possible within the circumstances of continuous change by the Process.

“Perception” is receiving and processing information by a person resulting in an awareness, understanding or insight in something. Human perception is intertwined with our feelings.

“Force” is the result of attraction or repulsion. A force has a certain measure of power and a certain direction. Force can be perceived as a physical source of direction or a mental source of direction.

“Energy” is the capacity to attract or repose. Or a measurement for capability to transform or distribute forces.

“Direction” is a distinct string of steps in the process of cause and effect. Direction is the result of a system of one or more forces, together leading to a distinct path of cause and effect or over a distinct path of possibilities and choices.

 “System” is a unit with defined borders that can be regarded to be acting as one process, with or without sub processes.

The “Soul” houses the combination of feeling and thinking, which are in continuous interaction with each other, it is used as a name for the location of awareness, of consciousness.

“Harmony” is a feeling caused by mutual approval between several processes.

“Beauty” is a feeling of both recognition and approval.

“Balance” is a state of stability of a system, it is measured over time. Balance is the result of a process being repetitive. Repetition in a process occurs when forces at work are compensating each other, resulting in a status quo. The forces can be mental and physical forces of attraction and repulsion. The term “balance” can be used in both cases.

“The Design” is the reality as it is manifested consistently. The Design manifests itself in structures and processes being repetitive. The Design can be regarded as unchanging, as a fixed asset. Part of the Design are the fixed preferences which are leading to attraction and repulsion and which exist as the forces of nature and the Process of continuous transformation or distribution of Energy, which lead to evolution.

Clarification: Reality is as it is, and in the case of humanity we can say that we are as we are; according the Design. “You are what you is”. The phrase “Design” is used to indicate that we are dealing with a reality that does not change over time and that is the origin of the Process of cause and effect, meaning we are not as we are without a cause. In the Process there are patterns of repetition that behave consistently and that do not change just like that, like the laws of physics for instance. Humanity is part of the Design and behaves according the properties that are laid down in the Design, by evolution for example. In the Design of human kind, diversity is essential. Without diversity there is no evolution and without diversity it is not possible for people to complement each other and to be of added value. Every individual is unique and this uniqueness is part of the Design.

“a process” is a sequence of events, driven by cause and effect, as it is following a design, and having a start and finish, possibly in a cycling mode in which the sequence repeats itself from start to finish. A process is not static, it is flowing in a continuous development of steps of cause and effect.

 “The Process” is the chain of events, being action and reaction, by cause and effect, which forms reality and space-time, in the past, the present and the future. The Process is visible to us, detectable, where it has repeating patterns. All we see, exists in plural and behaves in accordance with the repeating patterns of the Process, like the laws of physics. The Process is the result of the continuous transformation or distribution of energy into another form, in combination with the selective preferences, leading to attraction and repulsion, as dictated by the Design. The Process derives from the Design. The Process is the dynamic execution of the never changing Design.

“Relation” is a connection that causes interaction. A relation can be a one-way connection or a two-way/multiple-way connection.

A “Thought” is a representation, in the mind, of a repetitive structure, enabled by memory and recognition.

“Understanding” is recognizing the relation between repetitive structures.

A “Breakdown structure” is a structure of layers of which the top layer holds all the components that are in the layers below it. A structure is a set of components in a relationship of dependency, together forming a specific repetitive process.

“Economy” is the activity that contributes to the satisfaction of human needs, in other words it is the activity that contributes to our preferred feeling.

“Life” is a process which has some capability to adapt to circumstances for which it makes use of knowledge of the repetitive patterns of other processes. Life lives on anticipation of the repetitive structures of other processes by means of extrapolation, leading to expectation. Life interacts with other processes by making use of memory structures and receptors. Part of the process of organic life forms, is to develop generations. Life is basically a process of anticipation, see the post “life”, posted earlier in “Blogpondering”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *