PDA

View Full Version : So how much transformation is actually wanted, really?



songsfortheotherkind
17th June 2012, 11:36
I have been on this forum for awhile now, moving around the different areas and peeking in various windows. I am now moved to bring to the table a perspective that I am opening for discussion.

Those who know me know that I speak about a concept called Sui Generis: it's a term that I learned from my deep law studies and it basically means that one is unique, without peer, one's own jurisdiction and authority. In the terms of the law, it raises an individual above every act, statute and external authority on the planet, but that aspect requires some discussion and isn't the focus of my current post. It's a really important concept.

What I am interested in discussing is the peculiar nature of most of the threads that are posted on this forum, with perhaps the exception of the alternative health thread. To this end, I'd like to introduce a concept: Heteronomy.

Here's a dictionary defnition:

Het`er`on´o`my
n. 1. Subordination or subjection to the law of another; political subjection of a community or state; - opposed to autonomy.

(note: there's a second definition here which defines the word according to Kant, which is a heteronomous definition in itself, so I've ignored it)

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, published 1913 by C. & G. Merriam Co.

heteronomy
1. the state or condition of being ruled, governed, or under the sway of another, as in a military occupation.
2. the state or condition of being under the influence or domination, in a moral, spiritual, or similar sense, of another person, entity, force, etc. Cf. autonomy. — heteronomous, adj.
See also: Government
the condition of being under the moral control of something or someone external; inability to be self-willing. — heteronymous, adj.
See also: Will
the condition of being under the rule or domination of another.
See also: Politics

-Ologies & -Isms. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.

Source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/heteronomy

According to this definition, heteronomy is the opposite of autonomy- so here's a look at what autonomy means:

au·ton·o·my Pronunciation (ô-tn-m)
n. pl. au·ton·o·mies
1. The condition or quality of being autonomous; independence.
2.
a. Self-government or the right of self-government; self-determination.
b. Self-government with respect to local or internal affairs: granted autonomy to a national minority.
3. A self-governing state, community, or group.
[Greek autonomi, from autonomos, self-ruling; see autonomous.]

autonomy [ɔːˈtɒnəmɪ]
n pl -mies
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the right or state of self-government, esp when limited
2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a state, community, or individual possessing autonomy
3. freedom to determine one's own actions, behaviour, etc.
4. (Philosophy) Philosophy
a. the doctrine that the individual human will is or ought to be governed only by its own principles and laws See also categorical imperative
b. the state in which one's actions are autonomous
[from Greek autonomia freedom to live by one's own laws; see autonomous]
autonomist n

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

autonomy - From Greek autos, "self," and nomos, "law," i.e. a person or unit that makes its own laws.

Farlex Trivia Dictionary. © 2012 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.

au·ton·o·mous Pronunciation (ô-tn-ms)
adj.
1. Not controlled by others or by outside forces; independent: an autonomous judiciary; an autonomous division of a corporate conglomerate.
2. Independent in mind or judgment; self-directed.

Sui generis encompasses all of the relevant concepts within these definitions, as well as an abundance more, which I'm not going to go into now or else this post will move beyond 'possibly epic' and into 'War and Peace, redux'. What is of interest is the contrast between heteronomy- authority that comes from *external* to the Self- and autonomy, the authority, direction and law that comes from within.

Much of the debate- and occasionally, discussion- that goes on in this forum revolves around the idea of discarding the current paradigm by replacing it with a different paradigm, as suggested by better authorities and Purveyors of Reality, so that the *new* paradigm will have a more solid footing. Better Politicians. A Shinier Economy. Nicer Religions.

It seems to me that almost all the posts made in this forum fall into the category of encouraging nothing more than a different form of heteronomy: here is an authority! no, HERE is the authority, with impressive credentials and a pointy stick to point at the points with! NO, you're all wrong, the TRUE authority is this guy over here - and then the noise ensues, which is nothing more than the different brands of heteronomy arm wrestling with themselves while the mind virus laughs hugely in the back ground at the whole debacle, knowing that the individuals concerned are all still firmly stuck in the tarpits.

