[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote: Thank you both. In addition to a post that requires a little thinking I have to compliment you for the chutzpah of placing it in one of the seasons political threads. Have you ever noticed if you stop consuming the news for six months it seems no time has pasted when you start consuming again? The wife describes it as: As useless as a time machine that travels in real time. Exactly. One of the reasons I rapped out my recent rant about the Open Season On Hate that is modern American politics is that I'd already begun to see posts appear here that were *exactly* the same as posts made during the last such season, posted by the same people, and interestingly sometimes about the same political targets. It made me realize that I'm in for another year and a half of this, and that I need to start focusing more on my Next Key finger during my workouts than usual. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Thank you both. In addition to a post that requires a little thinking I have to compliment you for the chutzpah of placing it in one of the seasons political threads. Have you ever noticed if you stop consuming the news for six months it seems no time has pasted when you start consuming again? The wife describes it as: As useless as a time machine that travels in real time. Exactly. One of the reasons I rapped out my recent rant about the Open Season On Hate that is modern American politics is that I'd already begun to see posts appear here that were *exactly* the same as posts made during the last such season, posted by the same people, and interestingly sometimes about the same political targets. It made me realize that I'm in for another year and a half of this, and that I need to start focusing more on my Next Key finger during my workouts than usual. :-) Oh my, Barry must have fallen out of love with the hopey-changey-unity-pony guy. He must be swallowing a lot of crow admitting (only to himself) that Hillary would have been a better president. Too bad she won't be around for him to dump his sexist load this election. Hmmm, I wonder if his claws will come out if Bachmann or Palin get the nomination? This is going to be fun.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama [3 Attachments]
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:55 AM, raunchydog raunchy...@yahoo.com wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Thank you both. In addition to a post that requires a little thinking I have to compliment you for the chutzpah of placing it in one of the seasons political threads. Have you ever noticed if you stop consuming the news for six months it seems no time has pasted when you start consuming again? The wife describes it as: As useless as a time machine that travels in real time. Exactly. One of the reasons I rapped out my recent rant about the Open Season On Hate that is modern American politics is that I'd already begun to see posts appear here that were *exactly* the same as posts made during the last such season, posted by the same people, and interestingly sometimes about the same political targets. It made me realize that I'm in for another year and a half of this, and that I need to start focusing more on my Next Key finger during my workouts than usual. :-) Oh my, Barry must have fallen out of love with the hopey-changey-unity-pony guy. He must be swallowing a lot of crow admitting (only to himself) that Hillary would have been a better president. Too bad she won't be around for him to dump his sexist load this election. Hmmm, I wonder if his claws will come out if Bachmann or Palin get the nomination? This is going to be fun. Tine to recycle oldies http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR9V_aOCga0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l46t_nrySg4feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPWBY-zmnKk
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
I guess what I am concluding is that far from having confidence in perceptions involving life after death; I'm thinking that I am an idiot to ever drive while talking on my cell phone. Sweet rivers of redeeming love Lie just before mine eye, Had I the pinions of a dove, I'd to those rivers fly; I'd rise superior to my pain, With joy outstrip the wind, I'd cross o'er Jordan's stormy waves, And leave the world behind. PIPPIN: I didn't think it would end this way. GANDALF: End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path, one that we all must take. (Pippin listens intently) The grey rain curtain of this world rolls back and all turns to silvered glass. And then you see it. PIPPIN:What? Gandalf? See what? GANDALF: White shores and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise. (He smiles at Pippin.) PIPPIN:Well, (he smiles back) that's not so bad. GANDALF: No. No it isn't.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote: Thanks Curtis, much appreciated. More below. I am overcoming a reluctance to get into long discussions here because this one seems not only interesting, but as if it could go somewhere. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. Response: Does this mean perception is like a limb that remains in sense memory after we've lost it? I'm curious to know an example of the collision you mention above? Me, too. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. Response: You could be right. I'm not sure I'm confident, all the time, in my perceptions. Me, either. :-) As a businessman I'm motivated by results (profit that can be measured in numerous ways) and fault on the side of simplicity. I start with an objective and if, overtime, my perception brings me closer to my objective I hold on to my perception. If on the other hand, my perceptions stop serving my objective I reconsider and quite possibly adopt a new perception that I originally considered incapable of serving my objective. I consider this the competitive part of who I am. Although profit is a prime metric of commerce-competiton is much more what motivates me and I believe many other business types. Although the metaphor can be over simplified, IMO-business is most like sports and in sports velocity can reduce some of the editorializing of reality you are describing. If a tennis ball or a baseball is coming at me at 100mph my thought and emotions have to surrender to my body to react effectively. I believe in this surrender there is a nowness that transcends:) the yoke of perception you are describing. I'm guessing as a musician, sound does something similar for you? I'm not sure about how music might have done this for Curtis, but I'm pretty sure that studying martial arts would have. A tennis ball or baseball coming at you at that speed is one thing; you've got a racquet or a glove with which to catch the sucker. But when it's a fist or a foot coming for your face at that speed, there really isn't enough time to construct a terribly sophisticated inner perceptual vision of the incident. After years of martial arts study, your body reacts far faster than your mind, and if you're any good, effectively. In contests I would have blocked the punch or kick and have gotten off a couple of my own before my conscious mind ever perceived that something was going down. How would Eagleman characterize this? What relation- ship to perception shaped by beliefs would such a situation have? Does he deal with body memory, as we know it from studying martial arts or any art that involves performing the same moves over and over for years or decades, so much so that they become more a function of the autonomic nervous system than the somatic nervous system? I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. In a way, what you're describing is my reaction after I read my first book about advertising theory. Up to then, as much as I would tell myself that I was never affected by ads, they had me by the gnarblies. When I became aware of the techniques ads employed, and what beliefs in me they pandered to, I set about trying to challenge -- and, if necessary -- change those beliefs. For example, as hooked on shiny toys as I was (at the time I owned a Lexus two-seater that was way fun but way impractical when dealing with the kinds of dirt roads I wanted to drive in New Mexico), so I traded it in for a good, reliable 4X4. I stopped falling for the advertising meme that said Driving this car will make you young and sexy, and traded up to the meme, But driving this funky desert wagon will
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
First great thoughtful response Bob. I'll intersperse my comments on Barry's reply. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Thanks Curtis, much appreciated. More below. I am overcoming a reluctance to get into long discussions here because this one seems not only interesting, but as if it could go somewhere. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. Response: Does this mean perception is like a limb that remains in sense memory after we've lost it? I'm curious to know an example of the collision you mention above? Me, too. The collision is furniture, really. The person keeps running into things that are not in their visual field. The book's point is that our brain creates our visual experience out of a severely fractured input system of our eyes. You know about the huge blind spot our corneas have. Why don't we see it? Because our brain uses the Photoshop cloning tool and manufactures a seamless apparition of reality for us. It is not that vision remains in sense memory. It is that the mind has been creating the experience all along and as we know in dreams, it does fine without any outer vision at all. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. Response: You could be right. I'm not sure I'm confident, all the time, in my perceptions. Me, either. :-) Nor I. But people with visions like Jim is having are often supremely confident that this is an accurate insight into reality. I believe it is an insight into how vision and our minds interact to construct our visual field. I believe that the casket was actually there but that the dead person was an inner construction in the mind. A mind that is very poor at distinguishing inner and outer visions if they are compelling enough. As a businessman I'm motivated by results (profit that can be measured in numerous ways) and fault on the side of simplicity. I start with an objective and if, overtime, my perception brings me closer to my objective I hold on to my perception. If on the other hand, my perceptions stop serving my objective I reconsider and quite possibly adopt a new perception that I originally considered incapable of serving my objective. I consider this the competitive part of who I am. Although profit is a prime metric of commerce-competiton is much more what motivates me and I believe many other business types. Although the metaphor can be over simplified, IMO-business is most like sports and in sports velocity can reduce some of the editorializing of reality you are describing. If a tennis ball or a baseball is coming at me at 100mph my thought and emotions have to surrender to my body to react effectively. I believe in this surrender there is a nowness that transcends:) the yoke of perception you are describing. I'm guessing as a musician, sound does something similar for you? I'm not sure about how music might have done this for Curtis, but I'm pretty sure that studying martial arts would have. A tennis ball or baseball coming at you at that speed is one thing; you've got a racquet or a glove with which to catch the sucker. But when it's a fist or a foot coming for your face at that speed, there really isn't enough time to construct a terribly sophisticated inner perceptual vision of the incident. After years of martial arts study, your body reacts far faster than your mind, and if you're any good, effectively. In contests I would have blocked the punch or kick and have gotten off a couple of my own before my conscious mind ever perceived that something was going down. How would Eagleman characterize this? What relation- ship to perception shaped by beliefs would such a situation have? Does he deal with body memory, as we know it from studying martial arts or any art that involves performing the same moves over and over for years or decades,
