There was a trite anarchist slogan that one could join a club but never belong to one. Presumably we could no more be militant Israelis than Hamas. I think what makes me somewhat anti-religious is unthinking acceptance - it reminds me of animal training.
On 1 Jan, 20:55, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jan 1, 8:00 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I think Orn and Vam have pointed to much of value that has been around > > for a long time on many occasions. Molly too, is much more > > knowledgeable than me in more "modern" techniques. There are, for me, > > "matters of spirit" of substantial importance in what we might be/ > > come. I even believe, after many years of involved disappointment, > > that we could and should develop decent managers. Many of us in here > > would not differ much if given a free hand to sort out practical > > problems. Even jibes coming from Gabby and me reveal interests in > > doing the right thing, however much our humour may be pointed at > > zealot adherence to "right things", or Chaz at his "darkest". I am > > rarely inclined to think of anyone in here as the kind of monster > > likely to cover up as those involved in the Baby P saga managed to do, > > no doubt thinking they were virtuous creatures. > > In all my post-scientific academic work I have found a dire > > unwillingness to genuinely explore what matters against an empirical- > > practical background of the use of deception. One cannot forever > > deconstruct - this is nihilistic - yet as Orn says (more or less) we > > struggle to work from scientific grounding. Freud once said one can > > get so methodological that one ends up forever polishing spectacles > > and never looking through them. Chaz's warning above about > > institutionalisation within the limits of the cult is forever > > profound. > > I think this is why I never want to belong. Even to the cult of > science whose "Pillars" are founded on demonstrable evidence; there is > still the matter of choice and "interest" (aesthetically, politically, > socially) in which bits of evidence are thought worthy to demonstrate. > It is left for us to always remain sceptical and aloof so as not to > get dragged down into the depths of certainty, or drift into realms of > belief "must be" conclusions. > > > The story of Islamist cults forever refining Islam to the point they > > can kill other Muslims because they are no longer Muslim is merely > > another exapmle of "chosen people" lunacy - perhaps at its "best" in > > Numbers 31 where Moses' ethnic cleansing is trumpeted. "High > > standards" can be chronically pathetic and evil. > > There are other cults whose validity we tend to take for granted. I > think here of the cult of "legitimacy" which has determined that the > (unprecedented) foundation of the state of Isreal which has so upset > the pride of Palestine. The unthinking acceptance of this particular > myth supports the current bombing of ordinary people in Gaza to the > further detriment of any possible kind of peace in the ME. > > > A long way from this, I would point to a couple of young female > > students using poetry in one of my personal development classes, > > expressing the dismal realisation that their dumb jobs in a major > > hotel chain were truly piss poor. The good news is that their > > performance across the board improved and they got new jobs. A small > > "triumph". I think they could well have succeeded by different routes > > with others here. > > There has to be more than whatever work we can do like this. > > > On 1 Jan, 18:49, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Jan 1, 6:32 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > “Yes, and the results of this and most religions has been to retard > > > > human scientific and social progress. I think it matters what the "7 > > > > magic steps" lead to, or what the "5 supreme pillars" uphold, or what > > > > the "23 theses" assert. It is not enough to follow and fulfil, the > > > > choice is all important. They seem to be of the same category - self > > > > improvement rackets.” – chaz > > > > > chaz, as Neil says, I think you have something here. We are in full > > > > agreement about it mattering what a set of methods leads to, any > > > > grouping of pillars upholds as well as what differing theses assert. > > > > We also appear to be in full agreement about following. > > > > > What I don’t understand about your posting though is what you think is > > > > being ‘fulfilled’. Nor do I understand what you mean by saying that > > > > the choice is all important. > > > > Mea Culpa. I was reacting to more than your own posting but also to > > > Lonlaz, who stated: " People who truly try, truly try to follow all > > > Seven Strategies, or the tenets of the Celestine Prophecy, or whatever > > > will eventually get their efforts worth. They will achieve their > > > ideal selves, and will still have themselves to contend with. " > > > This I feel is simply untrue, and that reflects my comment on choice. > > > As for fulfilment, this is illusory in that most schemes (self help, > > > religions, etc.), define the conditions of their own success thus > > > limiting the individual who becomes institutionalised within the > > > limits of the cult. > > > > > As