|
Post by hollandr on Sept 16, 2008 11:25:08 GMT
>Classic symptom of schizophrenia.
Perhaps we might collect some data in open discussion - if that is acceptable
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Sept 16, 2008 11:28:43 GMT
>you chose not to address the clear evidence
Whether or not their evidence is clear to them, its introduction constitutes a distraction from the thread - and thus perhaps serves to demonstrate the point I was making
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 16, 2008 11:40:53 GMT
>Classic symptom of schizophrenia.
Perhaps we might collect some data in open discussion - if that is acceptable That was the data I contributed to the collection.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 16, 2008 11:43:12 GMT
>you chose not to address the clear evidence
Whether or not their evidence is clear to them, its introduction constitutes a distraction from the thread - and thus perhaps serves to demonstrate the point I was making In making your point, it was you who first mentioned the con artist and, in doing so, you later said: I knew you could not resist Castenada and the academic debunkers. Now you have the hide to object to my having reacted as you intended!? Go figure
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Sept 16, 2008 22:32:22 GMT
To return to the thread - I think so far we have seen examples of distractions arising when discussing significant issues.
We can test this further by the following experiment:
- Pick a topic such as a hobby, holiday, loved one and spend 30 seconds thinking in some detail as to how to achieve some objective. See if the thought stream flows easily and is not interrupted.
- Then pick some action from the past of which you are somewhat ashamed and spend 30 seconds examining the thought processes that led you to make that decision. See if you can find the thoughts that persuaded you.
Now compare the two.
My hypothesis is that the first set of thoughts is permitted and therefore are able to flow and the second set is not permitted and therefore likely to be interrupted repeatedly.
Please report observations without labels
|
|
|
Post by maat on Sept 16, 2008 23:51:35 GMT
So help me, Tamrin if you post that picture one more time I'm going to ask the Mods to delete it each an every time. What you are doing is harrassing a Brother. Bullying.
I don't know what your problem is, but get over it! Quit sulking! Move on!
Maat
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Sept 17, 2008 0:14:22 GMT
>if you post that picture one more time
It might be seen as an example of the use of distractions
>my having reacted as you intended!?
While I merely anticipated, does this perhaps illustrate my point about the lack of free will in thought processes?
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Sept 17, 2008 7:55:57 GMT
Its a sad case of badlymadechastitybeltophobia.
No cure I am afraid.
Happens most often in primates that can not find enough words to express what they wish to communicate.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 17, 2008 8:31:05 GMT
So help me, Tamrin if you post that picture one more time I'm going to ask the Mods to delete it each an every time. What you are doing is harrassing a Brother. Bullying.
I don't know what your problem is, but get over it! Quit sulking! Move on!
Maat As Napoleon said, " A picture is worth a thousand words." I suggest posting the image is an apt response and reminder if and where the only proof of one of Bro. Russell's many extraordinary claims is his own demonstrably unreliable observations. Whether he is a Brother or not, this is a perfectly valid point to make in responding to such nonsense and you may note, I only show it under such circumstances (which regrettably are many). If I were instead to verbalise my opinion of his experiences, I expect that would, by its nature, seem very much harsher. For instance, an alternative would be to throw in quotes, such as Nietzsche's comment, " I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you." >Still this raises questions about your credibility
Go for it Philip
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Sept 17, 2008 8:32:56 GMT
...does this perhaps illustrate my point about the lack of free will in thought processes? No
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Sept 17, 2008 13:40:47 GMT
There are those who believe there is no inner or outer world, that they are both part of the One and it's only perception that makes the "difference."
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Sept 17, 2008 22:10:16 GMT
We can test this further by the following experiment: - Pick a topic such as a hobby, holiday, loved one and spend 30 seconds thinking in some detail as to how to achieve some objective. See if the thought stream flows easily and is not interrupted. - Then pick some action from the past of which you are somewhat ashamed and spend 30 seconds examining the thought processes that led you to make that decision. See if you can find the thoughts that persuaded you. Now compare the two. My hypothesis is that the first set of thoughts is permitted and therefore are able to flow and the second set is not permitted and therefore likely to be interrupted repeatedly. No reports yet on the experiment about permitted thought. Perhaps the experiment itself is not permitted Or perhaps it is better not to know
|
|
|
Post by maat on Sept 17, 2008 22:59:41 GMT
This is a post from Synchronicity... I have only watched the first of two 25 min videos... and I concur that it is just brilliant.. can't wait to access the rest.
It is outlining how we might become aware of the inner world and what is preventing us from doing so.
We need to move from a 'willingness to receive' mode to a 'willingness to bestow' mode. Thereby we "G"row into the All. We interface.
