OT wins or Derealisation?
- Thread starter Feral
- Start date
Student of Trinity
Silver Meritorious Patron
If everything is just mocked up, fine. I guess that includes gravity, electrodynamics, and so on. Why not? If I stub my toe and it hurts, no doubt that's just because I fundamentally agreed to play the game of materiality. If I jump from height, I will fall, for the same reason. Yup: all just mocked up.
Well, could be. But I'm afraid I'm reminded of a little kid sitting in the back seat, turning a pot lid in both hands, and saying, "Brrrrrmmm!!!". He's making the car go! Yup!
Well, could be. But I'm afraid I'm reminded of a little kid sitting in the back seat, turning a pot lid in both hands, and saying, "Brrrrrmmm!!!". He's making the car go! Yup!
Hatshepsut
Crusader
Some don't get where the line is drawn. Obviously. I think we can AGREE on that.
The entirety of the construct around us and all its natural laws are an intentional product. Within the confines of it we exercise certain freedoms. What would the one experience be without the other.
Between my two hands gripping either side of my smartphone which I'm holding horizontal, I am typing this with one index finger and pretending a message will be sent when I click submit. Right through the ethers..... whoooooooosh. Boy! Somebody sure mocked that up somewhere.
What IS?
What ISN'T?
The entirety of the construct around us and all its natural laws are an intentional product. Within the confines of it we exercise certain freedoms. What would the one experience be without the other.
Between my two hands gripping either side of my smartphone which I'm holding horizontal, I am typing this with one index finger and pretending a message will be sent when I click submit. Right through the ethers..... whoooooooosh. Boy! Somebody sure mocked that up somewhere.
What IS?
What ISN'T?
Last edited:
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
I believe you once mentioned that you hold some form of 'religious views'. If so then what is the relationship between the "Creator" and his "Creation"? Specifically with regard to spiritual beings, in what way are spirits "the image of their creator", i.e. what characteristics have they in common?
The basic concept being dealt with here is that "spiritual beings" are not as fully limited in their abilities as humans appear to be. This is a commonly held view among those traditions which acknowledge a spiritual aspect to existence. In particular 'mental constructs' are of great importance, both in 'creation' as well as 'self-limitation'. Again, a well known principle broadly shared among many traditions.
Even such a dyed-in-the-wool materialist endeavor as physics, as you well know, is not as 'material' as it is commonly believed to be by many. It can be positively 'transcendental' at times.
Mark A. Baker
Gadfly
Crusader
Yes, that point is very key.
There is a line to be drawn. For most, this is how it works. There is a commonly-shared universe "out there", and the laws are pretty much the same for everybody. While it "may" be a mock-up, in a Vedic sense, or in some final sense even for each of us, it is, for the most part, NOT amenable to change by any of us. For instance, I can't bring the Sun a few billion miles closer, or decrease the force of gravity (for self or others). Actually, I have lost all concern for even imagining such a personal power. The desire for amazing powers says more about the person doing the desiring than much of anything else.
Really, who wants to bestow "unlimited powers and abilities" on a severely flawed human being who isn't at all yet anywhere near being able to "love all equally and unconditionally". That would be like putting the detonator to a nuclear device into the hands of a baby. I see the idea of giving "OT Powers" to imbecilic Scientologists in exactly the same way. There is far too little "moral substance" to monitor and control the responsibility of such powers. Luckily, I think there are built-in safeguards. One cannot REALLY ever expand in "powers" without first greatly reducing ego, sense of "self", and expanding ones sense of "self" OUT into and over all Creation.
So, there is the fixed playing field, and on the other side is your life, your mind, your health, and your imagination.
And, in between is the grey area that includes various things like telepathy, ESP, telekinesis, and the field of parapsychology.
Most New Age information involves some set of theories or models that enable the person to help and improve ones own life, health, prosperity, love life, etc. Just like Scientology. Granted, most New Age material does it through visualization and affirmations, using the creative imagination, and takes a "more direct mental and imaginative route", but even these appoaches are not averse to "lifting a hand to help things move forward". In fact, as much New Age data is "intentional" and the drills often aimed at a specific goal (such as attracting a spouse, or getting a better job), well they are much more "magical" than Scientology - which often uses all sorts of "admin tools" to "improve conditions".
