The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

I also though Leon's post was excellent.

My thoughts exactly! And so well said!

Only "wrong" is maybe not the word I would use. They live in a huge implant station; it's not their own idea.



.

I also thought Leon's post was excellent. Just one point, the people wearing their bikinis and swim attire are doing so, at least in part because it is the law and if one does not do it, they will be carted off to jail. All the other points are excellent, I like the fact that nudity acts as an equalizer and makes bosses and employees more like equals, that was a really cool and perceptive point.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Putting in Ethics on one's self.

Wow Lakey, each time I think you have reached 100% of possible honesty and insight, you come up and pile another 30% on top of that!

You are quite harsh with yourself. "Its as if the shallowness that he once exhibited is now "comming home to roost", how does that saying go, "the chickens are coming home to roost." One is receiving his "comeuppance" for being insensitive and being a Chauvenist in the past." I had to repeat that to believe it.

I think it's time you meet a lady who shows you real thetan love (that does NOT exclude the body). People of both sexes want to get out the maximum pleasure of a 2D encounter. Giving that maximum pleasure is not a priority to most of them. Meet one such lady, and then emulate what she does. That is a whole other dimension of lovemaking.

Was it LRH who said, "Ethics is a personal thing, if one does not put ethics in on oneself, then life will do it for him/her."


.

I subscribe to that quote of LRH's, it was one of his truest bits of wisdom. In typical fashion, though he uttered widsom, he did not always apply his own policies or maxim's to himself in the living of his own life.

The idea in my "TOTAL HONESTY APPROACH TO LIVING LIFE" is that one must be honest and own up to one's own shortcomings and try to improve on them or life is going to do it for one on a by-pass basis. By the way, as Carmelo pointed out after recognizing this trait in me, which is not that easy to do, he does not believe it is an optimum method of living a life. He cites as a reason, that a person living this way cuts himself off from too many other people by failing to grant sufficient beingness to the alternative methods of living life which others are using.

I found Carmelo's insights absolutely profound! First of all, even though I put this totally honest facet on display in virtually everything I do, people dub in an ulterior motive and think that I am playacting about being 100% honest so as to achieve an ulterior motive or hidden agenda. I came into Carmelo's space, writing the CCLA story, he did not know what my agenda was or what my motives were, he was suspicious and leery and looked for my ulterior motives in my text and found errors in dating and sequences of events. Carmelo takes ownership for his entire space and doesn't want people nosing around in it unless they are okay and pass his litmus test. When he critiqued me, I acknowledged him and thanked him so he critiqued me some more and and I thanked him again and offered to use his help and suggested he be a co host. He PM'ed with me and after a few messages we began working together. Carmelo, the being had realized that I was living an "always telling the truth approach to life" He then allowed me to be part of his universe and work in it. As things went back and forth between us, he finally decided that I had some actual "smarts" and that he would give up control of me and let me operate independently.

I hadn't figured all this out totally until he just gave me his critique yesterday on what he called "my philosophy of life". Obviously, he could see some merit in what I was writing and the products I was getting out. I see that he took a real good look at my "philosophy of life" and was even toying with adopting more of it in his own life. After careful consideration he came up with the correct assessment. In a more perfect universe, my system would be beautiful to use and would work perfectly but here on Planet Earth it is not a good system to live by. He then cited a correct reson why. His observation caused things to move around in my universe and enabled me to have new incites. Now we are connected strongly spiritually through mutual respect, at least on my end. After a whole lifetime, finally one very astute being figured me out and gave me the correct indication of what I was doing and in a way, who I am. "I am the guy who always tells the truth." It is a "signal" event in one's life to have a person let one into his universe and then tell him who he is and that in a better universe, his is the way to go but not in this universe. This may be the biggest epiphany I have had to date. It is a two terminal universe (more LRH) and people need to be recognized for who they are and acknowledged by another person! After 70 years, I finally received a correct indication and my ack!

Somebody figired me out better than I knew my own self and indicated it to me. What a priceless win that is to experience. Those of you looking for OT wins like being able to see without using your body's eyes and what not, I am here to tell you that this win which I just experienced is better than being able to do that. You know, "Know thyself and the truth will set your free." How much is it worth to one to take a major step in getting to know oneself better...this experience is a great step forward in being free again.

