Don't get me wrong, Obba. Curtis Is A Really Really NICE GUY. Nothing personal
towards him, at all. He happens to represent a point of view that I consider
damaging and short-sighted. I also consider him one of the emotional retards on
here. But again, nothing personal. Just stating my opinion.
--- In [email protected], obbajeeba <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> I know, right?
>
> Barry as Edward Mercer,
> Curtis as Uccello, in:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCyAQaRB0iw
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCyAQaRB0iw>
>
>
> Welcome, Curtis blues man! Hope all is playing well. Peace.
>
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], doctordumbass@ wrote:
> >
> > Its...its SYNESTHESIA, Dude! (though I could've SWORN Barry told Share
> to "SHUT THE FUCK UP!", this morning, didn't he??). Hmm. Must've been
> the synesthesia, again...
> >
> > I am sure glad we have The Wisdom Of Science weighing in for us, in
> all its pristine, and objective, glory!! And what better person to
> deliver this pristine and objective message, than Curtis!!??
> >
> > Mock humility and earnestness-ness-ness, at its finest. With Acolyte
> Barry at his side, the truth will flow forth, freely, and fluidly, from
> now on!!
> >
> > Yes, Ravi, these are glorious times!! All Hail Curtis and his black
> tongue! Deep Bow, while I vomit forth my reverence.
> >
> > --- In [email protected], Ravi Chivukula chivukula.ravi@
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Ah the incredible, intoxicating blend of Rory and Curtis's wisdom
> and
> > > brilliance.
> > >
> > > It's all about the rapport - you hear you FFL bitches, it's all
> about
> > > rapport, it's all about the feel good factor - come on let's start
> this
> > > from today - Barry, Share, Ravi, Mean girls - you listening?
> > >
> > > To hell with truth - welcome dishonesty, hypocrisy, all kinds of
> > > mood-making masking religious delusional beliefs, fuck authenticity,
> > > genuineness.
> > >
> > > Dawn of a new era on FFL?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:01 AM, RoryGoff rorygoff@ wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hey, Curtis! Long time!
> > > >
> > > > I have been refraining from reading FFL to rest, recuperate, and
> > > > assimilate, but a friend gave me a heads-up that you had
> "uncloaked" with a
> > > > message that he felt I should read, and a link to it, I just read
> it and
> > > > must say I greatly appreciate your clarification -- and no apology
> needed,
> > > > my friend. Thank you so much.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, to me, rapport is what it's all about, if at all possible.
> But I have
> > > > perhaps gotten rather soft from being here in Fairfield, where
> love is
> > > > tangibly everywhere. Well, that and not enough exercise, of
> course.
> > > >
> > > > See you around sometime, I hope! All glory to Guru You! ;-)
> > > >
> > > > *L*L*L*
> > > >
> > > > R.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues"
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Rory:
> > > > > Curtis, of course -- can tell with such utter
> > > > > > > > certainty that my entire spiritual life has been phony.
> > > > >
> > > > > From another post:
> > > > > ...Now it appears you may somewhat agree with
> > > > > > Curtis, who saw me as a Neurolinguistic-programming,
> form-running
> > > > > > charlatan.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Me:
> > > > > I wanted to drop in to comment on the idea that I think of Rory
> as a
> > > > phony or a charlatan. I do not. My view of people who have the
> kind of
> > > > experiences that Rory has shared is more nuanced than that.
> > > > >
> > > > > My current perspective involves how our brains communicate
> within
> > > > itself, and how some wires get crossed (think synesthesia between
> senses as
> > > > an example, hearing colors). My current belief is that this can
> result in
> > > > experiencing subjective experiences as if they are as as
> compelling as our
> > > > external reality. I am not making a case for this being a defect,
> because
> > > > it can be a source for profound creativity. So let's take Rory as
> charlatan
> > > > off my table. I believe he is sincere from the limited contact I
> have had
> > > > with him.
> > > > >
> > > > > But, just as with Maharishi, that doesn't mean that I hold his
> > > > epistemological conclusions as valid. I do not. My question is
> about how we
> > > > deal with this kind of subjective knowledge. I am skeptical that
> it
> > > > provides an insight into "reality" that bypasses any of our other
> methods
> > > > of verification of ideas which may or may not include the methods
> of
> > > > science. I rate all our subjective experiences the same as any
> other
> > > > hypothesis that needs further study taking into account the human
> tendency
> > > > to conflate our enthusiasm for an idea for the likelihood that it
> is true.
> > > > We all suck at this as a natural tendency, myself included.
