There is an immense world within us. Emotional, perceptive, mental, logical, essential.

A panorama that is not physically palpable but no less real. It is an integral part of our life as are the objects we use and the sensory perceptions through which we experience "solid" life. Through it we analyze, process, translate information, organize ideas, schemes; determines our thinking and our actions. Determines who we express (or believe) to be. But it is NOT who we are. Knowing this difference is as essential as it is essential to know and understand this inner panorama. This> knowledge <can determine a foundation: Determine or be determined in one's expression.

In practice, the possibility of freely choosing or being transported by unconscious movements is closely linked to what one is aware of one's inner movement and to the awareness that "I" and my perception / processing tools are not the same thing. Are "I" to decide or are they beliefs, beliefs, compulsions, emotions, logic?

If the distinctions are not clear, the risk is to identify with them. It's like being convinced of being a single essence with your computer. Instead of being an instrument through which to carry out actions there would be the risk of being conditioned by it. We would lose part of our actions in favor of 1/0 behavior. Either it is YES or it is No or even we would be doing actions suggested by a PC program instead of us generating them. But life, as we well know, is an immense nuance of various shades of billions of colors. Going through it with a computer logic would be out of place, it would detach us from a fundamental prerogative: humanity.

Yet without even realizing it we often fall into these unhappy confusions. You can see well in some areas of everyday life: one often gets angry without a real reason and then maybe one keeps one's nose long even after days without even being more certain of the reasons. It is seen in cases of racial, sexist, speciesist prejudice. In mass movements due to identification and homologation: we assume a cause, maybe even a just one, with excessive rigidity, almost obsessive. In rejecting comparisons with people who have different ideals. In taking certain actions and then regretting it: "it wasn't what I really wanted to do".

The list could go on for a long time even with addresses and areas very distant from those mentioned.

Surely each of us can bring testimonials about it.

We could say that most interactions, actions, decisions act just under the influence of these internal movements. More in detail we could say that there is a conditioning of an unconscious part of our mind (ref. "The reactive mind" S. Brunelli - Podresca editions) which generates precisely "reactivity": to a stimulus it responds according to a predetermined, hidden pattern to the conscience, predominant. My inner panorama responds to life while "I", confused in it, does not determine the choices that belong to me.

So the inner landscape is the "evil"?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Our mind (in a broad sense) is a fantastic tool, endowed with immense potential and capable of perceiving, processing, placing and finally expressing our reality.

If known, mastered and guided, it is the vehicle through which we can reach our goals, interact with others, freely love and reach the highest peaks of the "human being".

It is the logistical and operational center of creativity, it is the perceptive translator of the physical world and of experiences, it allows full self-expression in all forms and in all areas.

We can represent it as a set of infinite and refined tools that allow you to create whatever you want.

If, however, there is no "someone" to take hold of the tools and guide them, what is realized is evanescent, useless, gives no satisfaction or even produces nothing!

How useful is a sophisticated laser scalpel if there is no doctor who chooses to apply his mastery through it?

In the same way, if we leave the fascinating tools we have available to ourselves and their beliefs, what do we do?

If the tool I need to love is guided by the fear of being betrayed, will it be expressed and used to the fullest? If, instead, "I" choose to use it, how much more potential will there be? Will I love more freely through fear or through the choice to love freely? Which of the two hypotheses will generate jealousy, closure, compulsive attachment? Which of the two instead generates openness, acceptance, acceptance and, nevertheless, the awareness of being able to make mistakes and the strength to accept it?

Which side are you on?