And coming down to Earth and finishing my comments to Heidrun, yes I believe in being harsh on myself because I know that there are big gains to be had from being truthful and if I am being truthful and not receiving these big gains, then I must need to be even more truthful and really let it all hang out. Now, with this new win, maybe I will follow Carmelo's advice and not be as hard on myself from here on out. Time will tell. Again thank you Carmelo!
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

The role and power of an Auditor or Operator

Thoughts about my earlier post made 4 hours ago. The role of the Auditor, Therapist or Processor.

A person needs to be acknowledged by at least one other person, preferably one of his peers. It takes agreement between at least two beings to make something real persist in the physical universe. It is a two terminal universe.

Now having objective as well as subjective reality on this concept, I am in a better position to view the workings of the concept. As far as I can see it, there are perhaps 5 classes of individuals who a spiritual being can received a proper indication and acknowledgement from during his/her lifetime.

#1a. - The Auditor
#1b. - The Operator in Knowledgeism which I am not schooled in
#2a. - A Freudian type therapist
#2b. - A Psychologist or Sociologist
#3a. - A Western Religious leader, i.e. rabbi, preist, minister or preacher
#3b. - An Eastern religious leader, i.e. a guru or swami, etc.
#4. - A family member, relative or friend.
#5. - An opinion leader, i.e, a movie star, rock singer, teacher or professor

#1a and #1b are for the most part trained to handle the job.
#2a and 2b have training, but it is training which usually involves evaluating for a subject and telling him the answer. This methodology can occasionally get lucky and hit the jackpot by accident and give some gains but a wrong evaluation, which is more likely, plus a choppy untrained communication cycle will usually spell trouble. Some practioners have a "knack" and do better than the others.
#3a. There is some training here but the tech is generally flawed. You are encouraged to give your soul to Christ or something like that. A temporary lift can and does occur but there is not enough substance to the tech to make real permanent changes.
#4 - These people really love their friend who they are trying to help and the demonstration of love, friend to friend, will sometimes get a nice result but any real permanent result is very unlikely.
#5 - The movie star usually knows no more than the person he is giving advice to, the University professor often deals in only pretended wisdom not real wisdom, though once in a while there are exceptions. Often the University Professor adopts a condesceding attitude toward the person asking for help which also hurts the chances of success.

The school teacher in public school. These usually have some practical wisdom, tempered by real care and concern for their students and a real desire to help and to serve the community. They can and often are helpful and give sensible advice or get the person to think for himself.

I know this is a very simplified look at a complicated subject but I would say that one has to deal with someone in these few categories, auditor or processor, Eastern religious guru, grade school or junior high, high school teacher for youth or perhaps someone like a Scoutmaster, and finally a family member or very close friend. REMEMBER, THE GOAL IS FOR A PERSON TO BE DUPLICATED AND ACKNOWLEDGED FOR BEING WHO HE/SHE IS. Of these, #1a and #1b will be the most predictable.

EXAMPLES THROUGHOUT LIFE - LRH - One of the problems with LRH is that he never was duplicated and acknowledged!! He demanded and received a huge amount of adoration but in his mind, he had no peers and he would not let anyone get close to him on a deep and personal level so that he could really be duplicated and acknowledged. He actually was acknowledged over and over by his public, but usually for the wrong things. His acknowledgments were always for the Shore Story version of what he was doing but his true motives were NEVER acknowledged because he would not let anyone get close enough to him to take a real look at what his real motives were.

This is another negative side to embellishing all truths and making up phoney stories for every major event in one's life. LRH is the "Poster Boy" as to the fact that a life based on lies and phoney shore stories leads to a sad ending. For such a powerful and charismatic personality with a powerful mind to end up as he did sick and in hiding is mute testimony that such a way of living life does not work.

GRADE SCHOOL TEACHERS - Before puberty kicked in at age 11 1/2, my life was smooth as silk, nice and loving parents and relatives, straight A's through 6th grade and the second most popular kid in my classes (The first most popular, Larry Alger was my best friend.) ALL THE TEACHERS KNEW THAT I TOLD ONLY THE TRUTH AND THE FACT IS THAT THROUGH THE SIXTH GRADE, I NEVER TOLD ONE LIE IN MY WHOLE LIFE, NOT EVEN ONE TINY WHITE LIE.