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: snip How would Eagleman characterize this? What relation- ship to perception shaped by beliefs would such a situation have? Does he deal with body memory, as we know it from studying martial arts or any art that involves performing the same moves over and over for years or decades, so much so that they become more a function of the autonomic nervous system than the somatic nervous system? Moves per se are always a function of the somatic nervous system, never the autonomic nervous system, just for the record, even though they may seem automatic and even involuntary. The autonomic system may help by increasing heart rate, etc., but it's never in control of moving the muscles one would use for martial arts or playing a musical instrument.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Just something to bear in mind: No matter how fallible our perceptions may be, they've served us well evolutionarily. We wouldn't be here if they hadn't supported our survival as a species. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: First great thoughtful response Bob. I'll intersperse my comments on Barry's reply. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Thanks Curtis, much appreciated. More below. I am overcoming a reluctance to get into long discussions here because this one seems not only interesting, but as if it could go somewhere. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. Response: Does this mean perception is like a limb that remains in sense memory after we've lost it? I'm curious to know an example of the collision you mention above? Me, too. The collision is furniture, really. The person keeps running into things that are not in their visual field. The book's point is that our brain creates our visual experience out of a severely fractured input system of our eyes. You know about the huge blind spot our corneas have. Why don't we see it? Because our brain uses the Photoshop cloning tool and manufactures a seamless apparition of reality for us. It is not that vision remains in sense memory. It is that the mind has been creating the experience all along and as we know in dreams, it does fine without any outer vision at all. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. Response: You could be right. I'm not sure I'm confident, all the time, in my perceptions. Me, either. :-) Nor I. But people with visions like Jim is having are often supremely confident that this is an accurate insight into reality. I believe it is an insight into how vision and our minds interact to construct our visual field. I believe that the casket was actually there but that the dead person was an inner construction in the mind. A mind that is very poor at distinguishing inner and outer visions if they are compelling enough. As a businessman I'm motivated by results (profit that can be measured in numerous ways) and fault on the side of simplicity. I start with an objective and if, overtime, my perception brings me closer to my objective I hold on to my perception. If on the other hand, my perceptions stop serving my objective I reconsider and quite possibly adopt a new perception that I originally considered incapable of serving my objective. I consider this the competitive part of who I am. Although profit is a prime metric of commerce-competiton is much more what motivates me and I believe many other business types. Although the metaphor can be over simplified, IMO-business is most like sports and in sports velocity can reduce some of the editorializing of reality you are describing. If a tennis ball or a baseball is coming at me at 100mph my thought and emotions have to surrender to my body to react effectively. I believe in this surrender there is a nowness that transcends:) the yoke of perception you are describing. I'm guessing as a musician, sound does something similar for you? I'm not sure about how music might have done this for Curtis, but I'm pretty sure that studying martial arts would have. A tennis ball or baseball coming at you at that speed is one thing; you've got a racquet or a glove with which to catch the sucker. But when it's a fist or a foot coming for your face at that speed, there really isn't enough time to construct a terribly sophisticated inner perceptual vision of the incident. After years of martial arts study, your body reacts far faster than your mind, and if you're any good, effectively. In contests I would have blocked the punch or kick and have gotten off a couple
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: Just something to bear in mind: No matter how fallible our perceptions may be, they've served us well evolutionarily. We wouldn't be here if they hadn't supported our survival as a species. I don't doubt that this value includes our overconfidence in our ability to perceive reality. Like many holdovers from our more primitive past, like our fight or flight response, what has served us so well in the past may need to be compensated for in our present world. Let's throw into the mix of confusion for our brains internal vision and outer vision the whole super compelling images like my HD TV. I have noticed a stronger reaction in my body to scary films or graphic violence from this more immersive experience. But despite the evolutionary value, primitive societies all over the world also suffer from superstitious based priest cultures. One member claims to have visions (and he may) and somehow parlays this into a type of leadership. Without modern medicine the faith healing of a witch doctor may be the best you can do. But we can do better now. Theoretically that is. With the healthcare mess we are in due to monkey power struggles access may make our advances a moot point and we may have to head back to faith healing! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: First great thoughtful response Bob. I'll intersperse my comments on Barry's reply. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Thanks Curtis, much appreciated. More below. I am overcoming a reluctance to get into long discussions here because this one seems not only interesting, but as if it could go somewhere. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. Response: Does this mean perception is like a limb that remains in sense memory after we've lost it? I'm curious to know an example of the collision you mention above? Me, too. The collision is furniture, really. The person keeps running into things that are not in their visual field. The book's point is that our brain creates our visual experience out of a severely fractured input system of our eyes. You know about the huge blind spot our corneas have. Why don't we see it? Because our brain uses the Photoshop cloning tool and manufactures a seamless apparition of reality for us. It is not that vision remains in sense memory. It is that the mind has been creating the experience all along and as we know in dreams, it does fine without any outer vision at all. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. Response: You could be right. I'm not sure I'm confident, all the time, in my perceptions. Me, either. :-) Nor I. But people with visions like Jim is having are often supremely confident that this is an accurate insight into reality. I believe it is an insight into how vision and our minds interact to construct our visual field. I believe that the casket was actually there but that the dead person was an inner construction in the mind. A mind that is very poor at distinguishing inner and outer visions if they are compelling enough. As a businessman I'm motivated by results (profit that can be measured in numerous ways) and fault on the side of simplicity. I start with an objective and if, overtime, my perception brings me closer to my objective I hold on to my perception. If on the other hand, my perceptions stop serving my objective I reconsider and quite possibly adopt a new perception that I originally considered incapable of serving my objective. I consider this the competitive part of who I am. Although profit is a prime metric of commerce-competiton is much more what
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Thank you both. In addition to a post that requires a little thinking I have to compliment you for the chutzpah of placing it in one of the seasons political threads. Have you ever noticed if you stop consuming the news for six months it seems no time has pasted when you start consuming again? The wife describes it as: As useless as a time machine that travels in real time. More below From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 8:50:31 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama First great thoughtful response Bob. I'll intersperse my comments on Barry's reply. -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Thanks Curtis, much appreciated. More below. I am overcoming a reluctance to get into long discussions here because this one seems not only interesting, but as if it could go somewhere. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. Response: Does this mean perception is like a limb that remains in sense memory after we've lost it? I'm curious to know an example of the collision you mention above? Me, too. The collision is furniture, really. The person keeps running into things that are not in their visual field. The book's point is that our brain creates our visual experience out of a severely fractured input system of our eyes. You know about the huge blind spot our corneas have. Why don't we see it? Because our brain uses the Photoshop cloning tool and manufactures a seamless apparition of reality for us. It is not that vision remains in sense memory. It is that the mind has been creating the experience all along and as we know in dreams, it does fine without any outer vision at all. Response II: The collision is furniture, really. This reminds me of the compulsive analysis of something we have no control over, say politics? And of course it could be explained with that definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. Response: You could be right. I'm not sure I'm confident, all the time, in my perceptions. Me, either. :-) Nor I. But people with visions like Jim is having are often supremely confident that this is an accurate insight into reality. I believe it is an insight into how vision and our minds interact to construct our visual field. I believe that the casket was actually there but that the dead person was an inner construction in the mind. A mind that is very poor at distinguishing inner and outer visions if they are compelling enough. Response II: I wonder if they can measure confidence bio-chemically in small animals? If they could would it be interesting to measure the confidence levels of lemmings prior to their embracing the air just over the cliff? As a businessman I'm motivated by results (profit that can be measured in numerous ways) and fault on the side of simplicity. I start with an objective and if, overtime, my perception brings me closer to my objective I hold on to my perception. If on the other hand, my perceptions stop serving my objective I reconsider and quite possibly adopt a new perception that I originally considered incapable of serving my objective. I consider this the competitive part of who I am. Although profit is a prime metric of commerce-competiton is much more what motivates me and I believe many other business types. Although the metaphor can be over simplified, IMO-business is most like sports and in sports velocity can reduce some of the editorializing of reality you are describing. If a tennis ball or a baseball is coming at me at 100mph my thought and emotions have to surrender to my body to react effectively. I believe in this surrender there is a nowness that transcends:) the yoke of perception you
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@... wrote: Response II: Or how bout coming back as Tenzing, knowing full well you had to carry that lout the last half mile. I also wonder what exercises everyone uses to test their perceptions. I personally like to test the process rather than the content. One exercise I practise is staring at women from different distances. I've noticed that many women who are attractive close up are also attractive at a distance and that many women who are not so desirable close up can also look great far away. This could mean different things, although the wife's favourite is maybe its time for a visit to the optometrist. I would propose -- as merely an alternative theory, not in any way a challenge to the wife -- that another explanation is that at our age, when we see women at a distance, what we're really seeing is their auras. The auras are often far more attractive than the women themselves are up close.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Response II: Or how bout coming back as Tenzing, knowing full well you had to carry that lout the last half mile. I also wonder what exercises everyone uses to test their perceptions. I personally like to test the process rather than the content. One exercise I practise is staring at women from different distances. I've noticed that many women who are attractive close up are also attractive at a distance and that many women who are not so desirable close up can also look great far away. This could mean different things, although the wife's favourite is maybe its time for a visit to the optometrist. I would propose -- as merely an alternative theory, not in any way a challenge to the wife -- that another explanation is that at our age, when we see women at a distance, what we're really seeing is their auras. The auras are often far more attractive than the women themselves are up close. BTW Bob, I'm actually fairly serious about this. The aura -- whether we consciously see it or not -- in my view encapsulates the full multi-incarnational profile of the person in question. The aura, to paraphrase Walt Whitman, contains multitudes. The face and body, on the other hand, contain primarily only the successes and samskaras from This Time Around. Boring. I find myself these days far more interested in the full incarnational profile of women I find attractive than I am in just the latest model. To come back to my earlier mention of Isabelle Adjani, she has mentioned in interviews that her decision to portray Queen Margot and Camille Claudel was partially based on the suspicion that she might have actually been those women. In a less beautiful woman I'd write that off as self importance and ego, but with her, based on once having seen her aura at a distance on a Paris street, I'm willing to cut her a break. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:01:39 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bob Price bobpriced@ wrote: Response II: Or how bout coming back as Tenzing, knowing full well you had to carry that lout the last half mile. I also wonder what exercises everyone uses to test their perceptions. I personally like to test the process rather than the content. One exercise I practise is staring at women from different distances. I've noticed that many women who are attractive close up are also attractive at a distance and that many women who are not so desirable close up can also look great far away. This could mean different things, although the wife's favourite is maybe its time for a visit to the optometrist. I would propose -- as merely an alternative theory, not in any way a challenge to the wife -- that another explanation is that at our age, when we see women at a distance, what we're really seeing is their auras. The auras are often far more attractive than the women themselves are up close. BTW Bob, I'm actually fairly serious about this. The aura -- whether we consciously see it or not -- in my view encapsulates the full multi-incarnational profile of the person in question. The aura, to paraphrase Walt Whitman, contains multitudes. The face and body, on the other hand, contain primarily only the successes and samskaras from This Time Around. Boring. I find myself these days far more interested in the full incarnational profile of women I find attractive than I am in just the latest model. To come back to my earlier mention of Isabelle Adjani, she has mentioned in interviews that her decision to portray Queen Margot and Camille Claudel was partially based on the suspicion that she might have actually been those women. In a less beautiful woman I'd write that off as self importance and ego, but with her, based on once having seen her aura at a distance on a Paris street, I'm willing to cut her a break. :-) This makes complete sense to me and although Isabelle Adjani is truly stunning I'm more interested in all the lives of Eva Green, particularly the one where I was her plumber lover. I don't see time and matter as being very certain, why would I if I believe in something as fantastic as reincarnation---not to mention seeing dead people. My conviction of the reality of transmigration of the soul has a certain 'Billy Pilgrim favour to it. I believe when I die I will become unstuck and heaven knows what time I might end up in. Thats why I run like hell the other way if a woman tells me she was Anne Boleyn in a past life---God knows if it was in her past or just around the corner.