<<Let's just say that it is being a "chef" with ideas. Add a pinch of that and a spoon of the
other. We keep adding and taking out "ingredients" until we feel that it
"tastes good" to the mind.>> If I may remark, I like the way you express yourself. I am this sort of a person who needs to be filled with intellectual stuff. Otherwise I feel empty and superficial. And the way you present things is just so... hmm.. concise.. YEP! that's the right word for it... and I guess language is supposed to show what kind of a character a person has. And I like the impression I get from you.

Coming back to the subject. I also love the imbalance - it would be boring without it, right? Maybe we need the imbalance of thought in regard to keeping our bio-chemical balance in our brains? (that's pretty much what you've already said). But then again, this concept has a major flaw: to keep your bio-chemical balance in the brain, you don't really have to go as far as to changing your views all the time; all you really need to do is to keep those thoughts "flowing" (sort of: "exercise-your-brain-cells-to-keep-them-fit" kinda way). Another thought of mine on this topic was that such "swings" of views sometimes do stop (in most cases somewhere in the middle = the balance principle); it's just that there are millions of such "swings" (each one relating to a certain subject) to be settled down and I don't think a lifetime is enough for us to become absolutely balanced. Another question arises if you set out from the hypothesis: What if it was possible to acheive a perfect balance (concerning our views)? Isn't this meant by an "inner peace" many people talk about and strive towards? Take Scott Stapp as an example (at last something Creed related, huh? hehe...;-). In one of the interviews where Stapp talks about him not being sure of his confession he says: "But if that happened to me -- if all of the sudden there's a moment of enlightenment and everything makes sense to me and finally it sinks from my head to my heart, I'll tell everyone. Because I'll be at peace. I mean, I'm like, 'God, get this crap out of my head'. I wish I didn't have to think about this stuff all the time." So, what Scott wants is inner peace and balance, I guess (I mean, he does - even if not explicitly - talk about the contrary nature of mind and heart which are rarely at balance - and he wishes for them to be in harmony, in a way). But on the other hand, I don't think that this is what he really wants (if it is ever possible to speak for someone and say what he/she really wants, i.e. hehe ;-). But I honestly don't believe that after experiencing a time of deep spiritual confusion (= battle of thoughts) Stapp would prefer to give that up for a calmness of mind. Because, in a way, this is what is so interesting, challenging, beautiful and striking about "confusion"/ (better call it:) imbalance that makes us humans flexible, intelligent and deep. Such battles of thoughts are very rich experiences and you learn from them a lot. And results of such "battles" can bring you closer to the objective truth (- if there is such a thing in the first place, i.e.). At least that's what I've observed. I must admit that some of my "swings" have come to a nearly complete standstill. Or let's just put it this way: I already have some stone views concerning a very general understanding of different issues such as life. ............. to be continued