Telling the truth is not as rare for a kid as it is in adults. Religious Christian kids would often tell only the truth as would many kids who were serious about the Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts for boys and the Brownies and Girl Scouts for Girls.

It was known that I never lied by my teachers and they mentioned this to my parents on those "open house" nights when the parents went to school and visited the class room and met with the teachers. I heard it said many times that I never lied and my parents beamed with pride and I glowed with pride and a warm feeling as this fact was spoken right in front of me on several occasions by my teachers. Somewhere around puberty, problems arise and most kids start lying. In Junior High School, not too many kids continue telling only the truth. I finished grade school in 1951 so Carmelo's acknowledgement was not the first one in this lifetime but only my first one as an adult. Fifty Nine years had past between being acknowledged as living a truthful life style!!

Lakey

 

[Leon]

In a way "lies" are very creative. When one tells a joke, for example, "There were these three guys . . . . " Fact is these three guys never existed! It's a lie.

Also the creator of illusions at a magic show is trying to deceive us - he is creating lies.

When a girl puts make-up on her face, she is lying. And to touch on earlier posts, when we wear clothes that make us look good or feel good, then we are lying. We are covering up what is really underneath, hiding the perception of that.

Fundamentally the entire universe and its creation is a lie. Its continued existence depends on our maintaining that lie.

A lie made solid becomes a truth. This is on the inversion - the lower harmonic, please don't misunderstand me here.

"Always tell the truth" really means "Stay locked into other people's agreemenets". Real truth would cause vanishment, and so a disappearance of the agreed-upon "truth".

It was from this viewpoint that I describe here that LRH considered it to be OK for him to tell whatever lie he chose. "What is true for you is true for you" also means "If I convince you that something is true then for you it is true, and so it is not a lie". This made it all OK. For him.

 

[lkwdblds]

Great Points Leon!

In a way "lies" are very creative. When one tells a joke, for example, "There were these three guys . . . . " Fact is these three guys never existed! It's a lie.

Also the creator of illusions at a magic show is trying to deceive us - he is creating lies.

When a girl puts make-up on her face, she is lying. And to touch on earlier posts, when we wear clothes that make us look good or feel good, then we are lying. We are covering up what is really underneath, hiding the perception of that.

Fundamentally the entire universe and its creation is a lie. Its continued existence depends on our maintaining that lie.

A lie made solid becomes a truth. This is on the inversion - the lower harmonic, please don't misunderstand me here.

"Always tell the truth" really means "Stay locked into other people's agreemenets". Real truth would cause vanishment, and so a disappearance of the agreed-upon "truth".

It was from this viewpoint that I describe here that LRH considered it to be OK for him to tell whatever lie he chose. "What is true for you is true for you" also means "If I convince you that something is true then for you it is true, and so it is not a lie". This made it all OK. For him.

Great points Leon! Well, I did dye my hair dark from about ages 59 to 62 but had so many compliments on its being white that I let it revert to white. Also, I wore contact lenses all during the 1960's when I was going on dates which were more lies, covering up near-sightedness. BTW I got rid of near sightedness naturally with no Lasick but just by doing exercises and drills from various books.

LRH is too tricky for me, he reminds me of Tricky Dicky Nixon, I think he justified his many lies in a manner similar to LRH. There is just stretching the truth such as a woman wearing a push'em up bra and then there is outright lying done to decieve people. I am not a big fan of the way LRH ran his personal affairs especially the way he treated his children and former wives. I would never hang with anyone who exhibited those traits but I would still follow them as a guru. Other lies he told, finally stopped my adulation for him. Considering that I never lied, his refusal to accept my declaration that I never embezzled funds from CCLA Treasury and his insistance that I had lied before and would not get away with it this time showed just how wrong he was capable of being. He did not even "look before he leaped" when he falsely accused me of that rididuclous crime. My response is to cut him no slack in my assessment of his life. Despite uncovering or repackaging many truths and helping many people along the way but harming many others, he ended up almost a total failure because he did not see to it that his legacy was passed on to the right people and he did not see to it that his family was provided for at the end of his life. He tried to do that but applying the supreme test of a thetan, he was not able to make things go right at his life's end.

