“I don't take to the wheel of sharp weapons. I often wonder whether some operation of 'face' is present in language like this...” – archy
I do not know what is being implied by “some operation of ‘face’”. “…The scientist would want to know what the experiences are - or at least a certain sort of scientist. I don't mean that I shall nip over the the electrodes and wire you up, though I'd probably give up to this, or scanning with appropriate people…” – archy Herein lies the central point…an actual lover of knowledge or scientist would forgo electronics and secondhand reports except perhaps as anecdotal curiosities. Without the introspection advocated by William James, one just will not know. Of course, such directives are much older than a mere century. One can travel back to that which was engraved on the pronaos of the Temple of Apollo, “γνῶθι σεαυτόν”, the adage ascribed to, among others Thales, Solon, Socrates, Pythagoras, Heraclitus and Chilton of Sparta. (“Know Thyself”) This said, while different and diverse unreportable states do arise, that which is reportable (at least in the sense of methodology and goals) can include learning what the limits of mind entail, directly. This includes reviews of long ago cathected experiences and the necessary unraveling of such knots which restores life to synapses and cuts out atrophic restrictions…some of the foundational work necessary for health. Visualizations include simple and direct objective forms along with applied theurgy and the appropriate results of embodying some of the qualities that, until practiced, were seen as something external only. In a sense, it is taking ownership. Of course, there are different and diverse methodologies with specific goals…often designed to aid in the self-observation of attachment to beliefs and what the alternatives actually are…often pure gnoses. In general, the ‘trip’ is stuff of the sort of the ancient “Tadyatha gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhi swaha” ** type…going beyond, beyond the beyond. Beyond what? … consciously exploring the scope of, quality of and the resultant expanding of mind itself and not with the use of entheogens either. Simple increase of attention is one verifiable result too…of course all of this is cherry picking on my part. Others might point to other aspects such as bare attention etc. And, these words are about as useful as descriptions of a sunset or telling someone about Mahler’s 5th. (** http://www.purifymind.com/HeartSutraPra.htm ) In the realm of current parlance, much is verifiable in the sense of being repeatable. It takes a lot of patience and research, but there are countless reports from fellow travelers of paths over the millennia … these reports are extensive and recognizable as not only being mere correlates and analogies but as being reports of one to one correspondences and experiences. Again, if read by a skeptic and/or the uninitiated who has not yet completed the experiment/praxis, the words will appear to be impenetrable scientific jargon, dogma or, even worse, pure folly. “…The question of what the experiences are is also a question about what the 'normal trance' might be…” – archy Well asked and to the point too. Analogies from the movie ‘The Matrix’ abound and are not very useful. Especially if one hasn’t even seen the movie! For me, the fertile ground found here, while observed to some extent, is best known when ‘normal not-trance’ is known. … We share a general aversion of Shakespeare…and, on occasion, rare flashes of recognition arise when his words are recognized…perhaps on the 25th time. Like much in the realm of similar insightful representations, such as poetry, often the arrow has no mark to hit on the first few attempts. I know I didn’t appreciate calculus until I had studied and applied it. Of course, there is not only one form of calculus either. And, I greatly appreciate the impatience and associated lack of attraction to approach many things. While I fancy myself as an explorer who is open to and attracted to the all and the everything, the truth of the matter often falls quite short. Overall, ‘indoctrinations’ fall into your category of “some stuff I just don’t want to appreciate” for me too. Religion does too except as adjunct study. In short, I quickly ceased looking for ecstasy itself. Such states are results and not goals…other than in the sense of being mile posts perhaps. On Nov 23, 7:36 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't take to the wheel of sharp weapons. I often wonder whether > some operation of 'face' is present in language like this. If we > aren't careful Orn, our Beethoven appreciation will have certain types > wondering how we old fools get our jollies! I was damned near > exhausted after the Portuguese performance. I was almost 'gone' as > the choir sparked up in practice. We have one of the alleged 'world's > finest' 10 miles away (Bridgewater Hall - one train hop), but they > can't compare at 10 times the price (perhaps that is why). > > It may be we shouldn't be too distracted by this Bill, but I'll ask. > The scientist would want to know what the experiences are - or at > least a certain sort of scientist. I don't mean that I shall nip over > the the electrodes and wire you up, though I'd probably give up to > this, or scanning with appropriate people. Mine aren't religious, at > least given what always comes to mind when a female singer swoons me. > The question of what the experiences are is also a question about what > the 'normal trance' might be. I've never had to teach literature (I > am a few pence short of the full shilling here), am a trained but poor > musician (no talent but tried) and so on. I've noticed my ability to > appreciate things has changed substantially over the years, generally > for the better, though a bad accident has taken most music out of the > frame. My grandson is currently asking why things on TV are funny. > My old undergraduate classes mostly had to be taught why The Simpsons > was funny and proved almost totally unobservant in respect of films > like 'Beer', 'Office Space' or 'Modern Times'. Older classes would > weep with laughter over the same presentations. > > There is some stuff I just don't want to appreciate, and some I am > grateful to others for helping me into. I generally hate Shakespeare, > though I really admire the Sky western Deadwood and am somewhat into > 'Actors'. Seeing men in skirts swinging incense always makes me wish > I was wearing tartan (it's not the skirts themselves) and carrying the > Claymore. There are some 'indoctrinations' I don't want, some I've > already had that need to be shifted. If I would not see Shakespeare > abolished, I would question why it is given such privilege. Religion > seems much the same. None of this is to discount what the experiences > might really be or not to want them. > > On 23 Nov, 12:47, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I think you do your best work here while half asleep, Francis. Very > > good read. > > > On Nov 22, 5:51 pm, fran the man <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 22 Nov., 06:01, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:> I > > > share your idealism Neil… even when it came to Occham….until I > > > > noticed that when applied to itself, the razor disappears. > > > > This dialogue between Neil and Orn has set all kinds of ideas sparking > > > in my mind - I need more time to let many of them work and come to > > > some sort of fruit. Some brief comments: > > > > Master William's sharp instrument is a very useful tool. But we should > > > remain aware of its nature - as a tool - and, as every good handworker > > > knows, not every tool is appropriate for every occasion. There's a > > > word Neil has used here a couple of times, "simplexity", which I like. > > > There is often wonderful complexity in simple things, and simplicity > > > too in the complex. There is, I hope, some kind of truth to be > > > obtained through reason (and it is here that Occam's razor works > > > best). But there are also truths which express themselves in art, > > > music, literature, poetry. Ginsberg's "Howl" and Joyce's "Ulysses" > > > come to mind, as do Monet's "Water Lilies," Beethoven's 9th Symphony > > > and Pink Floyd's "Saucerful of Secrets." Just examples. Life, both > > > individual and common, is as much an artwork to be experienced as it > > > is a problem (or problems) to be solved. As Molly has put it (although > > > the words here are mine) we need to sustain the paradoxes put forward > > > by not rejecting one in favour of the other. Holding on to the > > > apparent opposites, while letting everything go. > > > > Not very clear, I know, but I can't put it better than this at the > > > moment. As Pepys put it, and so to bed! > > > > Francis- 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=.