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Well put! Funny how simply getting out of our own way leads to an entirely new vision of life. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: Quite so! I suspect that most humans throughout history didn't know they weren't supposed to be able to access multidimensional reality. Today of course we know better, so most of us have the common courtesy to ignore the inevitable anomalies. Amazing, the minutiae that we start to notice when we give up believing and politely pretending we can't perceive them :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Great! I have listened to a lot of people over the years and the things I experience with regard to subtle senses aren't that unusual except possibly wrt consistency. Everybody experiences such things. They aren't as rare as some would believe, nor is the world as small and predictable as many would like to believe.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote: Thanks for sharing these experiences Jim :-), I have really enjoyed them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: To address another assumption of yours, I never have spoken with those I see who have passed on, nor they to me. It is all visual so far. I also do not try to communicate with them - it is a very quiet and subtle experience. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Thanks Curtis too! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Not for me. I think of it as a natural product of education. Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. I'm not sure what that would mean but I guess the idea might be to seek a more complete understanding. At least that is how I live with all the experiences I have had including spiritual ones. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. Downplaying their effect on you makes sense. Not seeing that they represent something outside the norm doesn't to me. I would never attempt to contact your mom. I wasn't suggesting that. May she rest in peace. I was just speculating on what it would take for me to share your beliefs in what your experience means. Knowing what I know about human fallibility in knowledge it would take more than seeing her was my point. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. It wouldn't necessarily be so. If she was contactable as a person now she might be fascinated with the project. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I am happy with the memories of her in life. I don't believe she exists outside that and I am at peace with that. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. We're just talk' here. I wasn't trying to make you feel as if you have to prove anything. Of course you don't this is your personal experience and interpretation of what it means. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) Hopefully it would be more so, I mean if I were in the plane with you in the cockpit! Great rap, thanks. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
A lot of that going around lately... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk for losing it. Liberal pundits are slamming his idol, most of the progressive blogosphere is ready to take up pitchforks against him, and even the staid New York Times is denouncing him, in both its editorials and front-page news articles. It isn't a pleasant time to be an Obama dead-ender. No fun at all to have to recognize that those who warned Obama would be a disaster in the White House, the very people he told to go fuck themselves during the primary campaign, were right all along. So we should all have a little compassion. He's lashing out because he's hurting. He's doing his best to hold up the flag, and when it keeps getting knocked out of his hands by stubborn facts, of course he's going to react badly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Can I predict things, or can I predict things? :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk for losing it. Liberal pundits are slamming his idol, most of the progressive blogosphere is ready to take up pitchforks against him, and even the staid New York Times is denouncing him, in both its editorials and front-page news articles. It isn't a pleasant time to be an Obama dead-ender. No fun at all to have to recognize that those who warned Obama would be a disaster in the White House, the very people he told to go fuck themselves during the primary campaign, were right all along. So we should all have a little compassion. He's lashing out because he's hurting. He's doing his best to hold up the flag, and when it keeps getting knocked out of his hands by stubborn facts, of course he's going to react badly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
The Oracle of Amsterdam. From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 9:24:13 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama Can I predict things, or can I predict things? :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk for losing it. Liberal pundits are slamming his idol, most of the progressive blogosphere is ready to take up pitchforks against him, and even the staid New York Times is denouncing him, in both its editorials and front-page news articles. It isn't a pleasant time to be an Obama dead-ender. No fun at all to have to recognize that those who warned Obama would be a disaster in the White House, the very people he told to go fuck themselves during the primary campaign, were right all along. So we should all have a little compassion. He's lashing out because he's hurting. He's doing his best to hold up the flag, and when it keeps getting knocked out of his hands by stubborn facts, of course he's going to react badly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy. Even Judy has the objectivity to see a partisan demagogue when she sees one.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: Can I predict things, or can I predict things? :-) Yup, your dittohead the do.rk is one of FFL's most virulent haters. He isn't quite up to your standards yet, but he's working on it. No doubt Sal will be along shortly to give him a little assistance; and I'm sure Vaj will chime in very soon. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk for losing it. Liberal pundits are slamming his idol, most of the progressive blogosphere is ready to take up pitchforks against him, and even the staid New York Times is denouncing him, in both its editorials and front-page news articles. It isn't a pleasant time to be an Obama dead-ender. No fun at all to have to recognize that those who warned Obama would be a disaster in the White House, the very people he told to go fuck themselves during the primary campaign, were right all along. So we should all have a little compassion. He's lashing out because he's hurting. He's doing his best to hold up the flag, and when it keeps getting knocked out of his hands by stubborn facts, of course he's going to react badly. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wgm4u wgm4u@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy. Even Judy has the objectivity to see a partisan demagogue when she sees one. If only Obama were a true partisan and had the spine to do some good old-fashioned demagoguing from his bully pulpit, we'd likely not be in the mess we're in today.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: Can I predict things, or can I predict things? :-) Yup, your dittohead the do.rk ... Like I said...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
* * Ha! What goes around comes around, as it were...Uroborically speaking :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: A lot of that going around lately... --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. * * Are you really daid like me? Then we are indeed ever fucking ourself again and again. We really are an infinitely flexing dork, aren't we? You're a bore' becomes the (n)ever-boring Uroboros. By the way, somewhat along the same lines, I heartily second Tom Traynor's recommendation of Dead Like Me (available by instant download from Netflix) for a poignant and hilarious look at a life immediately post-Awakening :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. * * Are you really daid like me? Then we are indeed ever fucking ourself again and again. We really are an infinitely flexing dork, aren't we? You're a bore' becomes the (n)ever-boring Uroboros. By the way, somewhat along the same lines, I heartily second Tom Traynor's recommendation of Dead Like Me (available by instant download from Netflix) for a poignant and hilarious look at a life immediately post-Awakening :-) Sounds delightful, Rory.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: Sounds delightful, Rory. * * It really is! Some find the deadpan humor a bit depressing at first, but once my I got accustomed to the dark, I found it unbelievably funny! Alas, it ran only two seasons...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: Sounds delightful, Rory. * * It really is! Some find the deadpan humor a bit depressing at first, but once my I got accustomed to the dark, I found it unbelievably funny! Alas, it ran only two seasons... Is the 2009 movie the same thing? I'm not sure I want to take the time to watch 29 episodes of the TV series.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. You daid, do.rk? Gee, I'm sorry to hear that. Thought you had a few good years left.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. You daid, do.rk? Gee, I'm sorry to hear that. Thought you had a few good years left. Go fuck yourself, Judy.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. You daid, do.rk? Gee, I'm sorry to hear that. Thought you had a few good years left. Go fuck yourself, Judy. Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. You daid, do.rk? Gee, I'm sorry to hear that. Thought you had a few good years left. Go fuck yourself, Judy. Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works. You're an expert, Judy, at what you're doing. Congratulations. I hope you appreciate the results.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
On 08/15/2011 10:14 AM, RoryGoff wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflexdo.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriendjstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. * * Are you really daid like me? Then we are indeed ever fucking ourself again and again. We really are an infinitely flexing dork, aren't we? You're a bore' becomes the (n)ever-boring Uroboros. By the way, somewhat along the same lines, I heartily second Tom Traynor's recommendation of Dead Like Me (available by instant download from Netflix) for a poignant and hilarious look at a life immediately post-Awakening :-) Both the series and movie are available WI. I watched the series back in 2003 and recorded it to my D-VHS HDTV tape deck. It was a fun series but only lasted two seasons. Callum Blue was very funny in it. Ellen Muth is quite a comedienne but apparently did no more projects as her parents didn't really want to have an acting career.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. do.rflex: Go fuck yourself, Judy. Nice work, do.rk!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: Both the series and movie are available WI. Being non-American these days, I confess to not knowing what WI means, although I guess it means watch instantly on Netflix. We don't have Netflix over here, but I agree with the sentiment. It's actually a smashingly good TV series, one of the best I can think of when thinking of TV series or movies that have dealt with the afterlife. I watched the series back in 2003 and recorded it to my D-VHS HDTV tape deck. It was a fun series but only lasted two seasons. Callum Blue was very funny in it. Ellen Muth is quite a comedienne but apparently did no more projects as her parents didn't really want to have an acting career. Too bad. She was wonderful, as were other actors in the series, such as Mandy Patimkin. The basic plot, for those who don't know it, revolves around a group of the newly- dead who have been recruited to help other newly-dead gracefully make the transition to...uh...wherever they're going next. They're all fuckups who don't really know WTF they're doing, which IMO meshes nicely with the concept of being newly-dead and not knowing WTF you're doing, either. Many, many sweet moments in this series.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: A lot of that going around lately... We can hardly blame poor do.rk ... Like I daid, 'go fuck yourself Judy. You daid, do.rk? Gee, I'm sorry to hear that. Thought you had a few good years left. Go fuck yourself, Judy. When did do.rf become the Turq's alter-ego ? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
