Vinaire
Sponsor
The process of "neti, neti" exactly does that. Please see my last post.
Ultimately, one is one's consideration. Without consideration there is no beingness.
.
The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But
- Thread starter lkwdblds
- Start date
- Status
The process of "neti, neti" exactly does that. Please see my last post.
Ultimately, one is one's consideration. Without consideration there is no beingness.
.
Infinite
Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Looking without thinking again, Vinny?
lkwdblds
Crusader
See Post 3611 to fill in the blanks
You need to read Blip's post 3611 a couple of posts back on the previous page to fill in the boxes. I believe he is trying to infer that my Quotes A and B are contradictory and that I am exhibiting the traits of a "group think cult" which I accuse he and his buddies of being on your other thread with the 60 pages text mainly just bashing.
You need to read Blip's post 3611 a couple of posts back on the previous page to fill in the boxes. I believe he is trying to infer that my Quotes A and B are contradictory and that I am exhibiting the traits of a "group think cult" which I accuse he and his buddies of being on your other thread with the 60 pages text mainly just bashing.
lkwdblds
Crusader
Looking at a couple of the points...
These seem to be very broad conjectures at this point in their development! They need to be fleshed out and some examples given to show how it could be so. I find in all of them that it is easy to come up with counter examples of how it could not be so.
Vin, I realize that these precepts are apparently in an early stage of development. As they stand, they are very loose and some of the constructs appear to be a little bit ad hoc.
The whole system seems to depend on the first precept, "Viewpoint is a point of awareness" , being correct. Here you are using a word, viewpoint, which is already part of the language in a different sense. I think that you need to use another term such as "awareness point" or one large word such as "awarenessviewpoint". You are using viewpoint for a situation in which no viewing is taking place which can easily lead to confusion.
On the persistence and time passage issue, I can see a subset of a universe existing with no change within a universe where time is passing with movement. Perhaps an enclosure could be rigged in a vacuum at absolute zero temperature and some matter placed in this enclosure which has no movement molecularly or atomically and the entire apparatus place out in space. This enclosure exists in the universe as we know it with planets, stars, etc. all in orbits. In this case, of course, time is passing inside the enclosure because the enclosure is located relative to items which are in motion and the enclosure is being dragged along by the rest of the universe.
However, if an entire universe has no motion, I do not believe that persistence has any meaning but it would be an undefined term.
The precept, "Awareness of self is an aspect of perception." That one seems totally spot on to me.
"Scope of awareness is space." That one is not as intuitively obvious.
Time seems to have different characteristics than other dimensions. I know this has puzzled mankind for eons and when attempting to look at it, it tends to unstabilize one. There are perhaps three main characteristics which distinguish time from other dimensions. First, it can not be viewed and measured directly but requires indirect measurement. Second, it goes in just one direction, there is no backtracking. Third, it has a rate of flow which is somehow set by some consideration but the setting of the rate of flow is virtually undetectable to beings and no being seems to be able to tamper with it, perhaps even in its own universe (or as its own universe). Perhaps various universes have agreed to have the same rate of time flow to allow intercourse (the non sexual kind) between them and an agreement was made amongst universes that the rate of time passage must be the same for all.
Lakey
These seem to be very broad conjectures at this point in their development! They need to be fleshed out and some examples given to show how it could be so. I find in all of them that it is easy to come up with counter examples of how it could not be so.
Vin, I realize that these precepts are apparently in an early stage of development. As they stand, they are very loose and some of the constructs appear to be a little bit ad hoc.
The whole system seems to depend on the first precept, "Viewpoint is a point of awareness" , being correct. Here you are using a word, viewpoint, which is already part of the language in a different sense. I think that you need to use another term such as "awareness point" or one large word such as "awarenessviewpoint". You are using viewpoint for a situation in which no viewing is taking place which can easily lead to confusion.
On the persistence and time passage issue, I can see a subset of a universe existing with no change within a universe where time is passing with movement. Perhaps an enclosure could be rigged in a vacuum at absolute zero temperature and some matter placed in this enclosure which has no movement molecularly or atomically and the entire apparatus place out in space. This enclosure exists in the universe as we know it with planets, stars, etc. all in orbits. In this case, of course, time is passing inside the enclosure because the enclosure is located relative to items which are in motion and the enclosure is being dragged along by the rest of the universe.
However, if an entire universe has no motion, I do not believe that persistence has any meaning but it would be an undefined term.
The precept, "Awareness of self is an aspect of perception." That one seems totally spot on to me.