Anyway, most people involved with New Age stuff do it to make ones life "better". To help a family member. To help a friend. Some visualize "world peace" - some do it everyday, and some do it in groups. Does it help? Who knows, but I am certain that ANY person who spends 10 minutes a day visualizing world peace most certaintly changes him or herself for the better in some way (which affects a limited area around that person).
This over-attention on "OT abilities" is similar to eastern tricksters who, instead of staying on the path to God & compassion, get side-tracked and instead get all worked up about "making things happen", "controlling others", "manipulating perceptions through subtle hypnotic techniques", "creating illusions seen by others", and so forth. The desire to gain these things is a FLAW. It is a weakness in character. In a certain sense, Scientology actually feeds on that weakness.
It seems that some people have "natural abilities" to read minds, or sense subtle events and situations. There is no consistency, and despite many efforts, there does not seem to "yet" be any successful methods to develop and improve these "skills". The various governments of the world have spent lots of money trying.
I can fully understand that any person's "reality", how he or she "views" the world WITHIN THE FIXED FRAMEWORK OF PHYSICAL REALITY, is based entirely on arbitrary agreements, considerations and postulates. I can even see how a person's experiences, what any person "attracts" into his or her life is also dependent on similar attitudes and beliefs about self and all sorts of other things. There is MUCH truth to the Einsteinian notion that the "state of the observer" very much affects the perceptions and experiences of WHAT is observed. That doesn't mean that the observer "creates" the universe around itself, BUT HOW it sees this universe is VERY MUCH dependent on the "state" of the observer.
In other words, for any finite observer, the experience of the universe has FAR LESS to do with "the nature of the universe" than on "how YOU are looking". This is simply applying the theories of relativity to human psychology.
For example, one man, with marked prejudices against black people, in the 1930s in Georgia, sees a black man walking across the street. He thinks to himself, and EXPERIENCES this fully, "that man is no good and is probably going to steal something from those nice white people". He SEES this. It is REAL to him. In fact, because of this person's "agreements, beliefs and attitudes" (which define him as an "observer"), he can't experience it ANY OTHER WAY.
Take another man who went to college at an integrated university in 1978, who bunked with a black fellow, who became good friends, and when he sees a black man walking across the street, he thinks NOTHING! And, he has an entirely different EXPERIENCE of the world around him.
I can give an endless, near-infinite amount of examples. The DETAILS of HOW and WHY any person feels and "sees" so many things about the world around him or her are defined by the "state of the observer". Anyone who denies this is unwilling to take the time and work necessary for some sincere examination of self and others.
This is where magick comes in. It involves the "shades of grey" in how YOU EXPERIENCE THE WORLD. Simply, if you can change the "state of the observer", then it (the observer) comes to LOOK from a different place and in a different way, and the view of the universe CHANGES accordingly. In FACT, just as Einstein so brilliantly described, "there is not any actual way that it really is", but only the way any finite observer views it from his or her limited, and restrictive vantage point. Magick involves changing the "state of the observer". One uses visualization and affirmations as a way to come to some NEW set of agreements, considerations and postulates. And, once you do, you "see the world differently or even newly", and your experience actually CHANGES. It can be no other way. Einstein was entirely right. Somebody needs to write a book on how his theories relate to human psychology and experience.
It is quite simple. ALL EXPERIENCES OF THIS UNIVERSE ARE FINITE AND RELATIVE, BASED ENTIRELY ON WHO IS DOING THE LOOKING AND HOW ONE IS LOOKING. WHAT and HOW you see and experience is TOTALLY based on YOU. Hubbard talks on and on about the "thetan" and the "viewpoint". Well, I know this will be sad for some, but "individuality" is the BIG LIE. All individuality is fleeting, temporary, and is subject to the CHANGE of the CYCLES. When one actually lets go of the "ego", all sense of "personal" vanishes with it.
There is a reason why studies of "mystics" and "mystical experiences" continue to display feelings of "a breakdown of all separation", and "oneness with all-that-is". The personal goes away.