But then again that is what Freemasonry is telling us right from the First Degree, n'est pas? Freemasonry, Kabbalah, it's all the same. Just brilliant!
Maat
|
|
|
Post by 1wizardstone on Sept 23, 2010 1:50:11 GMT
I had this same problem when in contact with masculine Mason's,i felt more comfortable with LDH Bretheren...but in my humble opinion it is do to Consciousness ...people can only shine the light that they have and the brain can not teach what it does not know! Swami Kriyananda wrote, "Through concentration on the spiritual eye, the consciousness gradually becomes attuned to the subtle rate of vibration of… light. At last one's consciousness, too, takes on the quality of light." It is also extremely beneficial to visualize the spiritual eye and feel that it is your true reality. Paramhansa Yogananda said, "Just behind the darkness of closed eyes shines the light of God." Right before processional i close my eyes to center my consciousness at the point between the eyebrows...what you will be doing, in fact, is focusing more and more of the brain's energy there,The greater this concentration of energy at that point, the more powerfully that portion of the brain will be stimulated and awakened, and the more profound will be your spiritual awareness. Fraternally It doesn't get much more simpler than that from my experience. I use a concentrated attention and awareness of the right hand to project inwards towards the third eye area, thus becoming an increased inner awareness- detachment from the kingdom. But, still on the mission towards understanding the chi energy, prana, cosmic, orgone, static electricity, whatever that results from the practice. Haven't fully figured that one out yet. I think one will have to quiet the mind and detatch from the thinking program before they will even realize that such an inner World truly exists, through thoughtless awareness or other.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Sept 23, 2010 4:14:18 GMT
There's another world besides the inner? ;D
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Sept 23, 2010 12:35:20 GMT
To me one defines the other, if people are working its safe to assume they are thinking. Objective reality needs subjective reality on equal parts, without the thought of an existance we wouldnt be able to exist a thought with no reality. Without challenging reality we would have never grown.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Sept 23, 2010 13:15:54 GMT
I think there is often a type of prejudice portrayed by the thinkers who believe (or feign belief) in 'higher' concepts. 'Oh, they don't understand there is something inside of themselves.' Yeah, that might be true, but there's no need to get a big head about it. I usually don't know those people who seem to 'miss the boat', at least to the depth that I can discern whether they get it or not. I'm not even sure that there is a boat to miss, or that we're not all poor suckers in the same boat whether we know it or not. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Sept 23, 2010 13:47:32 GMT
I think its similair to a big boat, mainly because none of us know what the heck is going on. Im not even sure if God knew everything beyond the end result, seems like it would be kinda boring waiting for everything you know to start happening. I was just having a disagreement with my wife about communities. A preacher is being charged with a prostitution scandal, and im sure he will be exiled from the church, etc... This is common practice to do to things we disagree with, but I see it as wrong. I know his crime is unjustifiable but I think letting him be open to his own free-will might be worse. Sometimes I think a religious law would be best if it was done with a rationality for peace. Instead of removing him from society, I think it would be easier for people to come out of problems if they know the people they live with are still giving them a chance to change. It allready happens in a sense in that when he goes around town people are gonna look and he is gonna know why, Possibly worse. Wich shows again a air of free-will being open in options of what people can and will do to him. If peoples reactions were tied into the law we might accomplish a better unification.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Sept 23, 2010 14:14:32 GMT
I applaud your faith in humanity and the ability to change, yet most of my experience is that a spade remains a spade no matter where you place them in the deck. This is where the Catholic Church failed to deal appropriately, and allowed the scandals to turn into even greater injustices and betrayals. People tried to give lots of chances to murderers and worse. When given those chances, more often than not, they repeated their crimes. Two child-molesters in recent times were released and guess what? Murdered and injured children. These crimes are against individual liberties in the worst way.
Granted, this minister's 'crimes' were far less (in my opinion, but I do not belong to that church), and if I may hold my opinion, ought to be between his spouse and others to whom he is responsible. It is not my business, and it was a simple business transaction between two consenting adults. How a group chooses to deal with the missteps of one in power is and should be up to them unless criminal charges are involved.
I think we have attained complete and perfect unification in being a grouping of individuals. We could not avoid that if we tried; and oh how we have tried. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Sept 23, 2010 17:05:23 GMT
You may not be able to change a spade from a spade you can limit thier options in choosing to be so. I dont suppose to know what way would work but I deffinately think things would be different if our overall focus were eachother. Ofcourse I cant find anything about it on the news website but I think he was actualy like a pimp type of thing. My point is though who needs religious and life guidance more, the saved or the lost?
|
|