A lot of people want to cut him slack because he helped them but I say, hold the man to the high standard he held all of us to. One either makes it go right or he doesn't. Look don't listen. At life's end, LRH was not able to make things go right and was physically disabled and at the mercy of others and their visions of the future of his movement and that is what he should be judged on.
Lakey

 

[SweetnessandLight]

On becoming like a little child to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven...

Well if that is true, I have got it made and apparently Sweetness and Light does as well, from what she just wrote. The problem for me is that I do not believe in the kingdom of heaven other than a potential heaven which could be fashioned by individual beings working in concert to build a "heavenly" Universe. There would be a lot of hard work involved to move from current conditions on planet Earth to a universe resembling the heaven talked of by Western religions. This is not to say that such a task is impossible. Most of us believe it is possible and that it is happening now. We just need to pick up the pace.
Lakey

I just want to chime in here and say that I fully agree that some of us are more childlike than others, Lakey and I resonate in some very similar ways here, and in other ways are very different. It's all good!

The important point that I wish to make here is that to me, Heaven and Hell are not places that we go to or construct on earth or somewhere else in another Universe, but both are states of consciousness...that can be experienced now and/or in the future.

I agree that sharing ideas, theta, emotions and experiences with our fellow beings helps us to co-create these states of consciousness for ourselves and others. It's all about choice and responsibility. We are all MUCH more powerful that we are usually willing to accept, at any given place in time.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Jesus Christ said that if we don't become like children, we will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

We may not doubt that society in heaven consists mainly of undesirable persons.
- Mark Twain's Notebook

...heaven for climate, and hell for society.
- Mark Twain's Speechs


Mark A. Baker

 

[lkwdblds]

In a way "lies" are very creative. When one tells a joke, for example, "There were these three guys . . . . " Fact is these three guys never existed! It's a lie.

I do not think your conclusion is fully true. Let's look at the most common definitions of the word "lie:
Nouns #1 A false statement deliberately presented as being true, a falsehood.
#2. Something meant to deceive or give a false impression.
Verbs #1 To present false information with the intent of deceiving.
#2 To convey a false image or impression.

Its possible for a person to tell a story which is a lie but much more common, such as in telling a child a bedtime story, it is just a way to entertain the child and perhaps teach him a moral or to just bond with your child. Deception or conveying a false impression is not part of the intent. If a person telling the story is concerned enough not to want to lie, he can preface the story with an opening remark such as "The story I am about to tell is not true but I will tell it anyway because I think you will be entertained. Therefore, the conclusion which you reach, while it can be true can just as easily not be true and will never be true if you use an opening preface so I do not agree with your statement that when one tells a joke or a story it is a lie.

Also the creator of illusions at a magic show is trying to deceive us - he is creating lies.

The creator of illusions at a magic show is not really lying with the intent to deceive either. People know in advance that the magician is using some sort of trick to make it appear as if something happened which has not really happened. His basic purpose again is not to deceive so as to dupe someone but rather to deceive so as to entertain and fascinate the audience and do the trick so cleverly that though everyone know that it is a trick, no one can figure out how it is done. This is closer to a lie than the joke is because it contains some deception, but what makes it not a lie is that everyone watching knows, going in, that the magician is just executing a clever trick.

When a girl puts make-up on her face, she is lying. And to touch on earlier posts, when we wear clothes that make us look good or feel good, then we are lying. We are covering up what is really underneath, hiding the perception of that.

This one above is a close call but I will concede that the girl putting on make-up is executing a lie. When we wear clothes that make us look good or feel good we are not always lying. If the clothes only make us feel good then we wear them just for that reason and are not lying to anybody. If they make us look good well it could be a form of lying to fool others or it could be something else. Maybe a person, for his or her own self esteem just likes to dress up because it makes them feel better about themselves and just makes them happier regardless of what other people think. THis would not be a lie. If you reduce this case to absurdity, "reductio ad absurdum", a person would have to dress badly on purpose so as not to be lying and that doesn't make sense.

Fundamentally the entire universe and its creation is a lie. Its continued existence depends on our maintaining that lie.

I agree with clause one above. I do not think your second clause is fully accurate. Fundamentally the entire universe is a lie. I am not so sure that its creation is a lie. It was created knowingly and with a specific intention to create it. Its creation is a fact even though the creation itself is a lie. To get the universe to persist there has to be a lie and the most common one in use is mis-assignment of ownership. The ownership of who the creator is once jumbled up and mis-assigned is sufficient to keep the universe maintained.