If people get "better lives" with Scientology, it will mostly be because Scientology has functioned in a way to CHANGE basic agreements and considerations. Scientology does NOT operate outside the rules of the relativity of experience as defined by Einstein. Whenever any person joins some new religion or group, he or she usually receives a whole new pattern of "ideas", and along with various practices, comes to change his or her mind about all sorts of things. When the mind changes, as far as agreements and considerations go, THEN so change the perceptions and experiences of the Universe around this mind.
For most people, life's experiences kick you around, and you allow your ideas to be molded by those experiences. But, there is another possibility. Decide the life you want to live, and knowingly adopt the ideas (considerations) necessary to create THAT view and experience of reality. But again, for most, it is largely haphazard. Something happens, you react, your ideas follow accordingly, and these new ideas determine some new view and experience of reality.
The state of mind of any person precedes and determines the experience (at least within the fixed framework of the Universe).
Magick changes the world around you, for you, in a RELATIVE sense. It can and does do THAT exceptionally well. And again, for those who argue and deny, I am quite certain that you have never bothered to try actually using some system to effectively gain control over your own beliefs, attitudes and considerations. Most people are "tricked" into changing ones ideas, by buying into some religion or philosophy, and few recognize what is fundamentally going on at the deepest psycholgical level - that you are changing your considerations about all sorts of things (throughout the Dynamics).
If you think that this isn't so, then you haven't taken any time to examine how it is so, and how it is so every minute of every day for every conscious human being. Your beliefs, attitudes, and notions DEFINE you, and determine HOW you experience the world around you. Simply, if you want to change the world around you, as YOU experience it (within the fixed framework of physical reality), then just change your mind! It really IS that easy. All naysayers to the contrary.
Of course, most people as so horrendously rigid in their considerations, that many can't "have this idea". For most, the idea of actually changing ones own ideas enough to change ones perception and experience of reality is "impossible" or "absurd". And, THOSE ideas will define and limit you too.
I could go on about how that ties into the "ego", and how many people are heavily attached to ones own "ideas" about all sorts of things.
And, then there is the much larger aspect of how do all of these tiny points of awareness (you and me) connect up to and relate to whatever created the Universe? I suspect that it is in THIS REALM that truly "magickal powers arise", where one begins to be able to "bend the laws of Nature". But, as I see it, it has a built in self-protect mechanism.
When one can actually get to a point where you "know God" on some direct level of experience, your state of mind will have changed so much from that of the average human, that you won't and don't care AT ALL about "making things happen", or "influencing situations at a distance". Your only care is to extend love and compassion, as best as you care, from your station in life, to help other people reduce their pain and suffering. And, NOT to make the "able more able"! THAT idea is another major flaw of the Scientology philosophy.
Mother Theresa - help the poor, diseased and suffering
L Ron Hubbard - make the able more able
See the difference?
This over-attention and concern for OT powers is a diversion. It is a waste of time, time that could be better devoted to something actually useful (to others). I know I view it as a waste of time in a certain part of my life. I would suspect that, despite any and all claims to the contrary, that nearly ALL desires for "OT abilities" stem from "ego" concerns.
To me, legitimate spiritual practices address and diminish the human ego, as a necessary part of "growing" into a "larger consciousness". When the "ego" goes, so do most or all desires for things like "special powers" and "OT abilities". Granted, it makes sense to me that some few along a "pure path" might get certain powers, but not as any desired or intended result.
From where I am looking, I do not see that the study or practice of Scientology does much to reduce anyone's ego. The concept of "ego-reduction" is entirely absent from the Scientology philosophy. To a large extent, involvement with Scientology often acts to create a puffed-up, arrogant, know-best "Scientology personality" (just another version of more "ego"). In that regard, I find it largely flawed, and thus disqualified as a "legitimate spiritual path". Granted, there are certain points and ideas, that when taken OUT of the whole Scientology context, can and do have great use. Also, while it fails as a "spiritual path" in terms of how I define these things, it does have various uses and benefits as a "self-help" subject. Finally though, it is NOT AT ALL the unequivocal "solution to everything" that Hubbard and the C of S make it out to be.
+++++++++++++
Last edited:
RogerB
Crusader
Gaddie,
You're doing it again . . . you're impressing me!
Nice lucid piece above and nicely nuanced
Though I have a little point or two upon which I have a slightly different perspective, it is a lovely write up.
