"No one has any definitive path or way which renders the whole of it as moot dialogue. .." - SD
Slip, while I greatly appreciate your tenaciousness, IF I understand your words above, I do question them. First as a skeptic, how do you know such a thing to be true? Secondly, as having been connected with mystics, such exists within this realm. Thirdly, a true way of Integralism would fit the bill. . . all of this IF I grok your words. On Jul 11, 8:25 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > No one has any definitive path or way which renders the whole of it as > moot dialogue. > > This is all about Tinker going on about how no one understands his > idea. Fact is I understood it in the beginning but it never went any > further than cyclic chaos. I don't know which ego is more exhausting, > that of e space or tinker. At least I have spent a significant amount > of time and energy ping ponging with him but I'm running out of > options other than to cease and desist and relinquish all. > > As Molly put it......... > "I hope that you don't think that it is simply of matter of taste > here. I find it frustrating to have the conversations disrupted with > personal attacks and the almost spamming on continually asserting the > same personal idea, over and over, whether or not it is relevant to > the conversation. Some good threads are dying because the Tinker > insists on being the center of attention and draws it with his the > world is against me and my good idea expression that is repeated in > every conversation. At some point, the paranoid obsession must fall > away, and I am surprised it hasn't by now, as he has been put on > moderation often. I understand what he gets out of it. What do we > get out of it? It is beyond being open to all ideas and styles of > communication and on to being tolerant of destructive, abusive > behavior. The fact that there are so many of us that do not engage > him in any meaningful conversation, fewer all the time, tells us this > is true. But still, I wonder what we are getting out of it because > the fact is, it goes on and on...Do we really need the oppositional/ > defiance so badly to move the conversation along? As I see it, it is > more of a barrier to communication than a facilitator." > Thanks Molly! > > On Jul 11, 3:54 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > " You also state>>"I'm thinking there is a way to make a connection to > > bring that 'super mind' forward in our conscious mind." > > > Slip, if it doesn't divert, I would suggest Aurobindo Ghose's > > writings : The Integral Yoga ( Path / Way ) and Divine Life. He > > actually speaks of the Supermind, what it is, how is it in the > > cosmogonical structure, with a reference to us, as and how we are, and > > goes on to prescribe the path of how to bring the Supermind into our > > constant, even collective, consciousness. > > > There is nothing to disagree with there, for me. But, each of us are > > launched on our own respective paths, towards the same goals perhaps. > > I would, in all probability, not suggest ' the ' path to anyone that I > > know of, except with the intent to facilitate one's own self - > > discovery. > > > On Jul 11, 1:00 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The thread I misquoted was actually "Collective Mentality" back in > > > April. It covers 112 posts in all, much of which I have just scanned > > > through. > > > > A portion within the post on April 27 @ 10:47 pm you Tinker state>>>" > > > I think we need to > > > do something to get everybody off into it for a meeting to bring about > > > the change." > > > > You continue in other posts to state>> "I can't say exactly how it > > > will be done. " > > > > You also state>>"I'm thinking there is a way to make a connection to > > > bring that 'super > > > mind' forward in our conscious mind. " > > > > You reiterate with>>"Again, I can't actually say how it will be done. > > > I do have a pretty > > > sure idea of what will Not work. " > > > > You said you were working on a thread titled The Wrong Way which I > > > don't imagine would contain any solutions but recognition of noted > > > failures, all of which I would likely agree with, but we still remain > > > without a way and means of accomplishing the collective. > > > > You suggested>>"We have to create a focus point in the separation." > > > and "The 'thing' in our mind?" > > > > This is where it all starts to unravel, the creation of the "Thing". > > > > You continue with>>"The focus point would be the beginning of unity." > > > > Now we have the focus point, the thing and unity. > > > > You then reply to heretic with>>"Allan, we are not talking about > > > starting another religion. > > > We are looking at the root of all religion, which is intentionally > > > good, and seeking a way to make it a common link amongst mankind > > > without all the BS. " > > > > Still there is not a shred of direction but more recognition. > > > > You address Rosey with>>"I believe the purpose of this discussion is > > > to find the key to " how " > > > > Ah but yet another clue to the ongoing dilemma of the "how" which has > > > gone full circle to where we are now, probably several times over. > > > > You finalize a paragraph to e space with "I think we need a way to > > > make it common knowledge." > > > > So you are still stuck in the mud of perplexity with needing a