> > > > >
> > > > > As for the language form used, my point concerned the use of
> language
> > > > that is coming from a trance state and is meant to shift the state
> of the
> > > > listener from sensory based to internal connections based. This is
> how
> > > > poetry and hypnosis works. I consider my ability to ride this wave
> and to
> > > > generate these waves of language myself to be at the center of my
> creative
> > > > ability with language, so it is not a negative on its face.
> > > > >
> > > > > The problems I see comes when we confuse this kind of language
> with the
> > > > style we use to convey concrete meaning. That causes problems when
> the
> > > > person using this language form claims to be telling us about how
> reality
> > > > really is. (I'm looking at you immolated Maharishi.) This type of
> language
> > > > was described by Grinder and Bandler the founders of NLP when they
> did
> > > > their modeling of the hypnotherapist Milton Erickson and their
> perspective
> > > > has influenced my own about how this language form works. The rest
> comes
> > > > from my own experiences teaching TM and then doing NLP therapy for
> people
> > > > after leaving TM as well as an analysis of my own creative
> songwriting
> > > > process.
> > > > >
> > > > > So what is the difference between when Bob Dylan does this and
> when a
> > > > "spiritual" teacher does it? When you ask Bob Dylan what it
> "means" he
> > > > says, I don't know, that is up to you. Figurative language is a
> launching
> > > > pad for internal abstract thought. When you ask a spiritual master
> what he
> > > > "means" he might tell you that when you are in his state of
> consciousness
> > > > you will fully understand. I reject the many imbedded premises in
> this
> > > > statement. Would Rory answer this way? I don't know, I forget most
> of what
> > > > I read from him when we were interacting here. My view of
> spiritual
> > > > experiences is an evolving one as I gather more data on how our
> brains
> > > > function.
> > > > >
> > > > > Most of what I remember about Rory is that he uses a style of
> reframing
> > > > language as a type of verbal jiu jitsu. By this I mean when people
> attack
> > > > him he refers to them as a part of himself attacking himself.
> Although I
> > > > don't doubt this emerges from his internal experiences, it is also
> embedded
> > > > in a philosophy and web of beliefs about the world that I do not
> share. I
> > > > think it is a really good linguistic coping strategy for the
> projectile
> > > > attacks that this place is full of. It works on many different
> levels for
> > > > him.
> > > > >
> > > > > So why the drive by today? Because I like Rory and don't want to
> let an
> > > > impression remain that I think of him in such a negative way. If
> he
> > > > expressed it all as art rather than philosophy I would just
> appreciate him
> > > > as I do the rest of my wacky artistic buddies. He is a really
> creative guy
> > > > and I value that. But when it is expressed as philosophy I like to
> show
> > > > where I am drawing my lines to distinguish my beliefs from his or
> anyone
> > > > else who expresses a "spiritual" POV. I don't share the confidence
> > > > "spiritual" people do in their assumptions or conclusions and
> enjoy
> > > > expressing my evolving POV. (Or at least I used to here.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Another big plus in my mind about Rory is that he values rapport
> here as
> > > > I do. I remember our interactions very positively. He came off as
> willing
> > > > to interact with someone skeptical about his conclusions about his
> own
> > > > experiences. Maharishi certainly was never open to that kind of
> dialogue
> > > > and interaction.
> > > > >
> > > > > So "respect" Rory. You are interpreting your experiences in life
> just as
> > > > I do. I may not share your conclusions, nor you mine. The fact
> that we
> > > > looked beyond that to have some interesting discussions here makes
> you a
> > > > bro in my book. If I came off as harsh toward you in the past, I
> apologize.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], "RoryGoff" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend"
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "RoryGoff" wrote:
> > > > > > > (snip)
> > > > > > > > Ha! You crack me up, Ravi. I love how you -- and
> apparently
> > > > > > > > Judy, and Curtis, of course -- can tell with such utter
> > > > > > > > certainty that my entire spiritual life has been phony.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I never suggested that, Rory, nor did I say I could
> > > > > > > tell anything about you with anything like "utter
> > > > > > > certainty." I really don't appreciate your claiming
> > > > > > > otherwise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I said "apparently" in your case, Judy, as it did appear that
> way to
> > > > me. You may have meant it differently, of course, but "phony as a
> > > > three-dollar bill" sounded pretty certain to me. I didn't register
> your
> > > > saying anything like, "Well, I don't know for sure, of course, but
> at the
> > > > moment it appears to me that ..." etc. Again, I am only "claiming"
> how it
> > > > appeared to me. If you meant otherwise, I am sorry, and thank you
> for
> > > > clarifying.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
