To clarify my point. I had the perception, perhaps like Ravi, that Mao's time was in the somewhat distant past, among an older generation. It is hard to realize that his time was as recent as the 60's going into the 70's, and involved a more modern generation. A lot has happened in a short period of time. But yes I know I had the tendency to place an individual on a pedestal as I did with Maharishi.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi" raviyogi@ wrote: > > > > "So it was the believer's confidence in their ability to plumb his soul > > what I was comparing, not his deeds or pathological mass murdering > > mindset." > > Who are these believers? Innocent, gullible, feudal mindset of 1940's > > Chinese vs free spirited anti-establishment 60's Americans? > > Come on dude. You really wont even exert the effort to type three letters into Google to tighten up on your dates, or if you have a Droid phone say the words, "search Mao"? > > My argument is not dependent on dates, but since yours seems to be let me put your meat on the plate and cut it into tiny bite-size pieces. (Yeah, I'm getting a little dickish here.) > > The Cultural Revolution of Mao, which was the most extreme expression of his cult status, was 1966. Its effects lasted till his death in 1976. The focus was on young idealists who believed that they were uniquely capable of understanding a new vision for humanity, a vision that the older generation, in fact the whole previous intellectual and artistic history of China, was incapable of understanding. > > Maharishi was focused on the young idealists in Western countries during this time. They felt that their ability to comprehend and embody the full message of Maharishi's teaching was superior to the older generation, who did not share their belief that Maharishi had a unique role to play in human history. His student movement picked up steam in the mid to late 60's with the Beatles going to Rishikesh in '68. I sat with him in the Felt Forum in NYC in 1975 to inaugurate the Dawn of the Age of Enlightenment. It was filled with young people whose confidence in their assessment of Maharishi's special role in the history of the world, was complete. His "aura" filled the 5,000 seat room. > > But back to my point, because Steve has picked up the ball and I hope he pursues it. The comparison I am making concerns the confidence in these people, young or old, regardless of the decade, to assess the special status, or state of consciousness, or godly nature of their leader by their own subjective feelings about him or her. > > I contend that humans suck at this. Our track record shows case after case of our complete bamboozlement, with Mao and the millions who believed that he could bend the very laws of nature, as the definitive example of this human nature flaw. We not only suck at this assessment, we have been perversely endowed with an extra dose of unwarranted confidence in our abilities in this area. So much confidence that people believe that this is the one thing they can stake their very lives on. We are prone to mistake the fervor of our convictions for their epistemological legitimacy. > > We need to better understand the mechanisms behind our subjective experiences of people's specialness before we throw our collective hats in the ring again in support of the next version of: this guy (or gal, holla at the ladies in the house) who is serving up a heaping helping of "I have the inside story on this mystery called life. I really do. No, I mean it, I'm the one who knows. For sure, sure. Absolutely positive. Certain beyond any doubt. I've got the game plan from the big guy in the sky (all the ladies put your hands in the air for Mother D)." > > Our track record makes it clear that we can't tell the difference between shit and shinola. And all you have to do is type in the 3 letters M-A-O into Google, to see how humbling our overconfidence in this area can become. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ravi Yogi" raviyogi@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Curtis - some of us never had cultish mindset like you guys > > and don't have to carry this burden for rest of our lives. > > > > > > I'm not too sure about that. People influenced by this mindset are > > notoriously bad at recognizing it in themselves. There is a natural > > tendency to believe that we are too smart for that. > > > > > > > > > < To compare M with Mao is sick and twisted.> > > > > > > I hope you take the time to re-read to get the point you obviously > > missed. I was comparing the confidence his followers had in their > > subjective evaluation of him with that same confidence in guru > > followers. It is a good example because of the numbers involved and the > > way followers talked about him. Have you read about Mao from the > > perspective of people who knew him? But we can all agree that he was > > probably not God on earth, and that makes my point. Millions and > > millions of people experienced him as God. They were absolutely sure of > > it and many gave their lives for that belief. And by many I mean more > > millions of people than anyone in the history of the world killed with > > the possible exception of Stalin. And here Hitler has all the History > > Chanel specials, what's up with that? > > > > > > So it was the believer's confidence in their ability to plumb his soul > > what I was comparing, not his deeds or pathological mass murdering > > mindset. > > > > > > Although your assessment of me as sick and twisted is spot on, this is > > not one of the many possible examples that would prove this. > > > > > > > > >