"Scope of awareness is space." That one is not as intuitively obvious.
Time seems to have different characteristics than other dimensions. I know this has puzzled mankind for eons and when attempting to look at it, it tends to unstabilize one. There are perhaps three main characteristics which distinguish time from other dimensions. First, it can not be viewed and measured directly but requires indirect measurement. Second, it goes in just one direction, there is no backtracking. Third, it has a rate of flow which is somehow set by some consideration but the setting of the rate of flow is virtually undetectable to beings and no being seems to be able to tamper with it, perhaps even in its own universe (or as its own universe). Perhaps various universes have agreed to have the same rate of time flow to allow intercourse (the non sexual kind) between them and an agreement was made amongst universes that the rate of time passage must be the same for all.
Lakey
Last edited:
Vinaire
Sponsor
Please look up the definitions of VIEWPOINT, TIME, etc. from Technical Dictionary first, and then we'll discuss.
.
afaceinthecrowd
Gold Meritorious Patron
Ravings of a Lunatic
So many fine and thought-filled posts these past few days from all Yall!
Thank you…thanks a whole bunch.
IMO, metaphorically:
The whole physical universe and its phenomena are, in part, a filter.
That we live in a “Sea of Life” and, like all Sea creatures, we are Living at a depth, temperature, salinity, luminance, etc. that is tolerable to our capabilities.
That the “fractalness” of Living is, in part, a function of time in interplay with no-time and timeless.
That this Sea is a confluence, intersection or melting pot of Universes, and a multitude of Universes of Universes.
That we are, possibly, like “mammals” in this Sea”, that we are, possibly, one of many various types of mammals in the Sea.
That here are numerous other creatures, non mammalian, Living within this Sea and that they, just as Us, cannot fully fathom the entirety of the Sea and the confluences of influences—dimensions if you will—that make “It” thus and so, “this” and/or “that”.
That even though we are not consciously aware of all the interdependencies of our Sea’s physical and spiritual ecosystem, we are blessed and/or cursed, as it may be, with the desire to asked questions and the drive for answers.
That each of Us is interconnected with all of Us, with all our fellow Sea creatures, the substance of the Sea and all phenomena.
That we cannot not look—that identity is but one of the lenses for looking and can, as phenomena, be looked at in separate or within context with other phenomena, such as mind or as a near endless multitude of phenomena concerts, such as current, future, past identity, mind and body (DNA, etc) fractal constructs.
That each of Us has a singular personal “language” and that all other creatures in this Sea have their own language, as does all phenomena and all these languages are, in essence, symbolics and, in integers more than 1, somewhat symbiotic.
That the Sea’s modus is a big conversation wherein the Sea is the answers and each and all of Us are the questions.
I know that all of the foregoing is poorly stated, not new or original and very simplistic. I have neither formula or methodology regarding any of what I have written. It is merely a brief, clumsy attempt to express and share how I “see” “It” all, how I “Feel” “It” all.
And, to paraphrase the old adage, “That and $10.00 will get you an Havana Churchill.”
Face
So many fine and thought-filled posts these past few days from all Yall!
Thank you…thanks a whole bunch.IMO, metaphorically:
The whole physical universe and its phenomena are, in part, a filter.
That we live in a “Sea of Life” and, like all Sea creatures, we are Living at a depth, temperature, salinity, luminance, etc. that is tolerable to our capabilities.
That the “fractalness” of Living is, in part, a function of time in interplay with no-time and timeless.
That this Sea is a confluence, intersection or melting pot of Universes, and a multitude of Universes of Universes.
That we are, possibly, like “mammals” in this Sea”, that we are, possibly, one of many various types of mammals in the Sea.
That here are numerous other creatures, non mammalian, Living within this Sea and that they, just as Us, cannot fully fathom the entirety of the Sea and the confluences of influences—dimensions if you will—that make “It” thus and so, “this” and/or “that”.
That even though we are not consciously aware of all the interdependencies of our Sea’s physical and spiritual ecosystem, we are blessed and/or cursed, as it may be, with the desire to asked questions and the drive for answers.
That each of Us is interconnected with all of Us, with all our fellow Sea creatures, the substance of the Sea and all phenomena.
That we cannot not look—that identity is but one of the lenses for looking and can, as phenomena, be looked at in separate or within context with other phenomena, such as mind or as a near endless multitude of phenomena concerts, such as current, future, past identity, mind and body (DNA, etc) fractal constructs.