Now telling more lies only makes the universe more solid. Telling no lies at worst leaves the status quo alone and telling the truth can either leave the universe at its previous level of solidity or may as-is something and lighten the universe. If enough truth were to be told, the proper ownership of the universe might possibly be assigned riight down to the last detail and the whole universe might vanish. Telling the truth leads either to a status quo in the universe or a lightening while telling lies can never lighten or as-is anything but makes the universe more solid.

A lie made solid becomes a truth. This is on the inversion - the lower
harmonic, please don't misunderstand me here.

I'm okay on this one.

"Always tell the truth" really means "Stay locked into other people's agreemenets". Real truth would cause vanishment, and so a disappearance of the agreed-upon "truth".

There is something illogical in your first sentence. "The first quoted phrase is not equivalent with the second quoted phrase." You are stating that "Always tell the truth" really means "Stay locked into other people's agreements." This equivalence assertion is not a given. "Always tell the truth" just means "Always tell the truth", no more an no less. It does not automatically mean buying into or locking into other people's agreements. If one locks into other people's faulty agreements then that would not be telling the truth!

Real truth would cause vanishment, and so a disappearance of the agreed upon "truth". I believe you are right on this one. However, my telling the truth, say as a grammar school student, made no effort to cause a disappearance of the universe but only to state the correct facts when describing a physical universe situation rather than fabricating or manufacturing altered facts so as to deceive people or convey a false image. As an adult, I pretty much stuck with the same game plan. Wanton lying would only solidify other peoples AND MY co agreements which brought the universe into creation while telling the truth would either leave the solidity of the universe alone or reduce it solidity, depending on how fundatmental my truths were.

It was from this viewpoint that I describe here that LRH considered it to be OK for him to tell whatever lie he chose. "What is true for you is true for you" also means "If I convince you that something is true then for you it is true, and so it is not a lie". This made it all OK. For him.

Your last paragraph is very original and makes a lot of sense. I like this explanation of how LRH justified what is and what is not a lie. As far as what LRH did in the area being valid, the results speak for themselves, manifesting in a temendously muddied Scio field with people leaving the church in droves while the C of S is engaging in out exchange by getting their membership to go into great debt for ideal Orgs of total MEST which become owned by Church management. These very solid temples of huge amounts of the finest MEST available attest to the fact that the way LRH lied and twisted the truth to suit his own agenda led not to as-isness and vanishment but huge palaces of MEST soldifying other peoples agreements as you put it..

Lakey

 

[purple haze]

I just want to chime in here and say that I fully agree that some of us are more childlike than others, Lakey and I resonate in some very similar ways here, and in other ways are very different. It's all good!

The important point that I wish to make here is that to me, Heaven and Hell are not places that we go to or construct on earth or somewhere else in another Universe, but both are states of consciousness...that can be experienced now and/or in the future.

I agree that sharing ideas, theta, emotions and experiences with our fellow beings helps us to co-create these states of consciousness for ourselves and others. It's all about choice and responsibility. We are all MUCH more powerful that we are usually willing to accept, at any given place in time.

Awesome post, Sweet. Purple.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

so if you were in Germany in the period from 1930 to 1945, and you knew where some Jews were, would you tell the authorities where they were?

 

[Leon]

The dictum that one must always tell the truth is one that does not stand up to inspection. There are many cases - including the one made by Carmelo above - where telling a lie is the more honourable thing to do. And since all truth is contextual it can also be manipulated to one's own ends.

Between "Truth" and "Falsehood" lies an infinite continuum of variations. falsehood can be part of spirit of play, it can be aesthetic, it can be all sorts of things. "Truth" can be used to humiliate and depress others.

One can never say the Truth = Good, and Lies = Bad. Each is contextual, and its degree of goodness or badness varies according to the situation. And therefor it can be bent and made to mean whatever one chooses it to mean.

LRH knew this well. And he used it whenever it suited him. However, as with most liars, the context changed without his authority and he was shown up.