I experienced an unusual moment during a memorial service this year, during which everyone present was focused on the casket as the final resting place of the deceased, although at the same time I saw the subtle body of the deceased clearly standing outside of the casket, next to her former husband! I have also noticed that sentinel angels arrive by the bedside of one who is dying several days before they depart. We are well taken care of during the process of dying and death.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: Sounds delightful, Rory. * * It really is! Some find the deadpan humor a bit depressing at first, but once my I got accustomed to the dark, I found it unbelievably funny! Alas, it ran only two seasons...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 12:45 PM, authfriend jst...@panix.com wrote: If only Obama were a true partisan and had the spine to do some good old-fashioned demagoguing from his bully pulpit, we'd likely not be in the mess we're in today. Bully pulpit? Toy poodle pulpit.Gosh. Woodrow Wilson, Ph.D. (Johns Hopkins) professor then president of Princeton University had more charisma to get things done than President Kumbaya.A critic once wrote that Dorothy Parker said of Katherine Hepburn that She runs the gamut of emotions from A to B. President Bumbaya (which I believe is African for throw in the towel) deserves at least the Greek alphabet considering his terrific scholarship. The President runs the range of power and persuasion to sway people from alpha to alpha. If he didn't run against used goods in both tickets, he would never have been elected as our magic negro president. Perhaps we should get someone who's a lot more convincing and a much better orator, like William Shatner to pitch hit for Obama when it comes to the bull pulpit. He runs from alpha to gamma.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Both the series and movie are available WI. Being non-American these days, I confess to not knowing what WI means, although I guess it means watch instantly on Netflix. snip Nope. Means Wash Intermittently, and was originally coined for dirty movies, but since you are un-American these days, you wouldn't know about this and other fast forward cultural slang expressions.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: I experienced an unusual moment during a memorial service this year, during which everyone present was focused on the casket as the final resting place of the deceased, although at the same time I saw the subtle body of the deceased clearly standing outside of the casket, next to her former husband! I have also noticed that sentinel angels arrive by the bedside of one who is dying several days before they depart. We are well taken care of during the process of dying and death.:-) Paraphrasing Maharishi; We should have fear of birth, not death. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: Sounds delightful, Rory. * * It really is! Some find the deadpan humor a bit depressing at first, but once my I got accustomed to the dark, I found it unbelievably funny! Alas, it ran only two seasons...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Death is such an egocentric label for what happens. There is quite obviously no death, except for the outer casing, yet we pronounce it with such finality, fear and ignorance. Passing on or passing away is a far more accurate term. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I experienced an unusual moment during a memorial service this year, during which everyone present was focused on the casket as the final resting place of the deceased, although at the same time I saw the subtle body of the deceased clearly standing outside of the casket, next to her former husband! I have also noticed that sentinel angels arrive by the bedside of one who is dying several days before they depart. We are well taken care of during the process of dying and death.:-) Paraphrasing Maharishi; We should have fear of birth, not death. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: Sounds delightful, Rory. * * It really is! Some find the deadpan humor a bit depressing at first, but once my I got accustomed to the dark, I found it unbelievably funny! Alas, it ran only two seasons...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Tom Pall thomas.p...@gmail.com wrote: Bully pulpit? Toy poodle pulpit.Gosh. Woodrow Wilson, Ph.D. (Johns Hopkins) professor then president of Princeton University had more charisma to get things done than President Kumbaya.A critic once wrote that Dorothy Parker said of Katherine Hepburn that She runs the gamut of emotions from A to B. President Bumbaya (which I believe is African for throw in the towel) deserves at least the Greek alphabet considering his terrific scholarship. The President runs the range of power and persuasion to sway people from alpha to alpha. If he didn't run against used goods in both tickets, he would never have been elected as our magic negro president. Perhaps we should get someone who's a lot more convincing and a much better orator, like William Shatner to pitch hit for Obama when it comes to the bull pulpit. He runs from alpha to gamma. Maybe we could do better by hiding the prez or doing a Moon Over Parador thing. Have Michelle run the country the way Mrs. Wilson secretly did after her husband had his stroke.The prez already achieved it all. Even a Nobel Peace prize. We're at peace, right?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: I experienced an unusual moment during a memorial service this year, during which everyone present was focused on the casket as the final resting place of the deceased, although at the same time I saw the subtle body of the deceased clearly standing outside of the casket, next to her former husband! I have also noticed that sentinel angels arrive by the bedside of one who is dying several days before they depart. We are well taken care of during the process of dying and death.:-) * * Yes! We are always in very good hands, although the process of living sometimes distracts us from appreciating the Paradise we are ever creating even here and now :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works. You're an expert, Judy, at what you're doing. Congratulations. I hope you appreciate the results. Well, that's glib and cryptic enough to be meaningless. What I'm doing, toots, is twitting you. I pointed out that you posted all the positives and none of the negatives for Obama in that poll, and you freaked. Why? Do you think posting the negatives here is going to cause Obama to lose the election, that he'd win if I hadn't done so? Is that why you posted only the positives? Get real. You've never been capable of actually *discussing* Obama's pros and cons like an adult. If somebody says something critical about him, all you've ever done is either cut-and- paste some fawning, laudatory piece, or repeatedly sling crude insults at the critic. Grow up. There's an awful lot of people these days who think he's doing a rotten job. You want them to all go fuck themselves? What a helpful, thoughtful approach. If you have a case to make for him, if you have rebuttals to the criticisms, for pete's sake let us hear them. You sure don't do him any good by cursing people. When he took over the White House, I was hoping against hope that he'd prove me wrong and dazzle us with his ability to fix what was broken. I gave him the benefit of the doubt for quite some time. I even bought into the 11-dimensional-chess meme for a while. But he didn't fix what needed fixing, and he hasn't been able to prevent still more breakage. Some of it has even been his own doing. Who was the last Democratic president to propose cutting back Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security? He's the first. Did you know that? And nobody forced him into it. He was talking about doing it before he was inaugurated. He thinks it's a great idea. So does the GOP. How can you look at that and not have qualms? How can you claim to be a Democrat and not be horrified? Nobody is unhappier than I am that my opinion of him turned out to be on target. It's just as unpleasant for me to have been right about him as it is for you to have been wrong. He is who he is. What can we do about it? Let's face the facts instead of hurling curses. How can we keep the Republicans from winning a year from November?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works. You're an expert, Judy, at what you're doing. Congratulations. I hope you appreciate the results. Well, that's glib and cryptic enough to be meaningless. What I'm doing, toots, is twitting you. I pointed out that you posted all the positives and none of the negatives for Obama in that poll, and you freaked. Why? Do you think posting the negatives here is going to cause Obama to lose the election, that he'd win if I hadn't done so? Is that why you posted only the positives? Get real. You've never been capable of actually *discussing* Obama's pros and cons like an adult. If somebody says something critical about him, all you've ever done is either cut-and- paste some fawning, laudatory piece, or repeatedly sling crude insults at the critic. Grow up. There's an awful lot of people these days who think he's doing a rotten job. You want them to all go fuck themselves? What a helpful, thoughtful approach. If you have a case to make for him, if you have rebuttals to the criticisms, for pete's sake let us hear them. You sure don't do him any good by cursing people. When he took over the White House, I was hoping against hope that he'd prove me wrong and dazzle us with his ability to fix what was broken. I gave him the benefit of the doubt for quite some time. I even bought into the 11-dimensional-chess meme for a while. But he didn't fix what needed fixing, and he hasn't been able to prevent still more breakage. Some of it has even been his own doing. Who was the last Democratic president to propose cutting back Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security? He's the first. Did you know that? And nobody forced him into it. He was talking about doing it before he was inaugurated. He thinks it's a great idea. So does the GOP. How can you look at that and not have qualms? How can you claim to be a Democrat and not be horrified? Nobody is unhappier than I am that my opinion of him turned out to be on target. It's just as unpleasant for me to have been right about him as it is for you to have been wrong. He is who he is. What can we do about it? Let's face the facts instead of hurling curses. How can we keep the Republicans from winning a year from November? Nice scolding Judy, something I've been meaning to do for years. To your point however, I think I was right when I predicted that Obama would be nothing other than a consolidation of the status Quo, look who was doing all the heaving lifting for him, yep, Nancy Pelosi and Dingy Harry. Come on, there was nothing NEW about Barack Obama, Hope and CHANGE? GMWAS (gag me with a spoon)! :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Vote for Obama...that's how. Look at the alternatives - God save our sorry souls if any of the current GOP frontrunners are even in the running for a nomination. Saying he has accomplished nothing is simply another extremist view that will ultimately go down in history or work for the GOP to further divide us (see George Carlin - he was right then, and he is right now, laughing at our stupidity from above). Obama has accomplished something in the last three years (see the list I sent, whether you agree or not) and thank god for These Broke United States of America that we didn't follow Bush with a Bachmann or Perry. We'd all be begging you to sponsor us to move to the United Broke Countries of Europe. He's only had 3 years - this isn't a dictatorship we live in, after all. And, we know it is just as George Carlin said...the politicians are the sideshow to who is really running the show here. Obama will do the least damage. Of course he panders and caves and throws the problems at Congress, etc. Checks and balances - 3 branches of government and all that.Look who the hell he is working with...I believe he deserves some credit. I give him the benefit of the doubt - he is/was an idealist...reality looks nothing like idealism and I agree that his personality flaw of standing for nothing (i.e. compromise) has not served him well. He may or may not learn from his approach. Re: Congress - vote them out...per the polls, our reps aren't doing so well either. With all the intelligently crafted attacks on this site, demonstrating a great command of the English language and a vocabulary to intimidate, I'd like to see a well-crafted and sourced op/ed piece that outlined not what an utter failure Obama is and what a disappointment he's been, but instead, from your perch far away (giving you some objectivity and benefit of the different culture you live in) a plan for what you think is needed for Obama to regain the confidence of the Democrats and retain the White House - in terms of both approach and agenda. And no, I can't write it myself because I'm busy trying to save my soul and claim my life which is taking precedence right now (or the last thing I'll be sending is some painful Patty Loveless tune), and I'm also betting there is a better editor than I out there. Of course, if you Dem's have already written the op/ed than perhaps you would share and I can see about getting it published in the newspaper here. --- On Mon, 8/15/11, authfriend jst...@panix.com wrote: From: authfriend jst...@panix.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 15, 2011, 1:49 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works. You're an expert, Judy, at what you're doing. Congratulations. I hope you appreciate the results. Well, that's glib and cryptic enough to be meaningless. What I'm doing, toots, is twitting you. I pointed out that you posted all the positives and none of the negatives for Obama in that poll, and you freaked. Why? Do you think posting the negatives here is going to cause Obama to lose the election, that he'd win if I hadn't done so? Is that why you posted only the positives? Get real. You've never been capable of actually *discussing* Obama's pros and cons like an adult. If somebody says something critical about him, all you've ever done is either cut-and- paste some fawning, laudatory piece, or repeatedly sling crude insults at the critic. Grow up. There's an awful lot of people these days who think he's doing a rotten job. You want them to all go fuck themselves? What a helpful, thoughtful approach. If you have a case to make for him, if you have rebuttals to the criticisms, for pete's sake let us hear them. You sure don't do him any good by cursing people. When he took over the White House, I was hoping against hope that he'd prove me wrong and dazzle us with his ability to fix what was broken. I gave him the benefit of the doubt for quite some time. I even bought into the 11-dimensional-chess meme for a while. But he didn't fix what needed fixing, and he hasn't been able to prevent still more breakage. Some of it has even been his own doing. Who was the last Democratic president to propose cutting back Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security? He's the first. Did you know that? And nobody forced him into it. He was talking about doing it before he was inaugurated. He thinks it's a great idea. So does the GOP. How can you look at that and not have qualms? How can you claim to be a Democrat