That each of Us has a singular personal “language” and that all other creatures in this Sea have their own language, as does all phenomena and all these languages are, in essence, symbolics and, in integers more than 1, somewhat symbiotic.
That the Sea’s modus is a big conversation wherein the Sea is the answers and each and all of Us are the questions.
I know that all of the foregoing is poorly stated, not new or original and very simplistic. I have neither formula or methodology regarding any of what I have written. It is merely a brief, clumsy attempt to express and share how I “see” “It” all, how I “Feel” “It” all.
And, to paraphrase the old adage, “That and $10.00 will get you an Havana Churchill.”
Face
Last edited:
lkwdblds
Crusader
With that and $10,000 you can get....
Face, thanks for showing us your poetic side. Were you on the project to help LRH write the "Hymn of Asia"? It certainly appears as if you were. As I was reading your post, I was expecting a quote at the end telling where you got the material and was very surprised to find out that you worte it.
It is very inspirational and conveys a lot of good material as seen from your perspective. With that and $10,000 I think you could buy a $5,010,000 luxury estate overlooking the sea which you are describing. Don't sell your abilities and your knowingness short man!
Lakey
Face, thanks for showing us your poetic side. Were you on the project to help LRH write the "Hymn of Asia"? It certainly appears as if you were. As I was reading your post, I was expecting a quote at the end telling where you got the material and was very surprised to find out that you worte it.
It is very inspirational and conveys a lot of good material as seen from your perspective. With that and $10,000 I think you could buy a $5,010,000 luxury estate overlooking the sea which you are describing. Don't sell your abilities and your knowingness short man!
Lakey
lkwdblds
Crusader
I believe you are missing some little details....
Vin, I respectfully think that with your empasis on the big picture, you may not be dotting you "i's" and crossing your "t's" on the minor detail matters of posting.
Yesterday, I responded to a general memo you sent out unaddressed to anyone in particular and found out it was meant only for Leon. Also the last couple of days you had pointed out some errors which you had determined that LRH had made. Some of these errors were quite basic and fundamental. One example was the repetitive question type of process where both you and Leon did not feel it was good tech to assume each repetitive question would produce an F/N and a cognitiion nor did you think a TR 3 should always be given to force the pc to look more if a pc seemed to be done looking without an F/N and cognition. You also alluded to the fact that whille LRH got some things correct, he showed he was not a good scientist in other fundamental areas.
With all this background, you now refer me to LRH's Tech dictionary to look up terms before you address my comments.
I don't have a crystal ball to guide me on where you think LRH should be used as source material and where you think his conclusions are invalid. There just seems to be some inconsistency here.
Lakey
Vin, I respectfully think that with your empasis on the big picture, you may not be dotting you "i's" and crossing your "t's" on the minor detail matters of posting.
Yesterday, I responded to a general memo you sent out unaddressed to anyone in particular and found out it was meant only for Leon. Also the last couple of days you had pointed out some errors which you had determined that LRH had made. Some of these errors were quite basic and fundamental. One example was the repetitive question type of process where both you and Leon did not feel it was good tech to assume each repetitive question would produce an F/N and a cognitiion nor did you think a TR 3 should always be given to force the pc to look more if a pc seemed to be done looking without an F/N and cognition. You also alluded to the fact that whille LRH got some things correct, he showed he was not a good scientist in other fundamental areas.
With all this background, you now refer me to LRH's Tech dictionary to look up terms before you address my comments.
I don't have a crystal ball to guide me on where you think LRH should be used as source material and where you think his conclusions are invalid. There just seems to be some inconsistency here.
Lakey
Vinaire
Sponsor
Message for Leon
This message is for Leon:
Leon, I would prefer to continue our discussion on the thread KHTK Essays. I shall post our conversation there later today.
.
This message is for Leon:
Leon, I would prefer to continue our discussion on the thread KHTK Essays. I shall post our conversation there later today.
.
Last edited:
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
Clears out the bank alright!!!
"Originally Posted by Ted
One observation is that a little bit of auditing often begets additional need for auditing. You will hear the registrars and tech personnel say that "Your next level is keying in," "Clears are at risk," and so on. A flow 1 can stimulate the need for a flow 2. This is all positioned as necessary to clearing the bank."
Yeah, by CLEARING out the PC's Bank Account!!!
I'm sorry, I just HAD to say it!!!
"Originally Posted by Ted
One observation is that a little bit of auditing often begets additional need for auditing. You will hear the registrars and tech personnel say that "Your next level is keying in," "Clears are at risk," and so on. A flow 1 can stimulate the need for a flow 2. This is all positioned as necessary to clearing the bank."