I can fully believe that he "commanded a flotilla of sub-chasers in the North Altalntic". Also much else of what he claimed. What, for example, is the "Alaskan Radio Expedition" other than someone sailing off the coast of Alaska listening to the radio? He was posted to a converted trawler in Boston, if I recall rightly, and unlike bigger ships that have an officer aboard and on duty all the time when in harbour, small ships such as he was on usually have one officer covering a group of them. This is normal naval practice even today. So he undoubtedly was the duty officer of a group of converted trawlers one weekend and so he can rightly claim that he was "in command" of them. Quite true. And Boston's harbour water is part of the North Atlantic, so . . . .he told the "truth".

 

[lkwdblds]

Hell no!

so if you were in Germany in the period from 1930 to 1945, and you knew where some Jews were, would you tell the authorities where they were?

Well in 1930 and 1931 it did not matter too much because the Nazi's weren't in power. From 1932 on, Hell No! but really, how would one know what he would have done. Its easy to speculate that you would have done the right thing but there is no way to be certain unless you actually lived it.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

This time I fully agree for sure!

The dictum that one must always tell the truth is one that does not stand up to inspection. There are many cases - including the one made by Carmelo above - where telling a lie is the more honourable thing to do. And since all truth is contextual it can also be manipulated to one's own ends.

Between "Truth" and "Falsehood" lies an infinite continuum of variations. falsehood can be part of spirit of play, it can be aesthetic, it can be all sorts of things. "Truth" can be used to humiliate and depress others.

One can never say the Truth = Good, and Lies = Bad. Each is contextual, and its degree of goodness or badness varies according to the situation. And therefor it can be bent and made to mean whatever one chooses it to mean.

LRH knew this well. And he used it whenever it suited him. However, as with most liars, the context changed without his authority and he was shown up.

I can fully believe that he "commanded a flotilla of sub-chasers in the North Altalntic". Also much else of what he claimed. What, for example, is the "Alaskan Radio Expedition" other than someone sailing off the coast of Alaska listening to the radio? He was posted to a converted trawler in Boston, if I recall rightly, and unlike bigger ships that have an officer aboard and on duty all the time when in harbour, small ships such as he was on usually have one officer covering a group of them. This is normal naval practice even today. So he undoubtedly was the duty officer of a group of converted trawlers one weekend and so he can rightly claim that he was "in command" of them. Quite true. And Boston's harbour water is part of the North Atlantic, so . . . .he told the "truth".

Leon, this one I agree with 100% for sure. I read it very carefully and think it is an excellent post. On the other one, I was just walking out the door and quickly scanned it and thought I agreed but later on found some disagreements but not on this one. All the points are sound. BTW I never claimed that always telling the truth was mandatory, I just did it up through 6th grade. It is probably somewhat aberrated but what did I know. I used to say my prayers at night and thought God would take care of me if I told the truth. It was some crazy fixation of that nature that motivated me. There are worse aberrations for a kid to have.

I have told some lies as an adult when the situation required it. Even here on ESMB, many members do not want certain info about them given out and to accomodate them, I might put some little fib into a post. In the classic one which Carmelo brought up about telling the Nazi's where some Jews were hiding if you knew and were in Nazi Germany, of course, you are much better off lying in that case.

I am pretty much against lying for no good reason and just being a chronic liar as a matter of habit. If a hostess makes a new recipe at a family gathering and I do not care for it, I will still say I like it. Up through 6th grade I would admit that I did not like the dish. Lying for a good, well thought out reason is often the best thing to do. I really enjoyed your analysis of LRH's exagerations. Anyway very nice post!!
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Leon, this one I agree with 100% for sure. I read it very carefully and think it is an excellent post. On the other one, I was just walking out the door and quickly scanned it and thought I agreed but later on found some disagreements but not on this one. All the points are sound. BTW I never claimed that always telling the truth was mandatory, I just did it up through 6th grade. It is probably somewhat aberrated but what did I know. I used to say my prayers at night and thought God would take care of me if I told the truth. It was some crazy fixation of that nature that motivated me. There are worse aberrations for a kid to have.

I have told some lies as an adult when the situation required it. Even here on ESMB, many members do not want certain info about them given out and to accomodate them, I might put some little fib into a post. In the classic one which Carmelo brought up about telling the Nazi's where some Jews were hiding if you knew and were in Nazi Germany, of course, you are much better off lying in that case.

