4 ms·
> One can also define concentration as an absence of distractions. This frames distractions as passive. But I think being distracted is an active process, beca
by hirundo 3y ago
> One can also define concentration as an absence of distractions.
This frames distractions as passive. But I think being distracted is an active process, because when I'm not ready to concentrate the absence of distractions leads to the creation of distractions rather than concentration. And doing nothing when not distracted isn't concentrating, but perhaps meditation, which is very different than concentration. Concentration is actively of paying attention to a particular thing rather than the absence of distractions. To clear the mind is helpful but not sufficient.
- atomicnature 3y agoWhen I say absence of distractions, I mean it in the context of some "flowing" chunks within the conscious process (see next section - Concentration 'Flows'). So yes, I agree with you conceptually, but perhaps taken without the whole context, the definition seems to point at the idea of emptiness. Maybe the following makes it more clear: > Therefore, a clear definition of distraction is interruptions to the conscious process, either from external or internal sources. In turn, concentration means, a lack of disruptions to the conscious process, either from within or without.