Heteronomy will never, ever be user friendly, because the user isn't engaged in the process of their own life: they're engaged in the process of trading their autonomy for whatever bright beads and trinkets they're willing to settle for. Sometimes these beads and trinkets are elaborate psychological and intellectual constructs that can appear so excellently presented and persuasively presented as to surely be spiritual wisdom of the highest order because it resonates, it creates an internal vibration that feels right.

There's only one problem: if one has been profoundly, down to the level of the genes, immersed in the deeply layered indoctrination to the heteronomy, then how can one trust one's responses if there's nothing to contrast with? There is very little autonomy discussed in this forum in a way that indicates that the writers or commenters themselves practice deep level autonomy or are comfortable with the infinitely singular expressions of such autonomy: what I observer instead are claims to autonomy that then degenerate into ideological battles, which amount to nothing more than an attempt to overlay one individual's autonomy with another's authority- which, by definition, is heteronomy. And is thus the foundation of all the current things about the paradigm that many say they are against.

Is it a case that autonomy is only ok as long as others agree with the version favored by any particular individual? Which is heteronomous in intent. When any individual advocates the election of *this* individual rather than *that* one, they are advocating heteronomy. The same goes with religious and spiritual perspectives- when there are those that do not feel the same way, or have a different perspective, the superior and condescending tones of the heteronomy emerges, or the 'gentle correction' or the not so gentle admonition; however it is couched, the heteronomy, the constant tracking back to submission to some kind of external authority, is the guiding force.

I am fully aware of the endless earnest and persuasive arguments of the heteronomy, particularly those that insist Beings cannot be trusted to be their own authority: these indoctrinations begin before birth and continue to the moment of death, this constant bespelling of who and what we 'really' are, the 'sin' and 'untrustworthy' nature that Beings on this planet are subject to and thus in need of a benevolent saviour of *some* kind or another, some grand external authority to tell the masses what is the correct thing to think, to do, to not do...

I'm aware of all of these arguments and I have never, ever found a single one that was not pimping, either overtly or covertly, the agenda of the heteronomy. Which, as the recent history of the majority species currently on this planet attests, creates nothing but closed systems that eventually collapse on themselves and simply arise again to recreate themselves in another, corruptive and polluted form. The desperate rhetoric of this time, this time ti will work, we'll have the *right* king, the *right* president, the *right* religion, the *better* economy, blah blah blah- and each time the answer comes in the negative because ultimately an externally governed group cannot spiritually evolve in their own singularity.

This may seem like obvious stuff, yet in relation to this forum it actually isn't- the general tone of the posts are heteronomy in one form or another, the general tone of the replies are the same: where is the cutting edge evolution that has the actual power to truly bring the controllers and their agendas to their knees?

Apparently, it's buried beneath more rhetoric and heteronomy.

Autonomy as a concept is one that has infinite depth, flavour, expression and intention to explore and consider. It is also a concept and practice that cannot be embraced while the other hand is firmly stuck to the teat of heteronomy. Autonomy has nothing whatsoever to do with homogeny of thought, nothing to do with 'agreement', nothing to do with compromise or any of the other things that the heteronomy has bleated is necessary for groups to get along together: truly autonomous, sui generis Beings are as interested in engaging with those concepts as they are in removing their left foot with a fork, for reasons that I'm not going to go into right now. Suffice to say, the practice of 'autonomy' is one where a constant interested eye is kept on any indicators of lurking heteronomy with a view to prompt removal.

So how interested are individuals in the prompt removal of the heteronomy that emerges here in teh forum? Are there any that truly believe modified heteronomy is the answer? The benevolent hand of those that consider themselves truly able to rule in a fair and considerate fashion? (for a price, of course). Is anyone who is truly interested in transformation rather than recycling going to suggest to me that behaving like an insane Being (doing the same thing again and again while expecting a different result) is the best tool of the evolution there is?