way. > > > > And so that ends your contribution to the Collective Mentality > > > thread. > > > > So a quick rehash here>> > > > > You think we need to do something but you don't know what. > > > Your thinking there is a way, you don't know what it is but you are > > > sure of all the ways it isn't. > > > You know that a focus point is needed in order for a "thing" to begin > > > a unity. > > > You are seeking a way and want to find the key that unlocks the answer > > > to "how?" > > > > Okay, so now the question about what I don't understand! > > > > How should we go about facilitating your "idea"? > > > > Slip, R.I.P. > > > > On Jul 10, 11:04 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Slip, you started the 'Collective Consciousness' thread after our > > > > private conversation where I said; > > > > "I got this thing in my head saying there's a way to 'hook up' > > > > everybody to the collective intelligence. I need help to bring it out > > > > and make sense out of it. > > > > That is what brought me to Mind's Eye." > > > > > You went off on the tangent from the idea I presented to you. You went > > > > straight into the 'pattern' that has to be broken for us to change the > > > > ways of Society. > > > > > I am not evasive. You will not ask questions. > > > > I have presented the idea of establishing a common point of > > > > understanding as the beginning point of Unity. > > > > I have said that we need to recognize the common connection in our > > > > mind with a universal symbol for that common point of understanding. > > > > I have presented "the Feeling" as the way to recognize that > > > > connection. > > > > > Please, please, please, ask a question about what you don't > > > > understand. What more do you want to know? > > > > > peace & Love > > > > > On Jul 9, 10:57 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I think it would be better if you were where I am, but OK, let's start > > > > > from "square one". YOU lay out the road map, or the instructional > > > > > plan, or the owners manual to your "Unique Idea" and then "WE" can > > > > > possibly see exactly what this idea is other than an "IDEA". We were > > > > > together on the collective consciousness thread which I started but > > > > > somehow you have gone off on some obscure tangent which is void of > > > > > description and you continually remain evasive in face of membership > > > > > requests for specifics. I haven't forgotten your post long gone in > > > > > which you tell tale of your subtleties which are intentionally > > > > > antagonistic and in which you claim to have been really good at. The > > > > > cat and mouse games are boring so spell it out clearly, succinctly, > > > > > concisely and perhaps "WE" can "SEE" your "Unique" idea. So far I > > > > > don't see anything that even remotely resembles an earnest attempt > > > > > other than that of the dangling bait technique, which is by now > > > > > getting very tiring. Yesterday is gone, tomorrow is yet to come and > > > > > the future is wide open, so set the course, but at least make it > > > > > legible. > > > > > > On Jul 9, 7:08 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > If your mind was there, you would be where I am, you are not. > > > > > > > Yes it is a unique idea, I'm sorry you can't see it. > > > > > > > If you did see it you would know how "the segment of humanity that > > > > > > "does not want unity"" would be affected by our higher power. > > > > > > > I really do appreciate your concerned guidance. I've no interest in > > > > > > becoming a martyr. > > > > > > > peace & Love > > > > > > > On Jul 9, 5:17 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm afraid that you don't seem to understand is that my mind is > > > > > > > "there", as are others. You don't have a new or exclusive idea. > > > > > > > Get > > > > > > > off the cloud Tinker. > > > > > > > Aside from that there is a problematic mammoth starring you in the > > > > > > > face, one that you fail to address, that being the segment of > > > > > > > humanity > > > > > > > that "does not want unity". They don't want your peace and love! > > > > > > > I think you should spend more time "talking" to them about your > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > in hopes that they might not consider chopping your head off and > > > > > > > putting it on the end of a pole. > > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 11:48 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The riddler has provided the answer, you do not allow your mind > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > explore the possibility. > > > > > > > > > We can establish a common point of understanding for Unity to > > > > > > > > begin, > > > > > > > > let your mind go there. > > > > > > > > > peace & Love > > > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 11:17 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Why bother when the riddler can simply provide the answer, > > > > > > > > > something > > > > > > > > > you have yet to do, I have enough taxing my mind as it is > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > entertaining your mental goads. > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 9:23 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > My friend, riddles have answers if you'll let your mind > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
