SHORT-TERM STABILITY — LONG-TERM STABILITY – CENTER OF STABILITY, INSTRUMENTAL MIND, AND HUMAN CHOICE

TẢI XUỐNG (DOWNLOAD)

Evaluation Based on the Stability Criterion

Based on the complete manuscript “SHORT-TERM STABILITY – LONG-TERM STABILITY: Center of Stability, Instrumental Mind, and Human Choice”, the following is a multi-angle assessment with star ratings, conducted strictly in an academic–operational spirit — without gratuitous praise and without avoiding critical pressure.

OVERALL ASSESSMENT

⭐ 4.7 / 5

This is an independent operational map of psychological functioning with exceptionally high internal consistency. It deliberately refuses all familiar reference frameworks (Buddhist doctrine, psychology, psychotherapy, self-help) and does so with rare discipline.

The book does not “heal” anyone. Instead, it accurately identifies the mechanism explaining why human beings cannot heal themselves through consciousness alone. This is both its core strength and the reason it is not intended for a mass audience.

ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVE – THEORETICAL STRUCTURE

⭐ 4.8 / 5

Strengths

• Very clear positioning: consistent boundary-locking of scope, language, and mode of reading.
• Precise distinctions:
  • Center of Stability ≠ Instrumental Mind
  • Cognitive Processing Mode ≠ Insight Processing Mode
  • Stability ≠ emotion
  • Process ≠ method
• Successfully avoids the common flaw of hybrid models:
  👉 no mixing of ontology, therapy, ethics, and practice.

Minor Limitations

• The deliberate refusal to engage in academic dialogue limits access to conventional academic publication routes (journals, peer review).
• For purely academic readers, the refusal of comparison may be interpreted as “avoiding interdisciplinary verification.”

👉 Balanced judgment:
The book is not weak academically; it consciously chooses not to play on that field.

PSYCHOLOGY & THERAPEUTIC PERSPECTIVE

⭐ 4.5 / 5

Strengths

• Extremely accurate analysis of the failure thresholds of CBT, mindfulness, and cognitive restructuring.
• Correctly describes the phenomenon:
  “Understanding correctly but being unable to live differently.”
• Identifies mis-timed intervention — a blind spot many therapeutic models avoid or fail to reach.

Deliberate Limitations

• Does not provide:
  • techniques
  • protocols
  • step-by-step pathways
• Not applicable to:
  • acute crises
  • severe clinical treatment contexts

👉 Assessment:
Outstanding at the level of meta-therapy, not therapy.

PHILOSOPHICAL – EPISTEMOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE

⭐ 4.9 / 5

Major Strengths

• Does not construct:
  • a hidden subject
  • a karmic substrate
  • unobservable metaphysical layers
• Close in spirit to:
  • radical phenomenology
  • Krishnamurti (but more precise and technical)
• Establishes an uncompromising standard:
  only what can be directly observed without belief is retained.

Risks

• Readers accustomed to closed philosophical systems may find the book cold or empty.
• No metaphysical consolation is offered.

READER EXPERIENCE

⭐ 4.3 / 5

Who Will Find It Precise

• Those who have:
  • understood much
  • practiced much
  • undergone much healing
  • yet continue to repeat suffering
• Those who have recognized the limits of consciousness.

Who Will Find It Uncomfortable

• Those seeking:
  • methods
  • paths
  • practices
  • safe promises
• Those needing guidance.

👉 This is a book that weakens illusion, not one that strengthens motivation.

ORIGINALITY & DISTINCT CONTRIBUTION

⭐ 5.0 / 5

Nearly absolute, because it:

• Borrows no concepts.
• Does not rename old frameworks.
• Does not shelter behind tradition.
• Does not rely on religious or scientific authority.

👉 Extremely rare in literature on mind, suffering, and stability.

RISK OF MISINTERPRETATION

⭐ 3.8 / 5 (risk rating, not quality)

• Easily misread as:
  • resignation
  • passivity
  • rejection of practice
• In reality:
  👉 the book rejects mis-timed intervention, not responsibility for living.

SUMMARY TABLE

DIRECT COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Strictly academic, non-labeling, non-speculative.

Focus: Short-Term Stability – Long-Term Stability
Compared systems: Krishnamurti / The Power of Now (Tolle) / CBT / Yogācāra

Common Axes of Comparison

1. Operating subject: what is actually functioning?
2. Origin of suffering.
3. Point of intervention.
4. Role of consciousness.
5. Risk of misalignment.

SHORT-TERM – LONG-TERM STABILITY ↔ KRISHNAMURTI

Operating subject

• Krishnamurti: “the observer is the observed.”
• This model: no subject is assumed; only the ego–instrument–choice sequence is described.

👉 Difference:
Krishnamurti dissolves the subject by declaration;
this model lets the subject dissolve by losing operational relevance.

Origin of suffering

• Krishnamurti: division and accumulated thought.
• This model: mis-timed conscious intervention into non-conscious processes.

Intervention

• Krishnamurti: “seeing is action.”
• This model: explains precisely why all intervention fails.

Role of consciousness

• Krishnamurti: must be seen to end.
• This model: not wrong, but structurally overused.

⭐ Verdict:

• Ontological depth: equal
• Operational precision: this model wins

↔ THE POWER OF NOW (Eckhart Tolle)

• Presence as ground vs no assumed ground.
• Identification with mind vs over-control of autonomous processes.
• Practice of presence vs refusal of practice.

⭐ Verdict:

• Accessibility: Power of Now wins
• Operational accuracy: this model wins clearly

↔ CBT

• CBT assumes a modifiable subject.
• This model treats the subject as an outcome, not an agent.

⭐ Verdict:

• Short-term utility: CBT wins
• Root-level resolution: this model exceeds CBT’s scope

↔ YOGĀCĀRA

• Yogācāra posits unobservable substrates.
• This model remains non-metaphysical.

⭐ Verdict:

• Systemic tradition: Yogācāra wins
• Direct verifiability: this model wins

FINAL SYNTHESIS TABLE

FINAL CONCLUSION

Short-Term Stability – Long-Term Stability does not stand above other systems.
It stands elsewhere:

👉 at the point where most systems begin to fail — and refuse to stop.