I'm interested in what actually works, what is actually going to work in terms of true evolution of Being. Which means some sacred cows of belief, thought, psychology, 'wisdom' and other bastions of the paradigm are going to have to be left on the roadside no matter how much the programming within screams not to. That's the nature of programming and it's been done very very well- protect and serve the virus at all costs. Viruses and parasites do that- they alter the behaviour of the hosts to serve the interests of the parasite rather than the best interests of the host.

http://tobiastenney.com/2010/06/toxoplasma/ You *really* think you're in control of your Self? You really think there's no virus? Perhaps try this experiment: see what happens internally when you embrace and practice the idea of autonomy for all Beings and watch what triggers inside of you.

How would this practice manifest in the forum? For a start the criticism of channeling would cease- the criticism of *any* perspective would cease, because the pervading platform of connection would be with the respect for the autonomy of all individuals, not just those that agree with the particular individual. There would be a sense of co-creation and exchange rather than going into any thread with the intention of 'correcting' any 'wrong' thinking, or to go in and call another poster, using various benign- and not so benign-words, a prime idiot for believing/thinking/saying/doing that. All such self righteous actions would cease, or be something that other individuals would question.

The superior tones of self importance regarding *any* belief or perspective would cease, as would the self congratulatory enclaves when a poster dares to express something that the rest find ridiculous. There would be a genuine focus on exploring the skills of communication rather than debate; there would be a genuine interest in and exploration of the differences between the practical expressions and skills of a group that is consciously cultivating autonomy of all Beings. There would be an interest in expressing from "I" rather than globalising, which is an assumption that as it is for the individual expressing the opinion, it must also be so for everyone else. Autonomy says otherwise.

This is what interests me. I've always been interested in connecting with individuals who genuinely want to explore the deep level expression of sui generis autonomy rather than engaging in heteronomous onanism. This is still my interest and intention. I am underwhelmed by the current possibility of true evolution on a planetary scale if the tone of this forum- in which the focus itself is in part supposedly towards doing things on this planet in a more cohesive and intelligent way- is any indicator. Fortunately for me, I have never been interested in mass conversion or dependent on the idea that the future of the planet relies on *everyone* Getting A Clue. Still, the level of uninspiration is rather a bummer.

So rather than being bummed I thought I'd send out a flare and see what it lit up. I am looking for individuals that want to approach all things from the perspective of a sui generis, autonomous Being, comfortable with the infinite possibility and expressions that arise from these, and who can tell the difference between acceptance of autonomy and having to participate in things Unfun.

To me, this is where my personal evolution is heading. Does anyone else want to play in this realm?

PurpleLama
17th June 2012, 11:49
nkVcgpjTTeE

songsfortheotherkind
17th June 2012, 11:56
nkVcgpjTTeE

*falls about laughing* You are so awesome.

mountain_jim
17th June 2012, 13:19
Great post to clarify your terms and views, Songs. :)



The superior tones of self importance regarding *any* belief or perspective would cease


As evidenced again recently on this forum, a large part of my ongoing work in self-culture upon myself is in regards to my responses to my hot-buttons in this area, and to the ongoing process of trying to recognize and root out my remaining self-importance.

Posting and participating on a forum like this one can serve as quite a personality mirror. :)

Concerning autonomy verses heteronomy, all my life I have rebelled against belief-systems, accepted mass ritual behaviors, organized religious programming, and against all laws which come from a place of nanny-state-hood or attempts to regulate and control anyone's behavior when it is not affecting another being.

In the context of personal and individual autonomy, and as one who was awakened by substances the state declared to be off-limits and illegal, and who found most forms of prohibition absurd and counter productive, I found resonance with these ideas:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/519BJZAGZZL._SS500_.jpg



Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Country (ISBN 0-931580-58-7) is a book by Peter McWilliams in which he presents the history of legislation against what he feels are victimless crimes, or crimes that are committed consensually, as well as arguments for their legalization.

The book is divided into five sections.
Part I gives a definition of victimless and consensual crime and outlines the difference between personal morality and governmentally-imposed morality.
Part II presents arguments against the criminalization of victimless crimes.
Part III gives a closer look into some of the individual activities which the author classifies as consensual crimes, such as prostitution and marijuana use, but which the majority of criminologists would classify as victimless.
Part IV gives historical examples of the treatment of consensual and victimless crimes, such as Prohibition, and Biblical examples.
Part V advises readers on what to do to change the laws.