I'll make some time later to express my little point of different experience and perspective. For you raise some important issues.
Rog
You're doing it again . . . you're impressing me!
Nice lucid piece above and nicely nuanced
Though I have a little point or two upon which I have a slightly different perspective, it is a lovely write up.
I'll make some time later to express my little point of different experience and perspective. For you raise some important issues.
Rog
Gadfly
Crusader
Gaddie,
You're doing it again . . . you're impressing me!
Nice lucid piece above and nicely nuanced
Though I have a little point or two upon which I have a slightly different perspective, it is a lovely write up.
I'll make some time later to express my little point of different experience and perspective. For you raise some important issues.
Rog
Glad you like it.
Also, it is not "complete", and there may or may not actually be little points of difference. I am curious and look forward to the opportunity to review/re-evaluate these ideas while bouncing off of your perspective.
++++
afaceinthecrowd
Gold Meritorious Patron
Gaddie,
You're doing it again . . . you're impressing me!
Nice lucid piece above and nicely nuanced
Though I have a little point or two upon which I have a slightly different perspective, it is a lovely write up.
I'll make some time later to express my little point of different experience and perspective. For you raise some important issues.
Rog
Yep...Gaddie puttin' up some great, great stuff.
Thank, Gadfly. I'm gettin' a lot of good oudda your posts.
Face
Gadfly
Crusader
Yep...Gaddie puttin' up some great, great stuff.
Thank, Gadfly. I'm gettin' a lot of good oudda your posts.
Face
You are welcome. In a sense, I get much out of organizing the observations and trying to communicate them.
There is another KEY point here.
It is the duty of any viewpoint to OBSERVE HONESTLY within the framework of the Universe. I in no way imply that a person should "delude" self by accepting beliefs and considerations that deny actual facts and events.
But, this also involves a fine line, because part of practicing any form of magic (which includes many New Age subjects not called "magic") involves being able to disagree with current conditions. It is very tricky, because to change ones considerations one must change ones view in the face of often contradictory "data", and then quietly allow the Universe enough time to "catch up" with the new set of considerations.
I need to give a few examples, and this could take up a few chapters in a book.
For instance, it is a "fact" that the Church of Scientology attempted to frame Paulette Cooper in a crime that she didn't commit. It happened. It occurred as an event in the physical universe. It would be totally absurd to try to change ones agreements and considerations to have that "disappear" from your reality. Though, some people do deny such facts. It is not uncommon in life for people to deny and refuse to LOOK AT events and situations that disrupt ones neat little restrictive box of reality. It is part of my "philosophy" that one should NEVER DO THAT. Things such as misrepresentation, distortion of facts, lying, exagerration, altering of importances, and denial of facts, to self or to others is a MAJOR CRIME in my book. Such mental behaviors and tendencies block any and all roads to truth.
Sure, you can accept certain ideas that allow you to JUSTIFY the action, as many Scientologists do, using some Scio-based logic based on the idea that "anything is okay because we HAVE THE TRUTH and Paulette is an SP", but that is BULLSHIT, and NOT what I am talking about. Justification is equally despicable.
Do not EVER try to trick yourself into denying or altering the time, place, form and event of ANY actual situation that occurred in the Universe of shared-mutual experience. THAT opens a door to delusion and self-deception.
Next example. A woman has been divorced for a few years. The husband had been verbally abusive, and she internalized some of these ideas, and still has feelings of "inferiority" and "worthlessness". She "agrees" on some level that she is these things. So, taking a little bit of practical magic, in the form of affirmations, she gentle repeats to herself for a few minutes every day the following statements:
I am worthy of love.
I am a good person with valuable abilities.
I no longer attract violent men.
This is where it gets tricky. The current reality, the world she sees and experiences NOW, involves a view where she isn't worthy of love, where she has been attracting violent men, and where she has not been a good person (though less so than the other two). So, understanding the rules of consciousness, she sets out to create the thought and FEELING of the above statements. If she continues, and actually allows these notions to seep down into her subconscious (where all agreements seem to reside), they will act through some strange inexplicable connection to the rest of the entire Universe and change her life situations. But, before THAT, she changes her VIEW of herself and the world in which she lives. And, she does THAT by changing her agreements and considerations about herself and the world in which she lives.