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@... wrote: Vote for Obama...that's how. How can we ensure that enough people vote for him to beat the Republican, is what I'm asking. Look at the alternatives - God save our sorry souls if any of the current GOP frontrunners are even in the running for a nomination. They're all in the running. What are you talking about? Did you think there was some GOP knight in shining armor who hasn't announced yet? Saying he has accomplished nothing is simply another extremist view that will ultimately go down in history or work for the GOP to further divide us Denise, read what I wrote again. I did not say he has accomplished nothing. Please don't put words in my mouth. (see George Carlin - he was right then, and he is right now, laughing at our stupidity from above).  Obama has accomplished something in the last three years (see the list I sent, whether you agree or not) and thank god for These Broke United States of America that we didn't follow Bush with a Bachmann or Perry.  We'd all be begging you to sponsor us to move to the United Broke Countries of Europe.  He's only had 3 years - this isn't a dictatorship we live in, after all.  And, we know it is just as George Carlin said...the politicians are the sideshow to who is really running the show here.  Obama will do the least damage.  Of course he panders and caves and throws the problems at Congress, etc.  Checks and balances - 3 branches of government and all that.Look who the hell he is working with...I believe he deserves some credit.  I give him the benefit of the doubt - he is/was an idealist...reality looks nothing like idealism and I agree that his personality flaw of standing for nothing (i.e. compromise) has not served him well.  He may or may not learn from his approach.  Re: Congress - vote them out...per the polls, our reps aren't doing so well either.   With all the intelligently crafted attacks on this site, demonstrating a great command of the English language and a vocabulary to intimidate, I'd like to see a well-crafted and sourced op/ed piece that outlined not what an utter failure Obama is and what a disappointment he's been, but instead, from your perch far away (giving you some objectivity and benefit of the different culture you live in) a plan for what you think is needed for Obama to regain the confidence of the Democrats and retain the White House - in terms of both approach and agenda.  And no, I can't write it myself because I'm busy trying to save my soul and claim my life which is taking precedence right now (or the last thing I'll be sending is some painful Patty Loveless tune), and I'm also betting there is a better editor than I out there.   Of course, if you Dem's have already written the op/ed than perhaps you would share and I can see about getting it published in the newspaper here. --- On Mon, 8/15/11, authfriend jstein@... wrote: From: authfriend jstein@... Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 15, 2011, 1:49 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works. You're an expert, Judy, at what you're doing. Congratulations. I hope you appreciate the results. Well, that's glib and cryptic enough to be meaningless. What I'm doing, toots, is twitting you. I pointed out that you posted all the positives and none of the negatives for Obama in that poll, and you freaked. Why? Do you think posting the negatives here is going to cause Obama to lose the election, that he'd win if I hadn't done so? Is that why you posted only the positives? Get real. You've never been capable of actually *discussing* Obama's pros and cons like an adult. If somebody says something critical about him, all you've ever done is either cut-and- paste some fawning, laudatory piece, or repeatedly sling crude insults at the critic. Grow up. There's an awful lot of people these days who think he's doing a rotten job. You want them to all go fuck themselves? What a helpful, thoughtful approach. If you have a case to make for him, if you have rebuttals to the criticisms, for pete's sake let us hear them. You sure don't do him any good by cursing people. When he took over the White House, I was hoping against hope that he'd prove me wrong and dazzle us with his ability to fix what was broken. I gave him the benefit of the doubt for quite some time. I even bought into the 11-dimensional-chess meme
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I am searching for areas where unwarranted confidence masks my cognitive-perceptual flaws. It seems to me that this research in how our minds shape all perceptions,not just so called subtle ones, should be of interest for people whose perceptions are outside the broad consensus. (I am assuming that everyone else didn't see the exact same thing at the service.) I believe it is important to find out where our confidence should be placed concerning these perceptions. Our mental perceptual mechanism is so fluid, so automatic, so unconscious. We have so many blind spots which are compounded by our enthusiastic confidence in our lack of blind spots! We are all smoking our own brand. We are terrible witnesses to external events outside our minds, and even worse when it comes to reporting what goes on inside. But the statement that there quite obviously is no death, is overreaching. That is a leapfrogging over your own subjective confidence to a statement about the world that we share. I accept the report of your perceptions as accurate for you, and that it had compelled you to feel that they are authentically representing the world outside yourself. But it is way premature to go beyond saying this as a personal belief you have. A very compelling one. And in the end it may even be true in the sense that we can both watch the sun set and report it in somewhat similar terms despite our different mindsets. But we are a long way from being there yet. I would love to hear someone input the information about the mind and senses I am reading and integrate it with their experience of subtle perceptions. This information really shakes up having confidence in our ability to make these distinctions well. Distinctions that we often bet our lives on every day. Every day we drive we are throwing the dice on our ability to pull it all together internally while being bombarded with sensory input that is chaos until our mind sorts it out with process beneath our conscious awareness, but on whose judgements we rely for our very survival. I guess what I am concluding is that far from having confidence in perceptions involving life after death; I'm thinking that I am an idiot to ever drive while talking on my cell phone. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: Death is such an egocentric label for what happens. There is quite obviously no death, except for the outer casing, yet we pronounce it with such finality, fear and ignorance. Passing on or passing away is a far more accurate term. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I experienced an unusual moment during a memorial service this year, during which everyone present was focused on the casket as the final resting place of the deceased, although at the same time I saw the subtle body of the deceased clearly standing outside of the casket, next to her former husband! I have also noticed that sentinel angels arrive by the bedside of one who is dying several days before they depart. We are well taken care of during the process of dying and death.:-) Paraphrasing Maharishi; We should have fear of birth, not death. :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@ wrote: Sounds delightful, Rory. * * It really is! Some find the deadpan humor a bit depressing at first, but once my I got accustomed to the dark, I found it unbelievably funny!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@... wrote: snip We'd all be begging you to sponsor us to move to the United Broke Countries of Europe. snip I'd like to see a well-crafted and sourced op/ed piece that outlined not what an utter failure Obama is and what a disappointment he's been, but instead, from your perch far away (giving you some objectivity and benefit of the different culture you live in) Denise, your post appeared to be a reply to mine, but the above comments suggest you thought you were addressing Barry (turquoiseb). FYI, he's a big Obama fan. (He's also extremely ignorant about U.S. politics, but that's another story.)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Denise Evans dmevans...@yahoo.com wrote: Vote for Obama...that's how. Look at the alternatives - God save our sorry souls if any of the current GOP frontrunners are even in the running for a nomination. Of course you wouldn't want to vote for someone from the party of one of the greatest murderers in modern times, Abraham Lincoln, the man who was not poor (he had a lucrative appellate law practice). Yes, GOP are an abomination. Just because they are the GOP. Denise, time for you to disappear from my inbox. You've shown yourself to be worse of a True Believer or True Hater than the FemiNazis in this group. Bye!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
* * I can totally dig this, Curtis. For me, that was what Awakening entailed: the sudden visceral realization that my perceptible reality depends entirely upon my (previously subconscious) beliefs, or programs, and the concomitant realization that by consciously changing my programs, my whole reality instantly shifts. As a result, I am not particularly impressed by most experience(s) since they are so patently self-generated reflections of our own predispositions. That does not mean they aren't also true however, and I am interested in where our various realities may meet, the common ground we may share, where our maps may agree. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I am searching for areas where unwarranted confidence masks my cognitive-perceptual flaws. It seems to me that this research in how our minds shape all perceptions,not just so called subtle ones, should be of interest for people whose perceptions are outside the broad consensus. (I am assuming that everyone else didn't see the exact same thing at the service.) I believe it is important to find out where our confidence should be placed concerning these perceptions. Our mental perceptual mechanism is so fluid, so automatic, so unconscious. We have so many blind spots which are compounded by our enthusiastic confidence in our lack of blind spots! We are all smoking our own brand. We are terrible witnesses to external events outside our minds, and even worse when it comes to reporting what goes on inside. But the statement that there quite obviously is no death, is overreaching. That is a leapfrogging over your own subjective confidence to a statement about the world that we share. I accept the report of your perceptions as accurate for you, and that it had compelled you to feel that they are authentically representing the world outside yourself. But it is way premature to go beyond saying this as a personal belief you have. A very compelling one. And in the end it may even be true in the sense that we can both watch the sun set and report it in somewhat similar terms despite our different mindsets. But we are a long way from being there yet. I would love to hear someone input the information about the mind and senses I am reading and integrate it with their experience of subtle perceptions. This information really shakes up having confidence in our ability to make these distinctions well. Distinctions that we often bet our lives on every day. Every day we drive we are throwing the dice on our ability to pull it all together internally while being bombarded with sensory input that is chaos until our mind sorts it out with process beneath our conscious awareness, but on whose judgements we rely for our very survival. I guess what I am concluding is that far from having confidence in perceptions involving life after death; I'm thinking that I am an idiot to ever drive while talking on my cell phone.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Thanks Rory. It sounds like we are both in the same boat then. Whatever level of expanded experience you have is fraught with the same cognitive limitations of the rest of us. So we both do the best we can with the equipment we have. You seem to have avoided the epistemological tar pit of believing that compelling equals credible which I myself try to look out for. I respect that The un-awakened are just as prone to that fallacy. I am very excited about increasing my knowledge of what they are discovering about how our mind works through the lens of neruo science. Although I am not a complete reductionist, I figure I have to at least start there. The blend of inner and outer vision as a profound experience does not just have spiritual implications. It also is a tool for creativity for the arts. And the line gets pretty blurred where these meet, say in Blake's work or even Jung. Although I am pretty content to stay on the artistic side of the fence, I am well aware that we have our picnic blankets spread out in the same field and might be able to lob a chicken wing or corn on the cob to each other occasionally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: * * I can totally dig this, Curtis. For me, that was what Awakening entailed: the sudden visceral realization that my perceptible reality depends entirely upon my (previously subconscious) beliefs, or programs, and the concomitant realization that by consciously changing my programs, my whole reality instantly shifts. As a result, I am not particularly impressed by most experience(s) since they are so patently self-generated reflections of our own predispositions. That does not mean they aren't also true however, and I am interested in where our various realities may meet, the common ground we may share, where our maps may agree. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I am searching for areas where unwarranted confidence masks my cognitive-perceptual flaws. It seems to me that this research in how our minds shape all perceptions,not just so called subtle ones, should be of interest for people whose perceptions are outside the broad consensus. (I am assuming that everyone else didn't see the exact same thing at the service.) I believe it is important to find out where our confidence should be placed concerning these perceptions. Our mental perceptual mechanism is so fluid, so automatic, so unconscious. We have so many blind spots which are compounded by our enthusiastic confidence in our lack of blind spots! We are all smoking our own brand. We are terrible witnesses to external events outside our minds, and even worse when it comes to reporting what goes on inside. But the statement that there quite obviously is no death, is overreaching. That is a leapfrogging over your own subjective confidence to a statement about the world that we share. I accept the report of your perceptions as accurate for you, and that it had compelled you to feel that they are authentically representing the world outside yourself. But it is way premature to go beyond saying this as a personal belief you have. A very compelling one. And in the end it may even be true in the sense that we can both watch the sun set and report it in somewhat similar terms despite our different mindsets. But we are a long way from being there yet. I would love to hear someone input the information about the mind and senses I am reading and integrate it with their experience of subtle