Throughout the book are approximately six hundred quotations by noted thinkers on both sides of his positions (primarily supporters).

McWilliams presents a variety of arguments against the criminalization of victimless crimes. Some are philosophical in nature: one argument is that laws against these crimes are based in religion, which violates the separation of church and state. He also claims that they are un-American, as they attempt to homogenize the country to a certain group's idea of morality, and that they create an oppressive society, restricting personal freedoms without justification. Another claim is that they teach irresponsibility, by not letting people deal with the natural consequences of their actions, but rather penalizing them whether or not their actions harmed anyone else.

Other objections are practical: catching the "criminals" involved is an expensive affair. Victimless crimes draw manpower and funds away from crimes that do hurt innocent parties, and enforcement of the laws is not consistent enough to be an effective deterrent. He also argues that actions to help people deal with problems caused by these illegal activities are effectively prevented by their criminilization -- for example, no one could be helped about their drinking problems during Prohibition. Additionally, he details how laws against victimless crimes paved the way for organized crime.

Activities examined in detail in Part III include gambling, recreational drug use, medical marijuana, prostitution, homosexuality, pornography, indecent exposure, and seat belt legislation.



All of the above being said, part of my awakening was the realization that All is connected, All derives from (a) Source, and finding the balance between Self Expression, Creative Manifestation, while still Existing in a Harmonious relationship with that All is quite the Art of Living.

At least for me and my path of learning and evolution of Self as currently understood and perceived.

(I may add to this later, for now real life is calling, but this looks like a good pot to stir around in, Songs) ;)

Hughe
17th June 2012, 14:56
See totality within itself that is connected with everything.

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 01:29
As evidenced again recently on this forum, a large part of my ongoing work in self-culture upon myself is in regards to my responses to my hot-buttons in this area, and to the ongoing process of trying to recognize and root out my remaining self-importance.

*smiling* It's one of the reasons I keep posting here- I too recognise the benefit of the fertile ground this forum presents when it comes to expansion and refining of signal. Having said that, I'm also aware that it is possible to find those who fundamentally get both the distinctions that I'm talking about *and* are actually interested in the subtle energetic signals that go with them. Seen my Joker pics lately? He had a *lot* of interesting things to say about not letting the limitations and fears of others constrict one's sui generis- perhaps his method of expressing this was a tad explosive and yet in terms of the balancing act of reflection with Batman, necessary: nobody bothers how much firepower and heteronomy *Batman* is packing under his protective suit, while the Joker was only wearing a spiffy outfit and the conviction of his perspective and signal. Apparently that at least matches a billionaires hi-tech toys- that in itself is an interesting message to explore, imo.


Posting and participating on a forum like this one can serve as quite a personality mirror. :)

And again, the refining, which is part of my sui generis anyway. :P


http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/519BJZAGZZL._SS500_.jpg

It was partly my deep law studies that helped me pinpoint the power of the sui generis in dismissing these laws. Without going into it here, suffice to say that the law is built on the premise of heteronomy and a quick stroll through some of the definitions of 'human being' and 'person' in the law is an eye-opening reveal as to how the governing forces have construed human beings: I have found the term 'animals', 'chattel', 'cattle' and 'asset' to define 'human being'. The fundamental basis of heteronomy is the belief by those imposing the particular law that those having the law imposed on them are inferior and incompetent to manage their own affairs. There is a LOT in the law that assumes the incompetency of the masses- one of the markers for incompetency buried *within* the law itself is the marker for obeying these laws- it is fully known and understood by the lawmakers that those who *truly* know who they are will know a number of things, one of them being that the laws set up to manage a bunch of incompetent and homogenous minors do not apply to them. The lawmakers know that autonomous Beings don't argue with the court at a lower level- a competent and sui generis individual never deals with incompetents, which is what the lower courts are: doorkeepers set up to separate the minors from the rest.