Yeah, by CLEARING out the PC's Bank Account!!!
I'm sorry, I just HAD to say it!!!
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
This little fishie loves to swim!
Thanks for that Facey! Well done! It is quite beautifully put, very clear, has great meaning for me, and resonates harmonically with my own world view. It has been said that fish do not perceive the water they are swimming in, I wonder if real "reality" is like that for us, too. Maybe it's easier to comprehend all this while in disembodied form...in the bardos or elsewhere...
But many of us like to be thinking about it and discussing it now!
So many fine and thought-filled posts these past few days from all Yall!
IMO, metaphorically:
The whole physical universe and its phenomena are, in part, a filter.
That we live in a “Sea of Life” and, like all Sea creatures, we are Living at a depth, temperature, salinity, luminance, etc. that is tolerable to our capabilities.
That the “fractalness” of Living is, in part, a function of time in interplay with no-time and timeless.
That this Sea is a confluence, intersection or melting pot of Universes, and a multitude of Universes of Universes.
The we are, possibly, like “mammals” in this Sea”, that we are, possibly, one of many various types of mammals in the Sea.
That here are numerous other creatures, non mammalian, Living within this Sea and that they, just as Us, cannot fully fathom the entirety of the Sea and the confluences of influences—dimensions if you will—that make “It” thus and so, “this” and/or “that”.
That even though we are not consciously aware of all the interdependencies of our Sea’s physical and spiritual ecosystem, we are blessed and/or cursed, as it may be, with the desire to asked questions and the drive for answers.
That each of Us is interconnected with all of Us, with all our fellow Sea creatures, the substance of the Sea and all phenomena.
That we cannot not look—that identity is but one of the lenses for looking and can, as phenomena, be looked at in separate or within context with other phenomena, such as mind or as a near endless multitude of phenomena concerts, such as current, future, past identity, mind, body fractal constructs.
That each of Us has a singular personal “language” and that all other creatures in this Sea have their own language, as does all phenomena and all these languages are, in essence, symbolics and, in integers more than 1, somewhat symbiotic.
That the Sea’s modus is a big conversation wherein the Sea is the questions and each and all of Us are the answers.I know that all of the foregoing is poorly stated, not new or original and very simplistic. I have neither formula or methodology regarding any of what I have written. It is merely a brief, clumsy attempt to express and share how I “see” “It” all, how I “Feel” “It” all.
And, to paraphrase the old adage, “That and $10.00 will get you an Havana Churchill.”
Face
Thanks for that Facey!
Well done! It is quite beautifully put, very clear, has great meaning for me, and resonates harmonically with my own world view. It has been said that fish do not perceive the water they are swimming in, I wonder if real "reality" is like that for us, too. Maybe it's easier to comprehend all this while in disembodied form...in the bardos or elsewhere...But many of us like to be thinking about it and discussing it now!
EP - Ethics Particle
Gold Meritorious Patron
Not to waste space and time...
I am completely in accord with S&L's post and my compliments to her and the other posters who prompted it.
EP
Thanks for that Facey!
But many of us like to be thinking about it and discussing it now!
I am completely in accord with S&L's post and my compliments to her and the other posters who prompted it.
EP
Vinaire
Sponsor
I find Hubbard's definitions for VIEWPOINT and TIME quite spot on. Otherwise, I won't refer you to them.
If there are some error's in a person's theory it doesn't mean that he is all wrong. I admire LRH for some of the wonderful reorganization he brought to ancient knowledge.
.
Ted
Gold Meritorious Patron
So You Joined A Cult. Wassat Alla 'Bout?
I am compelled to respond to my own post:
In reference to item #1, here are a few LRH topics:
Tone 40, intention without reservation or limit
Confront
Definition of OT
Any number of LRH quotes or sales pitches... Here's one: "We are the Admin authority." (WISE)
Supreme test of a thetan. Make it go right.
OT's work best with OT's
"Go ahead borrow the money (mortgage your house, sell your life insurance, etc.) for your next level. When you are done you will get it right back multiplied times over."
More?
I am compelled to respond to my own post:
In reference to item #1, here are a few LRH topics:
Tone 40, intention without reservation or limit
Confront
Definition of OT
Any number of LRH quotes or sales pitches... Here's one: "We are the Admin authority." (WISE)
Supreme test of a thetan. Make it go right.
