*************
The following message is relayed to you by  [email protected]
************











Paul,



I think all this tech talk on havingness is bullshit. 


Pure bullshit.







It goes on forever and I have less now  than I had when I started.







I have been discussing with and observing people ( in my circle of 
family and acquaintances that I know  their background and upbringing at
 least somewhat or at least enough to see a pattern )  who  have things 
and people who do not have things, and comparing situations. 





And their degree of ability to have things.





(And comparing it to stuff I read in various books on the subject)




That includes people who have a charismatic personality and the ones that are 
likable and not likable.



The ones people are attracted to and the ones people are not attracted to.



And the various degrees in between. 



I see  a relationship,  how they were conceived and nurtured while being 
brought up. 



To explain what I mean: 



For example:  



In an ideal scenario: 



If the parents were in true  love and conceived a child in true love and
 enjoyed each others' company and had a fulfilling  relationship, little or no 
sex during pregnancy, 



and the mother was a good sane  healthy mother, and spent a lot of time 
with the baby, breast fed the baby, played with the baby, constantly 
caressing it and kissing it and  stimulating it's senses and mind, lots 
of affection,  and did things to make the baby smile and laugh, and all 
that good stuff.



The stuff that makes the child a bundle of joy.  



And all the while the baby was growing up,  the parents had a good 
loving fulfilling relationship and helped develop the child 
positively  to make that child all it can be. 

And the child was 
sufficiently acknowledged and  complemented, praised  and given wins through 
out 
it's development.



and all the while there was plenty of positive social activities in and 
outside the home. Family gatherings, church functions, celebrations,  
religious holiday celebrations, positive religious rituals,  and the 
like.  



Vs 



a situation where the parents were not in love and were only in an 
existence and fought a lot and had sex only to get their rocks off,  and
 crazy sex during pregnancy,  and when the child was born, was all but 
abandoned or out right abandoned and not played with and not nurtured 
and not caressed  and not breast fed or not breast fed enough, no 
affection and not played with or not played with enough and the 
atmosphere in the home between the parents was usually cold or toxic.



And where the child was never complimented, never acknowledged, never praised   
never given wins, and the like.



Little or no family or social functions like in the prior example.....etc..  
The person is introverted. And has  a multitude of functional disorders.  



The only havingness the person has is a multitude of functional disorders. 





I cogged on the idea that I see a pretty clear evidence (pattern) that the 
child 
in the first example is charismatic, is likable, is easy to like, or 
even makes you want to like him or her, or even;  you can't "not like" 
that person even if you are angry and totally pissed off at that person 
for some reason,  and the person is always   lucky, and has little or 
no  trouble having things in life, including having a circle of friends 
around him or her and lots of people who want to be their friends.  
Things come easy to that person. The person is extroverted. 

And the exact opposite type of person in the later.  No personality. No 
friends. Can't have anything.  A schitzophrenic sex maniac. Always horny and 
can't find a good partner.  ( the person is abnormally horny because the sex ( 
especially excessive sex) during pregnancy is a postulate: see Dianetics) Does 
not like people.  People do not like him or her.  If the person had no bad 
luck, the person would have no luck at all.





I realized that these actions in both cases are postulates, or  implants. This 
is where wordless postulates come in. They are feelings. Causitive feelings. 
Everything is a program or postulate. Everything is cause and effect.  Nothing 
happens without a cause. 



I call them applied postulates. Whether positive or negative or  even 
absence  of postulates (nothing or abandonment) (called an abandonment 
complex).  Which makes the child a "zero".  



Now you may say that you know people who do not fit those descriptions or 
something. 



Well,  there are genetic factors too.  Traits are also genetically 
inherited and determined by the conditions and emotional and spiritual 
states of the parents  at the time of the conception. 



All it takes, for example,  is for the parents to be in properly in love
 for only  the window of  time they conceive the child (one book I read 
says; including  40 days before conception) and that time is enough to 
get a dominant gene or even a recessive gene with the good 
characteristics to prevail. This is enough to give the kid an edge, to be
 able to overcome obstacles and barriers through out life. It is all 
relative. Genes contain all the information of what our parents and ancestors 
did, every iota. Everything is genetically recorded.  That is why the bible 
says:  The sins of the fathers are passed on to the third and fourth 
generation.  So is everything else passed on. 



This gets to be a very complex issue because there are so many factors 
and so many variables of each factor  it is like a huge complex 
algorithm. 



But in any event,  I think I should of laid out enough basics to 
communicate the idea to demonstrate a pattern.   Because I see it in 
myself and my family and acquaintances. 



I am of the later.  In my twenties a boss described me as a product of my 
father having jerked off on a hot rock.



Because I was a nothing. Not likable, no good friends, And terribly PTS 
(Potential trouble source) 



If  I did not have any bad luck, I would have no luck at all.

When I left home at 19, I could hardly walk a straight line  from getting so 
much abuse.  I still have a hard time if I get agitated.  I easily get lost in 
familiar places.  When I was in school,  I always got lost going to the next 
class room or to the washroom or returning. 







To make matters worse, as a child,   I was always told that I can't have that 
or that,  when I wanted something.



I was also often given a slap  at the same time.



And I  got beat  for making mistakes.  Then I made more mistakes,  developed 
learning disabilities and other functional disorders and made more 
mistakes,   got beat more more and made more mistakes,  (and went down 
the downward spiral)    because my dad thought that you had to beat the 
child up to make him good.



"Spare the rod and spoil the child."  If some was good , more was better. 





I was diagnosed with schitzotypal personality disorder a few yrs ago. 





See: 



http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/schizotypal-personality-disorder/DS00830/DSECTION=symptomshttp:




The list on that site only lists a few symptoms, there are more.  And there are 
variables of those too. 

The main stream psychologists are catching on and got some things right, but 
they still have a ways to go. 





Because I could not have  things as a child I stole a few things as a child.



 Nothing serious, but nevertheless I see I did it to have havingness, I needed 
to have something. My parents did not provide it, so I stole it.  



I think this is the likely factor in what causes a person to become a thief in 
life. I could see it now. 





The thief  wasn't allowed to have things as a child, even if  it was something 
like a rattle or a favorite toy.



It is still something to have.







That is the way I see things now.



David 









On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Paul Tipon <[email protected]> wrote:
1.  That which permits the experience of mass and pressure.  (mass and energy)

2.  Can be simply defined as ARC with the environment.

3.  The result of creation.

4.  The ability to duplicate that which one perceives or create a duplication 
of it.  But it's duplication.

5.  The ability to communicate with an is-ness  The ability to conceive an 
is-ness and communicate with it.

6.  Havingness is the concept of being able to reach or not being prevented 
from reaching.

7.  The need (more like the ability) to have terminals and things to play for 
and on (to play with).  (parenthesis are mine)



Paul


                                                                                
  
_______________________________________________
Trom mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom

Reply via email to