to the appearance of anything being in the category of self > > > > improvement….let alone rackets, this of course is in the eye of the > > > > beholder…as is ‘the results of this and most religions…’. > > > > > Such ideological positions as far as I can tell arise from personal > > > > experience(s). This alone is neither good nor bad. It just is. Of > > > > course it can be said to only be true for the one who experiences and > > > > reacts to said experiences. (subjectivity) > > > > > Yet, what I’m pointing at later in my post seems to be of a different > > > > order from most of this. Where it may be of the same nature would be > > > > when associated with the goal, function and result of many schools of > > > > self observation. Without knowing the ground of that which observes, > > > > adequate scientific preparation to discuss observations has not been > > > > completed. > > > > > On Jan 1, 9:11 am, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 1, 6:41 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > “…I think that this is possibly a positive effect of the self- > > > > > > improvement racket. People who truly try, truly try to follow all > > > > > > Seven Strategies, or the tenets of the Celestine Prophecy, or > > > > > > whatever > > > > > > will eventually get their efforts worth. They will achieve their > > > > > > ideal > > > > > > selves, and will still have themselves to contend with.” – Lonlaz > > > > > > > As you say, there are exoteric and esoteric initiations. This is > > > > > > true > > > > > > even for the over 2,500 year old schools of Buddhism. And, yes they > > > > > > have their functions and results. > > > > > > Yes, and the results of this and most religions has been to retard > > > > > human scientific and social progress. > > > > > I think it matters what the "7 magic steps" lead to, or what the "5 > > > > > supreme pillars" uphold, or what the "23 theses" assert. It is not > > > > > enough to follow and fulfil, the choice is all important. > > > > > They seem to be of the same category - self improvement rackets. > > > > > > And, while often there is full focus > > > > > > > and sometimes it appears to be completed or what is being observed > > > > > > is > > > > > > taken away with differing results, one of which is as you say, the > > > > > > self disappears. When this state is known, that in itself is quite > > > > > > something to have been revealed. > > > > > > > As Neil would say, you have something there. And, even the notion of > > > > > > self-improvement, racket or not, reveals a specific level of > > > > > > subjectivity. > > > > > > > This all said, what you call their ‘ideal selves’ puzzles me. Of > > > > > > course you follow this with a dichotomy of ‘themselves…to contend > > > > > > with’. Perhaps a reflection upon some level of disillusionment. > > > > > > > It has been a while since I’ve discussed this stuff here, so will > > > > > > take > > > > > > a small leap. > > > > > > > The objects of attention can be as simple as the breath, a > > > > > > visualization etc. to something as total as mind itself. Is there a > > > > > > stage where mind itself dissolves? > > > > > > > What is the state where mind knows itself fully? > > > > > > > While appearing to be koan like, these are valid questions and not > > > > > > just metaphysically. > > > > > > > On Dec 31, 10:08 pm, Lonlaz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > When studying the occult, I was introduced to the idea of > > > > > > > initiation. > > > > > > > In the occult usage, it was a ritual, either short and intense, or > > > > > > > long a grueling to produce koan-like effect. A person puts their > > > > > > > full > > > > > > > concentration into something, their whole self is engaged, and > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > the subject of focus is completed, or taken away.. and for a > > > > > > > while the > > > > > > > self disappears with the task, and something is revealed. > > > > > > > > I think that this is possibly a positive effect of the self- > > > > > > > improvement racket. People who truly try, truly try to follow all > > > > > > > Seven Strategies, or the tenets of the Celestine Prophecy, or > > > > > > > whatever > > > > > > > will eventually get their efforts worth. They will achieve their > > > > > > > ideal selves, and will still have themselves to contend with. > > > > > > > > On Dec 31, 8:22 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > In theory, bumblebees should not be able to fly, but they do. > > > > > > > > Because > > > > > > > > they have to. But people, no matter how smart or how skilled > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > might be, do not always get off the ground. We are all born with > > > > > > > > common sense, but we don't always, or often, use it. > > > > > > > > > Must we drift without direction the rest of our lives? Are we > > > > > > > > doomed > > > > > > > > if we seem incapable of using our common sense? No, says > > > > > > > > bestselling > > > > > > > > author and professional speaker Barry Siskind. In Bumblebees > > > > > > > > Can't > > > > > > > > Fly, he shows you how to develop and follow his Seven > > > > > > > > Strategies of > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