The higher courts understand the true power of the sui generis. If anyone is interested, check out Alfred Adask and the way he dismissed the massive fines and threats against him by using his living Being as evidence of his own jurisdiction. I'm not going to get caught up in a discussion of the law though- there's enough of that out there and I was immersed in it for two solid years and walked away when I found the power of the sui generis when it's truly exercised. I discovered that there were precious few who wanted to talk about *that*- they preferred the war. *shrugs* The only reason I use the law now in my discussions is to demonstrate that I really do know the power of this key beyond the esoteric applications and perspectives. Part of the key is, *never argue with the minions* because they're trained to be traps, so they don't know this aspect of the law- go high enough and it is *absolutely* known, it's part of what the heteronomy has been striving desperately to hide.

Again I say- I am aware that the heteronomy itself operates within certain restrictions. Not being permitted to violate true free will is one of these restrictions. They're permitted to bamfoozle the issue of free will- and to bamfoozle even the term 'free will' itself- but if an individual stands before them who is utterly, completely in their sui generis their laws disappear like smoke. Know who you really are is a pulse that is beating ever more strongly in the collective consciousness, and for very very good reason: this is where the beginning of the real power resides.


All of the above being said, part of my awakening was the realization that All is connected, All derives from (a) Source, and finding the balance between Self Expression, Creative Manifestation, while still Existing in a Harmonious relationship with that All is quite the Art of Living.

I absolutely and utterly agree that the All is connected. That being said, the All as is expressed on this planet is a constant drag down the scale to the lowest common denominator, which is currently devolving ever lower. This simply is not the end of the scale I wish to play in- and absolutely never has been- and this in itself causes problems for those at the other end of the scale, because they have no grasp whatsoever of the concepts that I'm talking about and this makes them freak out. I've experienced this since the age of three. It hasn't improved in general, it's just that I'm much much more discerning of who I even think about revealing my Self to. This gap in not only understanding but the actual *ability* to make those kind of synaptic connections in the first place causes its *own* problems, one of the ones explored in the recent X-Men movie: how do a bunch of fundamentally and profoundly differently experiencing and thinking Beings exist in the world *without* those who *aren't* like them freaking out and throwing bombs on them.

So far, the answer has been, be invisible and don't rock the boat. This, however, is a profoundly unsatisfactory option- don't do anything to disturb the tranquil pond of the masses, despite the obvious issues- such as the pond being anything *but* tranquil. I'm not interested in the slightest with that option anymore, and I'm not interested in playing nice with the heteronomy that is pimped at me on a daily basis under the guise of being part of the 'All'- it's not 'All", it's very very selectively set up to NOT embrace expressions and experiences such as I Am. So it's an 'All' that is geared towards the perspective of the masses, the lowest common denominators, the collective- and the collective is constantly choosing heteronomy.

Hmm. Now it would *seem* we have a dilemma, unless the concept of true sui generis is willing to be explored. And that's the territory *I* want to be in- the X-Men movie that had the senator that was gunning against the mutants is a really good example of how the heteronomy will *always* seek to demonise the different: it HAS to, for its own virus based survival. I'm not interested in the All that has been infected by the virus- it's not permitted out in the rest of the multiverse so it's not going anywhere, it cannot evolve because that is against its fundamental tenets, so the only thing that can happen is dissolution. I'm already aware of that. What I'm exploring is the *next bit*- ok, sui generis autonomy, what exactly does that look like? How can it be expressed in such a way that a foundation platform is created from which to explore? The many questions that anyone creating a new platform asks. I'm looking for new points of triangulation from a research and development point of view. I am aware that there are many other roles, including those that want to try and bring the humans along. That's their sui generis and I respect it, AND I'm not going to assist them in that task because *I personally* see it as Sisyphean, given my singularity experience and history of this planet. There are others with a vast range of different interests in the same playing field. It is my intuition and calling to find the platforms that support this infinite variety in such a way that doesn't create the usual clusterf*uck, because I don't know about anyone else but I am really really bored with that recursive scenario.

I'm not interested in playing nice, I'm interested in playing intelligently, robustly, innovatively and with utter sui generis. That at times makes me look like a cast iron pain in the arse. Sometimes, I don't just *look* like a cast iron pain in the arse, but comfort can be taken in the knowing that I'm primarily first and foremost a pain in my *own* arse. *big cheesy grin* And I'm so not going into the grubbier territories of that comment either.