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Sorry Judy...I sometimes pay less attention to who writes what and tend to respond to the what. Not always, but when the thread get long I get confused as to who is saying what so I don't pay as much attention. I may have been responding to you, but I certainly did not mean to put words in your mouth - that is never fair. But, regardless of whether you are an Obama fan or not (and while I say that I am, I say that in relative terms to our other choices at the moment), I still think you could write an excellent article on approach and agenda. --- On Mon, 8/15/11, authfriend jst...@panix.com wrote: From: authfriend jst...@panix.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 15, 2011, 4:25 PM --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@... wrote: snip We'd all be begging you to sponsor us to move to the United Broke Countries of Europe. snip I'd like to see a well-crafted and sourced op/ed piece that outlined not what an utter failure Obama is and what a disappointment he's been, but instead, from your perch far away (giving you some objectivity and benefit of the different culture you live in) Denise, your post appeared to be a reply to mine, but the above comments suggest you thought you were addressing Barry (turquoiseb). FYI, he's a big Obama fan. (He's also extremely ignorant about U.S. politics, but that's another story.)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
I'm sorry I've been going to your Inbox...by all means delete me. I don't actually know what a FemNazi or True Believer or True Hater is, but you may categorize me as you see fit. I don't give a fuck :) (But, I should and I am working on that). --- On Mon, 8/15/11, Tom Pall thomas.p...@gmail.com wrote: From: Tom Pall thomas.p...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, August 15, 2011, 4:35 PM On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Denise Evans dmevans...@yahoo.com wrote: Vote for Obama...that's how. Look at the alternatives - God save our sorry souls if any of the current GOP frontrunners are even in the running for a nomination. Of course you wouldn't want to vote for someone from the party of one of the greatest murderers in modern times, Abraham Lincoln, the man who was not poor (he had a lucrative appellate law practice). Yes, GOP are an abomination. Just because they are the GOP. Denise, time for you to disappear from my inbox. You've shown yourself to be worse of a True Believer or True Hater than the FemiNazis in this group. Bye!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
But the statement that there quite obviously is no death, is overreaching. Hi Curtis, I can only go on my experience. I have been having clear experiences of those that have passed now for many years. They don't all go the same way, nor is my experience of them after they passed the same; some are resting, some are happy, others not so much. It feels like an extension of my senses. It is the consistency and duration of my experiences that leads me to say that there is no death. It is not a belief, merely an extrapolation of direct experience. I am entirely satisfied with the alternative that nothing happens at death, except death. Fine with me. I have no idea if these 30 plus years of experience are some sort of elaborate game I am playing on myself, any more than to say I am apparently alive now. I appreciate your skeptical outlook on this, and would say to anyone if their experience doesn't match mine, then they ought to go with their experience. I do enjoy sharing my experience that there doesn't appear to be death, as it is conventionally understood, but I am in no way shape or form attempting to convince anyone else of this. I am much happier when people are true to their own experience, whether conventional or otherwise. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I am searching for areas where unwarranted confidence masks my cognitive-perceptual flaws. It seems to me that this research in how our minds shape all perceptions,not just so called subtle ones, should be of interest for people whose perceptions are outside the broad consensus. (I am assuming that everyone else didn't see the exact same thing at the service.) I believe it is important to find out where our confidence should be placed concerning these perceptions. Our mental perceptual mechanism is so fluid, so automatic, so unconscious. We have so many blind spots which are compounded by our enthusiastic confidence in our lack of blind spots! We are all smoking our own brand. We are terrible witnesses to external events outside our minds, and even worse when it comes to reporting what goes on inside. But the statement that there quite obviously is no death, is overreaching. That is a leapfrogging over your own subjective confidence to a statement about the world that we share. I accept the report of your perceptions as accurate for you, and that it had compelled you to feel that they are authentically representing the world outside yourself. But it is way premature to go beyond saying this as a personal belief you have. A very compelling one. And in the end it may even be true in the sense that we can both watch the sun set and report it in somewhat similar terms despite our different mindsets. But we are a long way from being there yet. I would love to hear someone input the information about the mind and senses I am reading and integrate it with their experience of subtle perceptions. This information really shakes up having confidence in our ability to make these distinctions well. Distinctions that we often bet our lives on every day. Every day we drive we are throwing the dice on our ability to pull it all together internally while being bombarded with sensory input that is chaos until our mind sorts it out with process beneath our conscious awareness, but on whose judgements we rely for our very survival. I guess what I am concluding is that far from having confidence in perceptions involving life after death; I'm thinking that I am an idiot to ever drive while talking on my cell phone. --- In
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Thanks Rory. It sounds like we are both in the same boat then. Whatever level of expanded experience you have is fraught with the same cognitive limitations of the rest of us. So we both do the best we can with the equipment we have. You seem to have avoided the epistemological tar pit of believing that compelling equals credible which I myself try to look out for. I respect that The un-awakened are just as prone to that fallacy. I am very excited about increasing my knowledge of what they are discovering about how our mind works through the lens of neruo science. Although I am not a complete reductionist, I figure I have to at least start there. The blend of inner and outer vision as a profound experience does not just have spiritual implications. It also is a tool for creativity for the arts. And the line gets pretty blurred where these meet, say in Blake's work or even Jung. Although I am pretty content to stay on the artistic side of the fence, I am well aware that we have our picnic blankets spread out in the same field and might be able to lob a chicken wing or corn on the cob to each other occasionally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@ wrote: * * I can totally dig this, Curtis. For me, that was what Awakening entailed: the sudden visceral realization that my perceptible reality depends entirely upon my (previously subconscious) beliefs, or programs, and the concomitant realization that by consciously changing my programs, my whole reality instantly shifts. As a result, I am not particularly impressed by most experience(s) since they are so patently self-generated reflections of our own predispositions. That does not mean they aren't also true however, and I am interested in where our various realities may meet, the common ground we may share, where our maps may agree. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I am searching for areas where unwarranted confidence masks my cognitive-perceptual flaws. It seems to me that this research in how our minds shape all perceptions,not just so called subtle ones, should be of interest for people whose perceptions are outside the broad consensus. (I am assuming that everyone else didn't see the exact same thing at the service.) I believe it is important to find out where our confidence should be placed concerning these perceptions. Our mental perceptual mechanism is so fluid, so automatic, so unconscious. We have so many blind spots which are compounded by our enthusiastic confidence in our lack of blind spots! We are all smoking our own brand. We are terrible witnesses to external events outside our minds, and even worse when it comes to reporting what
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Okay, the referees have put a temporary halt to the fight. Insult recognition moment. When an insult stands out in terms of its cleverness. That's what we've achieved here. Okay, continue. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: Thanks Rory. It sounds like we are both in the same boat then. Whatever level of expanded experience you have is fraught with the same cognitive limitations of the rest of us. So we both do the best we can with the equipment we have. * * Yes, Curtis! But as far as I can tell, I have no expanded experience -- whatever that may mean. (If I did, I would be guilty of creating and then believing in said experience.) If anything, I just appreciate (and participate in, and flow with) the minutiae that have always been here, more than I generally used to think I did. You seem to have avoided the epistemological tar pit of believing that compelling equals credible which I myself try to look out for. I respect that The un-awakened are just as prone to that fallacy. * * More so, from what I recall anyway. Awakening simply showed me how my intellect actually operates, and that (like beliefs) it actually cannot get hold of what reality is; it evidently is -- we are -- a priori and hence too subtle or too slippery for any of that. So I cannot really fool myself with intellectual certainty or beliefs of any kind any more, for very long anyhow. Always, the opposite of whatever I am asserting also arises to make me an instant liar, even now! :-) I am very excited about increasing my knowledge of what they are discovering about how our mind works through the lens of neruo science. Although I am not a complete reductionist, I figure I have to at least start there. * * Sounds reasonable. I wish you good fortune and profound satisfaction on your journey of self-discovery. Don't forget to write! The blend of inner and outer vision as a profound experience does not just have spiritual implications. It also is a tool for creativity for the arts. And the line gets pretty blurred where these meet, say in Blake's work or even Jung. Although I am pretty content to stay on the artistic side of the fence, I am well aware that we have our picnic blankets spread out in the same field and might be able to lob a chicken wing or corn on the cob to each other occasionally. * * As one who has dabbled in the arts myself, I suspect our picnic blankets are close enough to at least occasionally toss delicacies back and forth with some delicacy :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@... wrote: I'm sorry I've been going to your Inbox...by all means delete me. Â I don't actually know what a FemNazi or True Believer or True Hater is, but you may categorize me as you see fit. Â I don't give a fuck :) Â (But, I should and I am working on that). * * Should you? Whatever for, Denise? I *love* that you don't give a fuck! My kind of celibacy! :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Yes indeed, I put a lot of effort in to making even my insults creative. That's why I suggest do.reflex should stick to his brainless reflexive copy and paste of liberal blogs. At least his thinking cap was on when he selected his id. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@... wrote: Okay, the referees have put a temporary halt to the fight. Insult recognition moment. When an insult stands out in terms of its cleverness. That's what we've achieved here. Okay, continue. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Ooops, sounds like you're stuck, do.rk. Try picking up the needle and putting it down again in a different groove. Or just jump up and down near the record player; sometimes that works.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Everybody else is posting a song... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw_FZorE4p8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw_FZorE4p8 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: * * I can totally dig this, Curtis. For me, that was what Awakening entailed: the sudden visceral realization that my perceptible reality depends entirely upon my (previously subconscious) beliefs, or programs, and the concomitant realization that by consciously changing my programs, my whole reality instantly shifts. As a result, I am not particularly impressed by most experience(s) since they are so patently self-generated reflections of our own predispositions. That does not mean they aren't also true however, and I am interested in where our various realities may meet, the common ground we may share, where our maps may agree. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I am searching for areas where unwarranted confidence masks my cognitive-perceptual flaws. It seems to me that this research in how our minds shape all perceptions,not just so called subtle ones, should be of interest for people whose perceptions are outside the broad consensus. (I am assuming that everyone else didn't see the exact same thing at the service.) I believe it is important to find out where our confidence should be placed concerning these perceptions. Our mental perceptual mechanism is so fluid, so automatic, so unconscious. We have so many blind spots which are compounded by our enthusiastic confidence in our lack of blind spots! We are all smoking our own brand. We are terrible witnesses to external events outside our minds, and even worse when it comes to reporting what goes on inside. But the statement that there quite obviously is no death, is overreaching. That is a leapfrogging over your own subjective confidence to a statement about the world that we share. I accept the report of your perceptions as accurate for you, and that it had compelled you to feel that they are authentically representing the world outside yourself. But it is way premature to go beyond saying this as a personal belief you have. A very compelling one. And in the end it may even be true in the sense that we can both watch the sun set and report it in somewhat similar terms despite our different mindsets. But we are a long way from being there yet. I would love to hear someone input the information about the mind and senses I am reading and integrate it with their experience of subtle perceptions. This information really shakes up having confidence in our ability to make these distinctions well. Distinctions that we often bet our lives on every day. Every day we drive we are throwing the dice on our ability to pull it all together internally while being bombarded with sensory input that is chaos until our mind sorts it out with process beneath our conscious awareness, but on whose judgements we rely for our very survival. I guess what I am concluding is that far from having confidence in perceptions involving life after death; I'm thinking that I am an idiot to ever drive while talking on my cell phone.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles that we as a culture do understand to a high degree of precision. This is a huge distinction between these different types of knowledge. A fascinating discussion about knowledge and how we can be confident about our perspectives. I am not trying to concert you to my view, that would be impossible given your experiences and the limitations of my own. But I appreciate your sharing them with me so that I can consider their value to my perspective. Hey Rory, you got any more of those hot wings for Jim? Talk about miracles! The skin stays crunchy on the outside even with the hot sauce while the inside is moist and tender. Now that's divine. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Thanks Rory. It sounds like we are both in the same boat then. Whatever level of expanded experience you have is fraught with the same cognitive limitations of the rest of us. So we both do the best we can with the equipment we have. You seem to have avoided the epistemological tar pit of believing that compelling equals credible which I myself try to look out for. I respect that The un-awakened are just as prone to that fallacy. I am very excited about increasing my knowledge of what they are discovering about how our mind works through the lens of neruo science. Although I am not a complete reductionist, I figure I have to at least start there. The blend of inner and outer vision as a profound experience does not just have spiritual implications. It also is a tool for creativity for the arts. And the line gets pretty blurred where these meet, say in Blake's work or even Jung. Although I am pretty content to stay on the artistic side of the fence, I am well aware that we have our picnic blankets spread out in the same field and might be able to lob a chicken wing or corn on the cob to each other occasionally. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@ wrote: * * I can totally dig this, Curtis. For me, that was what Awakening entailed: the sudden visceral realization that my perceptible reality depends entirely upon my (previously subconscious) beliefs, or programs, and the concomitant realization that by consciously changing my programs, my whole reality instantly shifts. As a result, I am not particularly impressed by most experience(s) since they are so patently self-generated reflections of our own predispositions. That does not mean they aren't also true however, and I am interested in where our various realities may meet, the common ground we may share, where our maps may agree. --- In
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles that we as a culture do understand to a high degree of precision. This is a huge distinction between these different types of knowledge. A fascinating discussion about knowledge and how we can be confident about our perspectives. I am not trying to concert you to my view, that would be impossible given your experiences and the limitations of my own. But I appreciate your sharing them with me so that I can consider their value to my perspective. Hey Rory, you got any more of those hot wings for Jim? Talk about miracles! The skin stays crunchy on the outside even with the hot sauce while the inside is moist and tender. Now that's divine. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Thanks Rory. It sounds like we are both in the same boat then. Whatever level of expanded experience you have is fraught with the same cognitive limitations of the rest of us. So we both do the best we can with the equipment we have. You seem to have avoided the epistemological tar pit of believing that compelling equals credible which I myself try to look out for. I respect that The un-awakened are just as prone to that fallacy. I am very excited about increasing my knowledge of what they are discovering about how our mind works through the lens of neruo science. Although I am not a complete reductionist, I figure I have to at least
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
To address another assumption of yours, I never have spoken with those I see who have passed on, nor they to me. It is all visual so far. I also do not try to communicate with them - it is a very quiet and subtle experience. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles that we as a culture do understand to a high degree of precision. This is a huge distinction between these different types of knowledge. A fascinating discussion about knowledge and how we can be confident about our perspectives. I am not trying to concert you to my view, that would be impossible given your experiences and the limitations of my own. But I appreciate your sharing them with me so that I can consider their value to my perspective. Hey Rory, you got any more of those hot wings for Jim? Talk about miracles! The skin stays crunchy on the outside even with the hot sauce while the inside is moist and tender. Now that's divine. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Thanks Rory. It sounds like we are both in the same boat then. Whatever level of expanded experience you have is fraught with the same cognitive limitations of the rest of us. So we both do the best we can with the equipment we have. You seem to
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Thanks for sharing these experiences Jim :-), I have really enjoyed them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: To address another assumption of yours, I never have spoken with those I see who have passed on, nor they to me. It is all visual so far. I also do not try to communicate with them - it is a very quiet and subtle experience. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles that we as a culture do understand to a high degree of precision. This is a huge distinction between these different types of knowledge. A fascinating discussion about knowledge and how we can be confident about our perspectives. I am not trying to concert you to my view, that would be impossible given your experiences and the limitations of my own. But I appreciate your sharing them with me so that I can consider their value to my perspective. Hey Rory, you got any more of those hot wings for Jim? Talk about miracles! The skin stays crunchy on the outside even with the hot sauce while the inside is moist and tender. Now that's divine.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Denise Evans dmevans365@ wrote: I'm sorry I've been going to your Inbox...by all means delete me. Â I don't actually know what a FemNazi or True Believer or True Hater is, but you may categorize me as you see fit. Â I don't give a fuck :) Â (But, I should and I am working on that). * * Should you? Whatever for, Denise? I *love* that you don't give a fuck! My kind of celibacy! :-) LOL.., too many of your funny, quirky tongue-in-cheek spiritual messages in the last day to compliment on.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Great! I have listened to a lot of people over the years and the things I experience with regard to subtle senses aren't that unusual except possibly wrt consistency. Everybody experiences such things. They aren't as rare as some would believe, nor is the world as small and predictable as many would like to believe.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@... wrote: Thanks for sharing these experiences Jim :-), I have really enjoyed them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: To address another assumption of yours, I never have spoken with those I see who have passed on, nor they to me. It is all visual so far. I also do not try to communicate with them - it is a very quiet and subtle experience. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles that we as a culture do understand to a high degree of precision. This is a huge distinction between these different types of knowledge. A fascinating discussion about knowledge and how we can be confident about our perspectives. I am not trying to concert you to my view, that would be impossible given your experiences and the limitations of my own. But I appreciate your sharing them with me so that I can consider their value to my perspective. Hey Rory, you got any more of those hot wings for Jim? Talk about miracles! The skin stays crunchy on the
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
I guess what I am concluding is that far from having confidence in perceptions involving life after death; I'm thinking that I am an idiot to ever drive while talking on my cell phone. PIPPIN: I didn't think it would end this way. GANDALF: End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path, one that we all must take. (Pippin listens intently) The grey rain curtain of this world rolls back and all turns to silvered glass. And then you see it. PIPPIN: What? Gandalf? See what? GANDALF: White shores and beyond, a far green country under a swift sunrise. (He smiles at Pippin.) PIPPIN: Well, (he smiles back) that's not so bad. GANDALF: No. No it isn't.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
More individual perhaps and much more for you perhaps because you have 4 planets in the 2nd house with Taurus rising (the natural 2nd house of the zodiac), this is Jyotish, 2nd for Senses. I heard your batgap interview and the focus on visual, sensory imagery, which makes sense with your chart. Based on your chart you must have actually placed more emphasis on intuition and neglected sensory experiences before your enlightenment. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: Great! I have listened to a lot of people over the years and the things I experience with regard to subtle senses aren't that unusual except possibly wrt consistency. Everybody experiences such things. They aren't as rare as some would believe, nor is the world as small and predictable as many would like to believe.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote: Thanks for sharing these experiences Jim :-), I have really enjoyed them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: To address another assumption of yours, I never have spoken with those I see who have passed on, nor they to me. It is all visual so far. I also do not try to communicate with them - it is a very quiet and subtle experience. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Quite so! I suspect that most humans throughout history didn't know they weren't supposed to be able to access multidimensional reality. Today of course we know better, so most of us have the common courtesy to ignore the inevitable anomalies. Amazing, the minutiae that we start to notice when we give up believing and politely pretending we can't perceive them :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: Great! I have listened to a lot of people over the years and the things I experience with regard to subtle senses aren't that unusual except possibly wrt consistency. Everybody experiences such things. They aren't as rare as some would believe, nor is the world as small and predictable as many would like to believe.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote: Thanks for sharing these experiences Jim :-), I have really enjoyed them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: To address another assumption of yours, I never have spoken with those I see who have passed on, nor they to me. It is all visual so far. I also do not try to communicate with them - it is a very quiet and subtle experience. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles that we as a culture do understand to a high degree