One doesn't deny or pretend that the past hasn't happened. That is NOT healthy. Of course, totalitarian outfits, such as Scientology, lie about, suppress facts, and rewrite history all of the time to keep a tight control on adherents. THAT is bonkers. But, one can understand that ones "current view and experience of reality" is based on "previously held agreements", and know that as long as one changes certain ideas NOW, that ones experiences of reality will eventually and suitably follow along. Remember, ANY "view" of reality (experience) is dependent greatly on YOU and HOW you choose to look out at it all. But, it can take a little "time" to effectively change ones mind.
The idea involves a certain sphere of activity around any person, which involves your health, prosperity, friendships, work, success, love, etc. As the sphere expands out into groups, and Mankind, the ability to directly influence goes down fast. Some people say, "well, if you can change things with magic then get rid of all pain and suffering for everybody". The missing factor in all of that is that at this point of the evolution of the Universe there are many seemingly "independent" points of consciousness with "free will". They each need to walk the path. Why? I don't know. But, nobody can wave his or her hand and just make it all "perfect". But, you CAN work to make YOURSELF perfect.
It is from that understanding and framework that Ghandi said, "be the change you want to see in the world".
For some reason, God doesn't seem to put much stock in you finding your way back to Him/Her unless you do it through your OWN hard work! :confused2:
Now, we can talk and theorize about how one might be able to PUSH some of the control past the first and second dynamics, out into the other dynamics, but THAT gets VERY "theoretical". Also, if it is true that any person's considerations set the stage for and determine his or her life experiences, then the larger dynamics involve a great many more sets of considerations and agreements (which are often at odds with each other).
I think people like Hubbard and some others, had the notion that he/they would work to change reality by getting MANY OTHERS to agree and consider certain things. In that way, MANY points of awareness, with similar agreements, might attract and bring about some new version (view) of reality. I think it is a dumb idea myself, but I don't doubt that some have experimented with that notion.
Also, from a theoretical Scientology view, implants function in that way. If enough spiritual beings are implanted with the same set of considerations, which sink down into deep subconscious levels, then these billions and trillions (and many more) beings will "see" a shared reality based on the content of the implants. I don't believe that, but simply threw out a possibility that might align with other Scientology ideas (which also may or may not be true).
Summary:
There is the shared universe. The MEST universe. It stays the same for the most part, and whatever changes occur do so over long periods of time. It acts as a sort of playing field, but to me, it is much more than that. It is impossible to view it all in one gaze, and it can only be examined from infinite numbers of viewpoints, using different avenues and "organs" of perception, along different bands of the energy spectrum (over time). That requires many many many individual points of view, which brings us to the next.
And, there is YOUR universe (personal awareness along with all the considerations and agreements), which may or may not be an aspect (finite tentacle) of God's awareness. For me, I am choosing to accept this last as true, and have been finding that it brings about very unusual and interesting "experiences" of the Universe for me. I like to experiment with agreements and considerations, and see what happens. But, you need to give them a little time to work their "magic".
The above two universes have a dynamic relationship, that is different for every person, and changing for every person moment by moment.
I will leave here with this one idea. If I or you wasn't/weren't here to listen to "Here, There and Everywhere" by the Beatles, of what value would it have? Or, some other form of art or experience of Nature that blows YOU away? A sunset? A thunderstrom? The smell of honeysuckle blossoms in the Spring? A great painting? Your dog or cat lying on its back, all stretched out and utterly content?
We each may be God's way of experiencing, up close and personal, some unique aspect of this amazingly complex, beautiful and detailed Universe. For me, at this point in my "evolution", I am trying to do THAT the best I can. While also recognizing that EVERY OTHER separate thing is simply some other version of myself, just at a different point in space and time along the unfolding of this Universe (God's Creation). And each deserves complete tolerance, respect, and love. Of course, it would sure be nice if some of them would eventually come to also grant such tolerance, respect, and love to all others. But, their failure or refusal in that regard is no excuse for me not to.