I am pretty much against lying for no good reason and just being a chronic liar as a matter of habit. If a hostess makes a new recipe at a family gathering and I do not care for it, I will still say I like it. Up through 6th grade I would admit that I did not like the dish. Lying for a good, well thought out reason is often the best thing to do. I really enjoyed your analysis of LRH's exagerations. Anyway very nice post!!
Lakey

There is an old joke:

A fellow asks a woman if she'd sleep with him, if he paid her a million dollars.

She replies,"Yes."

So then he asks her, if she would sleep with him if they go out for for a burger, some fries and a movie.

She says,"No; what kind of girl do you think I am?"

He says,"we've already ascertained that. Now, we are dickering on price."

So Lakey, if it means certain death or torture, you can lie to protect someone. There are times, like with a woman cooking bad green beans, that you'll lie.

I'll let you finish the analogy.........


The aspect of your SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) that I find vexing, is your ability to not is others' needs for privacy, security, cloaking, and possible hurt feelings.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

The dictum that one must always tell the truth is one that does not stand up to inspection. There are many cases - including the one made by Carmelo above - where telling a lie is the more honourable thing to do. And since all truth is contextual it can also be manipulated to one's own ends.

Between "Truth" and "Falsehood" lies an infinite continuum of variations. falsehood can be part of spirit of play, it can be aesthetic, it can be all sorts of things. "Truth" can be used to humiliate and depress others.

One can never say the Truth = Good, and Lies = Bad. Each is contextual, and its degree of goodness or badness varies according to the situation. And therefor it can be bent and made to mean whatever one chooses it to mean.

LRH knew this well. And he used it whenever it suited him. However, as with most liars, the context changed without his authority and he was shown up.

I can fully believe that he "commanded a flotilla of sub-chasers in the North Altalntic". Also much else of what he claimed. What, for example, is the "Alaskan Radio Expedition" other than someone sailing off the coast of Alaska listening to the radio? He was posted to a converted trawler in Boston, if I recall rightly, and unlike bigger ships that have an officer aboard and on duty all the time when in harbour, small ships such as he was on usually have one officer covering a group of them. This is normal naval practice even today. So he undoubtedly was the duty officer of a group of converted trawlers one weekend and so he can rightly claim that he was "in command" of them. Quite true. And Boston's harbour water is part of the North Atlantic, so . . . .he told the "truth".

You really had a nice "look" there. I've not read that viewpoint before. It makes excellent sense.

I've had questions about someone else, now departed, who could utter, for posterity, those same kind of false truths.

 

[hbeer]

The important point that I wish to make here is that to me, Heaven and Hell are not places that we go to or construct on earth or somewhere else in another Universe, but both are states of consciousness...that can be experienced now and/or in the future.

Well, yes and no (in my opinion)!

I have read that the main difference between physical existence and the afterlife is: you will live on a level that resonates with you in the afterlife, while you will encounter mixed experiences while incarnated.

In other words: in the afterlife thieves live among thieves, drug addicts among drug addicts, artists among artists - and every religion has their own "heaven" as well -, while on Earth the most loving person can run into an abuser, and vice versa... you get the idea.



.

 

[hbeer]

We may not doubt that society in heaven consists mainly of undesirable persons.
- Mark Twain's Notebook

...heaven for climate, and hell for society.
- Mark Twain's Speechs


Mark A. Baker

Heh



.

 

[hbeer]

Well in 1930 and 1931 it did not matter too much because the Nazi's weren't in power. From 1932 on, Hell No! but really, how would one know what he would have done. Its easy to speculate that you would have done the right thing but there is no way to be certain unless you actually lived it.
Lakey

I solved that dilemma by getting myself killed by a bullet... oh that was a bad mistake, I still pay for it.



.

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Well, yes and no (in my opinion)!

I have read that the main difference between physical existence and the afterlife is: you will live on a level that resonates with you in the afterlife, while you will encounter mixed experiences while incarnated.

In other words: in the afterlife thieves live among thieves, drug addicts among drug addicts, artists among artists - and every religion has their own "heaven" as well -, while on Earth the most loving person can run into an abuser, and vice versa... you get the idea.



.

IN HEAVEN THERE IS NO BEER
(Traditional)

Recorded by :
Brave Combo; Dr. Demento; The Dubliners; The Pogues.