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, RoryGoff rorygoff@... wrote: Quite so! I suspect that most humans throughout history didn't know they weren't supposed to be able to access multidimensional reality. Today of course we know better, so most of us have the common courtesy to ignore the inevitable anomalies. Amazing, the minutiae that we start to notice when we give up believing and politely pretending we can't perceive them :-) ARAGORN: Hold your ground! Hold your ground! He rides across the front of the army addressing them. ARAGORN: Sons of Gondor, of Rohan, my brothers. (They listen to him.) I see it in your eyes, the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day! An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the age of men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! The men look encouraged. ARAGORN: By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand! Men of the West! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Great! I have listened to a lot of people over the years and the things I experience with regard to subtle senses aren't that unusual except possibly wrt consistency. Everybody experiences such things. They aren't as rare as some would believe, nor is the world as small and predictable as many would like to believe.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote: Thanks for sharing these experiences Jim :-), I have really enjoyed them. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: To address another assumption of yours, I never have spoken with those I see who have passed on, nor they to me. It is all visual so far. I also do not try to communicate with them - it is a very quiet and subtle experience. Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. I would never attempt to contact your mom. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote: Hi, I don't consider any of my experiences in terms of what they might look like to others, or from a historical or statistical perspective. That would be a strange way to live, wouldn't it? Not for me. I think of it as a natural product of education. Always comparing our experience to some sort of cosmic guinness book of world records? What a trap. What a prison. I'm not sure what that would mean but I guess the idea might be to seek a more complete understanding. At least that is how I live with all the experiences I have had including spiritual ones. So you find my experiences unusual? OK, I don't. I enjoy sharing such things because they can be commonplace for any of us, and part of my intent is to show that there is nothing special about them, at all. Downplaying their effect on you makes sense. Not seeing that they represent something outside the norm doesn't to me. I would never attempt to contact your mom. I wasn't suggesting that. May she rest in peace. I was just speculating on what it would take for me to share your beliefs in what your experience means. Knowing what I know about human fallibility in knowledge it would take more than seeing her was my point. It is a violation of life to do such a thing, treating her as part of a parlor trick vs. the wonderful kind and perceptive person you have described her to be. It wouldn't necessarily be so. If she was contactable as a person now she might be fascinated with the project. You on the other hand could probably get in touch with her directly quite easily, imo. I am happy with the memories of her in life. I don't believe she exists outside that and I am at peace with that. I have nothing to prove. Life is a wonderful and fantastic mystery and will remain so, no matter how much we know. We're just talk' here. I wasn't trying to make you feel as if you have to prove anything. Of course you don't this is your personal experience and interpretation of what it means. Sure I know about lift and airfoils and step motors and piezoelectric transducers and how they work, and yet I find flight much more fascinating than being with those who have passed on. Maybe that wouldn't be the case if I were a pilot.:-) Hopefully it would be more so, I mean if I were in the plane with you in the cockpit! Great rap, thanks. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote: I wanted to investigate a word you used possibly without thinking, to characterize the experience I mentioned before, that of death being an obvious illusion. The word is 'profound'. I absolutely do not consider my experiences of those who have passed on to be 'profound'. Out of the ordinary perhaps, but profound? No way. It has been happening for too long to amaze me. I can understand how this could become common enough to be considered as ordinary, but in the context of human knowledge, a first person account, if credible, of life after death is more than just merely profound. It would be the single most significant revelation of human history. What an experience like this represents is something beyond just a religious belief in an afterlife, but the beginning of an insight born of direct knowledge from perception. The key to confirming it would have to come from some of the other principles of solid epistemology. If I had 5 minutes conversation with my dear old Mom from beyond the grave, I could confirm to my own satisfaction the truth of life beyond death. And each of us would have the ability with a loved one we knew well to verify this kind of perception. Or actually it would require another step because I could easily persuade myself that I was verifying the information I knew myself. So we would need another step. I would tell you a question to ask my mom and she would tell you. Then you would tell me having had written the answer down and put in the hands of someone else beforehand. Houdini wanted to set this type of verification up with his wife, but never contacted her. What I DO consider a *profound* experience is something like what I saw when filling up at a new gas station across from the airport today, a fully loaded 737 landing with absolute precision, and one taking off the same way! That always fills me with awe and wonder, that I am witnessing a profound miracle.:-) I assume you have seen the wonder of flight even longer than you have perceived people who have died standing somewhere. I agree that flight is amazing, but it comes from principles that we as a culture do understand to a high degree of precision. This is a huge distinction between these different types of knowledge. A
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
Thanks Curtis, much appreciated. More below. From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltabl...@yahoo.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 4:20:22 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama I am reading a fascinating book called Incognito, the Secret Lives of the Brain by David Engleman a neuroscientist. What has struck me so far in the book is how much perception is shaped by our beliefs. And how poorly we are able to distinguish between inner and outer vision. There is a phenomenon among stroke victims where they become blind, but their mind constructs such a detailed visual world,they don't realize it. It is only over time when the inner vision and outer vision collide that they can be convinced that they are not seeing the actual outer world. Response: Does this mean perception is like a limb that remains in sense memory after we've lost it? I'm curious to know an example of the collision you mention above? It strikes me that we all have developed a confidence that the perceptions we are having depict an ontological reality outside our mind. It is so strong that it even causes you to have a confidence about what happens after death. I suspect that it is the compelling nature of the experiences that is the basis for this confidence. Response: You could be right. I'm not sure I'm confident, all the time, in my perceptions. As a businessman I'm motivated by results (profit that can be measured in numerous ways) and fault on the side of simplicity. I start with an objective and if, overtime, my perception brings me closer to my objective I hold on to my perception. If on the other hand, my perceptions stop serving my objective I reconsider and quite possibly adopt a new perception that I originally considered incapable of serving my objective. I consider this the competitive part of who I am. Although profit is a prime metric of commerce-competiton is much more what motivates me and I believe many other business types. Although the metaphor can be over simplified, IMO-business is most like sports and in sports velocity can reduce some of the editorializing of reality you are describing. If a tennis ball or a baseball is coming at me at 100mph my thought and emotions have to surrender to my body to react effectively. I believe in this surrender there is a nowness that transcends:) the yoke of perception you are describing. I'm guessing as a musician, sound does something similar for you? I am taking myself in a completely opposite direction. I am trying to uncover all the areas where my subjective influence interferes with my perception, shapes it, nudges it in the direction that my mind desires to support its beliefs. Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I am searching for areas where unwarranted confidence masks my cognitive-perceptual flaws. Response: Not to have an objective ability for perception, that is not possible, but to limit some of the areas of error that I can. I would describe this as dynamic doubt which I believe is fundamental to being awake. IMO, to achieve what you've described requires embracing uncertainty and thereby using it like drafting another bikers slipstream or how birds in a flock use each other. It seems to me that this research in how our minds shape all perceptions,not just so called subtle ones, should be of interest for people whose perceptions are outside the broad consensus. (I am assuming that everyone else didn't see the exact same thing at the service.) I believe it is important to find out where our confidence should be placed concerning these perceptions. Our mental perceptual mechanism is so fluid, so automatic, so unconscious. We have so many blind spots which are compounded by our enthusiastic confidence in our lack of blind spots! We are all smoking our own brand. We are terrible witnesses to external events outside our minds, and even worse when it comes to reporting what goes on inside. Response: Question everything starting with the speaker; was one of my favourite Krishnamurti lines. I believe to admit what you're describing takes a great deal of courage. I suspect the habit of not living completely -with the truth of our eventual death, conditions us to dogma and opinion. The kaleidoscope of images of demons and darkness that the Buddha experienced under the Bodhi and Jesus experienced in the desert are no more than the complete embrace of the fear that the admission of our end requires for awakening. I believe what you're reaching for, whether we believe in an afterlife or not, requires constant honesty about death. But the statement that there quite obviously is no death, is overreaching. That is a leapfrogging over your own subjective confidence to a statement about the world that we share. I accept
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@... wrote: A new CNN/Opinion Research poll finds President Obama's base is behind him with 70% of Democrats saying they'd like to see Obama as their party's presidential nominee next year. Notes pollster Keating Holland: In 1994, only 57% of Democrats wanted the party to renominate Bill Clinton, and he went on to win the nomination and a second term two years later. Linked here: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/08/14/democratic_base_solidly_behind_obama.html This is from the CNN article Political Wire references: Seven in 10 Democrats say they'd like to see Obama as their party's presidential nominee next year. That figure may seem promising, but support for Obama's re-nomination has fallen 11 percentage points since June. Despite the decline, history is on Obama's side. 'In 1994, only 57% of Democrats wanted the party to renominate Bill Clinton, and he went on to win the nomination and a second term two years later,' said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. Without a prominent primary challenger, Obama's bid for re-election seems to be safe for now. But of those losing faith, the poll reveals that moderate Democrats are more likely than liberals to say the party should nominate someone else and younger Democrats are more likely to favor a new nominee than those who are older. No wonder the do.rk quoted Political Wire's blurb rather than the actual article. It would be interesting to see how the results would change were there a credible Democratic candidate for the nomination to oppose Obama. It would also be interesting to see whether the results would change , especially among independents, if the candidates for the Republican nomination were more credible, as they were in 1994 (Dole, Buchanan, Forbes, et al.).
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: ;...] It would also be interesting to see whether the results would change , especially among independents, if the candidates for the Republican nomination were more credible, as they were in 1994 (Dole, Buchanan, Forbes, et al.). Buchanan is/was a credible candidate? L
[FairfieldLife] Re: Democratic Base Solidly Behind Obama
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: ;...] It would also be interesting to see whether the results would change, especially among independents, if the candidates for the Republican nomination were more credible, as they were in 1994 (Dole, Buchanan, Forbes, et al.). Buchanan is/was a credible candidate? Relatively speaking, yes, he was. He won the New Hampshire primary, if you'll recall. Dole ultimately won the nomination overwhelmingly at the convention, 59% to Buchanan's 21%, but early in the primary campaign Buchanan was considered a significant threat to Dole. As loathesome as his political positions are, he's a very smart guy in comparison to what the Republicans have to choose from this time around.