OT's work best with OT's
"Go ahead borrow the money (mortgage your house, sell your life insurance, etc.) for your next level. When you are done you will get it right back multiplied times over."
More?
lkwdblds
Crusader
Misc. comments and responses.
Our Stats - Last night at midnight, we were at about 89.800 views. Now, 20 hours later we are at 90,800. That's 1,000 in 20 hours. On the list of how many have read the thread at least once, the number of people listed is now 564. I estimate that somewhere between 1/4 to 1/3 of the viewers suppress the printout that they have read a thread, so that would put the actual number at around 800.
To Ted - Nice list, I think the last one about cashing in the life insurance policy and mortgaging the house is the most dangerous. I did some of those things and believed that stuff and now at age 70, the truth comes home to roost. Instead of a comfortable retirement, I am still hustling to bring in money.
How about the quote from RJ 67, just from memory it goes something like, "In all the broad universe, there is no hope for mankind other than than ourselves. This is a tremendous responsibility and for too long now, I have borne it alone. You share it with me now!!" These emotional and inspiririg words turned out to be just smoke. These noble sounding words were not true. Ron was like the Wizard of Oz stating words of that magnitude when, if you pull the curtain away and look at him directly, the words actually had very little substance to back them up.
To Vinaire I know you feel Ron has validity in parts of his tech and you also feel he is wrong in some areas. On the definition of "time" in the Tech Dictionary, I have probably read that about 2 dozen times and maybe done clay demos on it 5 times. On the definition of "viewpoint" I don't remember doing it in clay. Anyway I am willing to look at both of these again but unfortunately about a month ago, we tossed all my Scn materials while cleaning out my garage. I tried to bring up the tech dictionary on the internet and read those two definitions but was not able to do so. Look at Helluva Hoax's Avatar, that's what happened to my Scn materials.
The problem with this is that one never knows whether to study up on LRH tech before engaging you in a dialogue. I used to do that often last year but this year I know you do disagree with large sections of LRH so I guess the best policy is to ask you first, "I want to engage you in dialogue on such and such. Would it be worth my while to bone up on LRH in this area before writing to you or is this one of the LRH areas where you are in disagreement.
Lakey
Our Stats - Last night at midnight, we were at about 89.800 views. Now, 20 hours later we are at 90,800. That's 1,000 in 20 hours. On the list of how many have read the thread at least once, the number of people listed is now 564. I estimate that somewhere between 1/4 to 1/3 of the viewers suppress the printout that they have read a thread, so that would put the actual number at around 800.
To Ted - Nice list, I think the last one about cashing in the life insurance policy and mortgaging the house is the most dangerous. I did some of those things and believed that stuff and now at age 70, the truth comes home to roost. Instead of a comfortable retirement, I am still hustling to bring in money.
How about the quote from RJ 67, just from memory it goes something like, "In all the broad universe, there is no hope for mankind other than than ourselves. This is a tremendous responsibility and for too long now, I have borne it alone. You share it with me now!!" These emotional and inspiririg words turned out to be just smoke. These noble sounding words were not true. Ron was like the Wizard of Oz stating words of that magnitude when, if you pull the curtain away and look at him directly, the words actually had very little substance to back them up.
To Vinaire I know you feel Ron has validity in parts of his tech and you also feel he is wrong in some areas. On the definition of "time" in the Tech Dictionary, I have probably read that about 2 dozen times and maybe done clay demos on it 5 times. On the definition of "viewpoint" I don't remember doing it in clay. Anyway I am willing to look at both of these again but unfortunately about a month ago, we tossed all my Scn materials while cleaning out my garage. I tried to bring up the tech dictionary on the internet and read those two definitions but was not able to do so. Look at Helluva Hoax's Avatar, that's what happened to my Scn materials.
The problem with this is that one never knows whether to study up on LRH tech before engaging you in a dialogue. I used to do that often last year but this year I know you do disagree with large sections of LRH so I guess the best policy is to ask you first, "I want to engage you in dialogue on such and such. Would it be worth my while to bone up on LRH in this area before writing to you or is this one of the LRH areas where you are in disagreement.
Lakey
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
how I spent my summer vacation
Our apricots came and went, but farther down south from us, cots are in full swing. As a boy, I used to work beside my father fixing tractors in apricot orchards at this time of year. I could eat all the cots I wanted. Life was simpler then. Each year we take as many kids, who want to go, and see the harvesting, sorting, cutting, and drying of cots... City kids think apricots come from Safeway. We think it's better for our kids to know where their food comes from, and how much work goes into a simple dried apricot.