I also see that as a key ingredient of a "valid spiritual path". It breaks down barriers and encourages tolerance, respect, and love to all others. ANY ideology, religion or philosophy that creates a model that involves "good guys" and "bad guys", and provides EXCUSES TO HARM some segment of creation (for your own or your group's benefit) is, to me, fundamentally flawed. Again, Scientology fails horribly in that regard. Both in theory, and especially, today in DM's current version of Scientology, in practice. Hubbard has/had been mocking up "enemies" right from the beginning. The subject itself creates separation/division and erects barriers. THAT asepct, all by itself, sabotages the subject. No matter WHO is in charge (DM, Hubbard or Marty).
+++++++++
Last edited:
afaceinthecrowd
Gold Meritorious Patron
Very nice, Gadfly...V-E-R-Y N-I-C-E...thank you.
I've pretty well spent my active synapse coins for the day so I’ll just respond briefly and provide a Link to two posts I made awhile back that you may or may not have seen.
My “Take” is that we are all on our own path. Our paths “intersect” with the paths of others. When this happens, others are as “guests” along our pathway and we along theirs. Not all guests are “good” guests and not all treat others as “guests” but, if one acts as a “guest” and “host”, then the pathway is more well defined, found and followed from the “Rocks” that define the edges, the “Lights” that illuminate the way and the “Signposts” that show us which turns to take—in short, our guests.
Yep, that's for sure!
To paraphrase a Lyric by Bernie Taupin...all of Us are “Artists” that “Paint” with our “Eyes”.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=445713&postcount=3626
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=466821&postcount=5419
Face
Last edited:
Gadfly
Crusader
Very nice, Gadfly...V-E-R-Y N-I-C-E...thank you.
I've pretty well spent my active synapse coins for the day so I’ll just respond briefly and provide a Link to a posts I made awhile back that you may or may not have seen.
My “Take” is that we are all on our own path. Our paths “intersect” with the paths of others. When this happens, others are as “guests” along our pathway and we along theirs. Not all guests are “good” guests and not all treat others as “guests” but, if one acts as a “guest” and “host”, then the pathway is more well defined, found and followed from the “Rocks” that define the edges, the “Lights” that illuminate the way and the “Signposts” that show us which turns to take—in short, our guests.
Yep, that's for sure!
To paraphrase a Lyric by Bernie Taupin...all of Us are “Artists” that “Paint” with our “Eyes”.
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=445713&postcount=3626
Face
And, thank-you! I especially enjoyed this from your link (written by afaceinthecrowd):
"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."
+++++
afaceinthecrowd
Gold Meritorious Patron
Thanks, Gaddie.
I forgot to say that i very much agree with this from you;
"It is from that notion that Ghandi said, "be the change you want to see in the world".
For some reason, God doesn't seem to put much stock in you finding your way back to Him/Her unless you do it through your OWN hard work! "
Face
I forgot to say that i very much agree with this from you;
"It is from that notion that Ghandi said, "be the change you want to see in the world".
For some reason, God doesn't seem to put much stock in you finding your way back to Him/Her unless you do it through your OWN hard work! "
Face
Gadfly
Crusader
Thanks, Gaddie.
I forgot to say that i very much agree with this from you;
"It is from that notion that Ghandi said, "be the change you want to see in the world".
For some reason, God doesn't seem to put much stock in you finding your way back to Him/Her unless you do it through your OWN hard work! "
Face
I got your intention, because in the quote of my original post you highlighted those lines in different colors!
I went back to my original post and put one of them in BOLD, because, I also agree that they are especially meaningful. To me, and apparently to you too.
That partially can explain pain & suffering in the world and why "God tolerates it". It is a lesson, and sending Jesus or some "son of God" to fix it all with the wave of a hand doesn't "solve the basic problem". That each person, or evolving entity, needs to figure it out for his or herself. And, God, as the sum total of ALL of these many evolving viewpoints, also learn and gain as a result. I suppose, that "God" may also be evolving.
++++++
Last edited:
afaceinthecrowd
Gold Meritorious Patron
I got your intention, because in the quote of my original post you highlighted those lines in different colors!
I went back to my original post and put one of them in BOLD, because, I also agree that they are especially meaningful. To me, and apparently to you too.
++++++
Thanks, Gadfly...I added another link in my post while you were answering that post.