In Heaven there is no beer
That's why we drink it here
And when we're all gone from here
Our friends will be drinking all the beer.

In Heaven there is no wine
So we drink till we feel fine
And when we leave this all behind
Our friends will be drinking all the wine.

In Heaven there is no fear
So we worry too much here
And we drink ourselves full of beer
To help us when we deal with the fear.

In Heaven there are no drugs
That's why we hang with thugs
And when the Lord pulls the plug
All the thugs will still be selling drugs, yeah.

Thugs and drugs
Beer...

In Heaven there is no sex
So let's do that next
And when our muscles no longer flex
Someone else will be having sex.

In Heaven there are no wars
Or cars, or movie stars
And when we no longer are
The world will probably still be having wars.

What the heck! Yeah!

Sex and war,
Bars and cars.
Drugs, thugs,
And delicious food.

 

[lkwdblds]

Wasn't that George Bernard Shaw?

There is an old joke:

I heard this anectdote before and I believe it was expounded in England by someone famous such as George Bernard Shaw. I once knew who said it and am now only guessing but that would be my best guess.

A fellow asks a woman if she'd sleep with him, if he paid her a million dollars.

She replies,"Yes."

So then he asks her, if she would sleep with him if they go out for for a burger, some fries and a movie.

She says,"No; what kind of girl do you think I am?"

He says,"we've already ascertained that. Now, we are dickering on price."

So Lakey, if it means certain death or torture, you can lie to protect someone. There are times, like with a woman cooking bad green beans, that you'll lie.

I'll let you finish the analogy.........

I don't know, I guess a summary would be that we have already established that I am a liar (to some degree) so we are just dickering about to what degree of danger or discomfort someone will experience if the truth were told,
before I will be motivated strongly enough to enable me to lie. How's that?

Like most decisions required to live life, it boils down the "the greatest good for the greatest number...." One is engaging in deception and there has to be a sufficiently valid reason to do so. Wanton deception, just for sport and to jerk people around just for amusement, to me is nearly always wrong. Look, your Ruthie Madoff avatar caused me to think you were a woman, and you allowed me to be taken in and believe this for weeks. When I found out, I was pissed but quickly got over it. I would not have been able to allow someone to believe such a falsehood for an extended period of time. You seemed to have fun doing so, its no big deal, I was not harmed in any way but did feel foolish. Neither of us was right or wrong. You were just having a little fun at my expense, if I didn't like it, I could have cut communications with you but I did not. Staying in communication turned out to be a wise decision for me. I don't know what else to say..

The aspect of your SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) that I find vexing, is your ability to not is others' needs for privacy, security, cloaking, and possible hurt feelings.

There are divorce papers going through right now with my ex-wife and this SOP as you call it is one of her biggest beefs. Not being aware of security cloaking plus blabbing my business trade secretes and inside knowledge of things such as my mark up structure to any person who comes in off the street. She is an attorney, trained to play her cards "close to her vest" and maintain secrecy and security. She feels that my SOP endangers her financially by costing us money.

I don't know why I have this SOP. if I knew, I wouldn't have it. My best guess is that being a type who does not like to lie, there is a quality of trusting everyone that goes hand in hand with it. The two items combined translate into being naive. Why am I naive, well there again you get back to the aspect of being childlike and carefree. Its a nice way to be but as you pointed out, when applied on a planet such as Planet Earth, it always leads to disaster. In a different world, such as the world Dorothy found in wizard of Oz, it would be a lovely way to live.

I will tell you this, when people point out to me that I have compromised their security, I immediately correct the information which they found objectionable and am very careful that I do not make the same mistake twice WITH THAT PERSON. I recently met some ESMB member who told me of a friend of theirs who likes something I like, say Hungarian cooking and say this person's name was Laslow. I post that I am going to have Hungarian with so and so and her friend Laslow next week and this person immediately notifies me that I have compromised their securtiy blanket. I had not the slightest idea that what I wrote about Laslow would compromise anyone's security. I am naive and do not see these things.

One thing though, I am pretty good about not making the same mistake twice. Once a person says I compromised their security I make very sure not to do it again. I think you have to admit, Carmelo, that when you pointed this out to me perhaps in October, I have kept tight security since then.
Lakey