We also know how to make apricot deserts and jam.
Our apricots came and went, but farther down south from us, cots are in full swing. As a boy, I used to work beside my father fixing tractors in apricot orchards at this time of year. I could eat all the cots I wanted. Life was simpler then. Each year we take as many kids, who want to go, and see the harvesting, sorting, cutting, and drying of cots... City kids think apricots come from Safeway. We think it's better for our kids to know where their food comes from, and how much work goes into a simple dried apricot.
We also know how to make apricot deserts and jam.
Vinaire
Sponsor
I think for myself, and I have been consistent in what I say. I try to be very clear.
I am sorry to hear that you are having problems with me.
.
lkwdblds
Crusader
I'll make the necessary adjustments
Don't worry about it, I'll make the necessary adjustments, maybe buy a used tech dictionary on e bay or something. I'll just dialogue with you as best I can and if you recommend I read something, I'll do it. Its no big deal. I appreciate having you post here. I want this to be a safe place for intelligent posters of good will and you certainly qualify.
Lakey
Don't worry about it, I'll make the necessary adjustments, maybe buy a used tech dictionary on e bay or something. I'll just dialogue with you as best I can and if you recommend I read something, I'll do it. Its no big deal. I appreciate having you post here. I want this to be a safe place for intelligent posters of good will and you certainly qualify.
Lakey
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCT9naHt2oo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1cfTMdjkYM&feature=related
so I just got this extraordinary, and yet common, cognition, that I need to share. Feel free to contribute or refute. Cognitions are like that.
in Sci and life , we keep wanting to envision (postulate) positive outcomes.
If you look at or read my posts, you see a recurrent thread: my vision of an ideal scene.
it includes (in no particular order) orchards, vegetables, family, skiing, scuba, horses, dogs, cats, sex, children, surf, ocean , mountains, auditing, tech, anti standard tech, anti Co$, community, driving fast on curvy roads, risk taking, practical economic thought, etc.
Everyone, for the most part, looks at what they want as a positive.
When I went Clear in June of 1971, I was so huge and simple -- all I could really do was smile, laugh, lay by the pool, fondle Mary Jo, and watch The Mark of Zorro on TV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VTyPWvyAF8
eventually life imposed its ugly head.
I came down, got fired for being a flake, and set off on a new (old) path.
What I needed after the big blow out of Clear was something on the line of "What game do I want to play?"
by this I mean opposition, evil, randomity, and last but not least, my own identity for the game.
so much of the game I entered into was old opp terms, old rigid rules, old values.
I didn't look and make a new enlightened game, but shrank into the old tired one.
When I blow out PCs, I always ask if there is a (proverbial) freight train headed for them. I've found that blow outs are followed by crashes with someone / something.
Really what is needed is the enlightened being to review old games and create a new one fully that they can be the "legend in their own mind" game player.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xBHnm66y64
What do you think?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1cfTMdjkYM&feature=related
so I just got this extraordinary, and yet common, cognition, that I need to share. Feel free to contribute or refute. Cognitions are like that.
in Sci and life , we keep wanting to envision (postulate) positive outcomes.
If you look at or read my posts, you see a recurrent thread: my vision of an ideal scene.
it includes (in no particular order) orchards, vegetables, family, skiing, scuba, horses, dogs, cats, sex, children, surf, ocean , mountains, auditing, tech, anti standard tech, anti Co$, community, driving fast on curvy roads, risk taking, practical economic thought, etc.
Everyone, for the most part, looks at what they want as a positive.
When I went Clear in June of 1971, I was so huge and simple -- all I could really do was smile, laugh, lay by the pool, fondle Mary Jo, and watch The Mark of Zorro on TV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VTyPWvyAF8
eventually life imposed its ugly head.
I came down, got fired for being a flake, and set off on a new (old) path.
What I needed after the big blow out of Clear was something on the line of "What game do I want to play?"
by this I mean opposition, evil, randomity, and last but not least, my own identity for the game.
so much of the game I entered into was old opp terms, old rigid rules, old values.
I didn't look and make a new enlightened game, but shrank into the old tired one.
When I blow out PCs, I always ask if there is a (proverbial) freight train headed for them. I've found that blow outs are followed by crashes with someone / something.
Really what is needed is the enlightened being to review old games and create a new one fully that they can be the "legend in their own mind" game player.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xBHnm66y64
What do you think?
Last edited:
- Status