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
The fact of implants is clear and their presence ubiquitous. They need not rise to the level of 'pain drug hypnosis' that LRH expounds upon at such length. All human cultures seek to inculcate their fixed considerations and belief systems through 'implants'. They call it 'education', or 'instilling moral & religious values', or some other such euphemism but what it is is the implanting of the existing fixed attitudes & considerations common to a group to new members and reinforcement of the same within the existing membership.
Even the use of pain, drugs, & forms of hypnosis are not unknown. Military bootcamp is intended to breakdown and refashion an individual to reflect the military culture by extended exposure to pain & stress. Many groups use drugs to induce agreements or to reinforce existing group agreements among members.
Implants are real enough. Although, not necessarily those with which LRH was so preeminently preoccupied.
Mark A. Baker
Gadfly, you've given me much to ponder.
G
Gottabrain
Guest
Beautiful, Gadfly. All of it. Shortened by taking out examples. Thank you for this.
Humility, then, is one of the key concepts a Scn needs to regain again in order to grow spiritually, as it is the arrogance and desire for personal power that are flaws stunting a Scn's personal spiritual growth. Once a Scn can become humble again toward the Supreme Power, he/she can break free of the traps of Scn.
But I don't find the self-affirmations and that sort of thing necessary once relationship is restored with the Higher Power. Once we are hooked up to God and others spiritually again and to total love, total acceptance, total integration with the world and others, healing comes so much more easily and the truth is easily seen; veils fall away.
Gadfly
Crusader
I thought of all of that when writing this, but my post was already too "long". :confused2:
Mark, we could have a few long lunches ending with a few slowly sipped lattes, and still not have enough time to discuss in depth how every human alive receives firm "indoctrination" from simply being alive and growing up in some culture. TV adds to the mix. Advertizing adds more. Religion adds its heavy dosage, and so forth.
In the end, a person must/needs to become aware of all of that, rise above past conditioning, consciously re-evaluate all of ones beliefs, attitudes and considerations, as compared to and with honest personal observations and extensive study, and finally choose values that align well with his or her curent "viewpoint". If you are doing this at all, it will be a dynamic process, and change more than a little infrequently.
Personally, I can imagine scenarios where Hubbard-style, heavy forced, electronic, whole track implanting could exist, pretty much just as he described. Just give modern science, along the fields of biochemistry, micro-electronics, and psychiatry another few thousand years. The "possibilities" to abuse humankind are endless (always in the name of some real or imagined IDEAL).
This is off-the-wall, but I remember reading a book on alien abductions, where the "greys" were unhappy with how they had turned out. They had bio-engineered themselves for many hundreds of thousands of years, to the point where bio-electrical crystal lattices were surgically woven into their brains at birth, so that the could be monitored and controlled, thus sharing a "group mind". The point though was that they had lost ALL emotions, were entirely "cold" and "logical", and also were dying out as a race. The book told a story of how certain alien abduction scenarios were actually instances of the grey's "coming back in time" in an attempt to change the direction of our history. Why? Because THEY were us in the past! They are who we will be in the future. Supposedly some abduction events are cases of their attempts to influence various people, as best they can, to change direction from this "scientific improvement of Man".
It is interesting, because I can easily envision not so pleasant scenarios where the "scientific" use of micro-processing in conjunction with advanced genetic engineering and bio-electronics could get WAY out of hand. Implanting, as described or imagined by Hubbard, could fit into such a model. As I see it, humans NEVER have enough knowledge and never CAN HAVE enough knowledge to enable a RESPOSNIBLE use of the various powerful and scientific gadgets at their disposal. No matter what man does with science, there are always "unintended consequences" (side-effects). Depending on where this sort of scientific experimentation gets pushed, there could be very dangerous side-effects (that current knowledge simply cannot anticipate).
I just noticed that the notion of KRC is fundamentally flawed for exactly the same reason. Oh, it works for things like cutting the grass, learning how to be a salesman, or playing a musical instrument, but with the BIG STUFF, like atomic power, messing with the weather, and advanced betterment of Man through science - watch out!
+++++++++
Last edited:
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
Understood. I believe we had a similar exchange with a basic agreement between us in the past. I simply did not wish the point to go completely unmentioned during the present discussion.
BTW, I too have enjoyed your recent string of posts very much.
Mark A. Baker
Similar threads