At least for me and my path of learning and evolution of Self as currently understood and perceived.

And that's really the fun bit- sui generis Beings grinning at each other across the flat and boring plane of the current paradigm and saying 'well, what do we want to do now?'. I'm often swimming in my own naturally high levels of DMT, so it makes my perspective different.

(I may add to this later, for now real life is calling, but this looks like a good pot to stir around in, Songs) ;)[/QUOTE]

Real life. How rude! Getting in the way of interesting stuff yet again. *laughing*

onawah
18th June 2012, 03:51
Songs wrote:

*smiling* It's one of the reasons I keep posting here- I too recognise the benefit of the fertile ground this forum presents when it comes to expansion and refining of signal.
It's very true, though the forum continues to morph as members come and go and the personalities change.
On the whole, I think the forum is a great mirroring/refining tool, as well as a good place (sometimes) to catch up with what is going on behind the scenes in the world.
I'm glad some fresh turf has been established here for the ongoing discussion of sui generis, which, though central to the Pub thread as well, is a subject worthy of plenty of exploration.

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 08:03
I'm glad some fresh turf has been established here for the ongoing discussion of sui generis, which, though central to the Pub thread as well, is a subject worthy of plenty of exploration.

*grins at you* mmm, let's see how it goes, first...

Carmen
18th June 2012, 08:56
Good stuff Songs! The freedom to explore everything and to make free choice as to what suits me. It actually, (for me anyway) is what 'works' and what doesn't. To explore, to learn, to experience! Then we have the wisdom. I don't wanna hear philosophy, I want to know what you have personally experienced. That's inspiring. Love the meaning of the word Sui generis. Suits me!

modwiz
18th June 2012, 09:08
This thread is a gift from the Otherkind, free for the taking. It should be interesting, with all of the directions 'interesting' can take, to see how this gift is treated.

Your gift of expression and generous posts, along with your proven track record of maintaining a thread could make this the most important thread we have here at Avalon. It certainly will create a filter to see what kind of population we really have here.

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 09:43
See totality within itself that is connected with everything.

I really don't understand what exactly you are suggesting or indicating here. Can you elaborate?

centreoflight
18th June 2012, 10:37
So far, the answer has been, be invisible and don't rock the boat. This, however, is a profoundly unsatisfactory option- don't do anything to disturb the tranquil pond of the masses, despite the obvious issues- such as the pond being anything *but* tranquil. I'm not interested in the slightest with that option anymore, and I'm not interested in playing nice with the heteronomy that is pimped at me on a daily basis under the guise of being part of the 'All'- it's not 'All", it's very very selectively set up to NOT embrace expressions and experiences such as I Am. So it's an 'All' that is geared towards the perspective of the masses, the lowest common denominators, the collective- and the collective is constantly choosing heteronomy.



Thank you very much for starting this thread. In my life I learned from early age to be invisible and I agree with you that it is a totally unsatisfactory option. I brainwashed myself with the belief that nobody understands me. Now since a few years I discovered the internet and learned how many lies our so called leaders have told us and how much we have been deceived. I realize that with my silence I have allowed this situation to be created and I now know that I deserve more than this.

Max Igan is telling us: non compliance to the system and creating community. The old will crumble in no time, once nobody is giving any energy to it and second respecting others view and not do harm to any living creature.

Blessings
George

Trail
18th June 2012, 11:35
Amazing brilliant thread! a beacon of light!

I can't agree more with the OP and could never have said it so brilliantly well.

Now let's incorporate autonomity into our lives and try to work with it to free ourselves collectively.

This thread has been stampt as a 'sticky' into my personal mindspace :)

Thanks for starting this thread.

~Trail.

spiritguide
18th June 2012, 12:14
This thread is the meat of the matter that needs addressing. Thanks for the lead in addressing this subject. Your path truly conjoins the vision of mine and I will positively do my best to help in this endeavor. Thanks again for opening this door in the manner you did. Songs, your thread is so right on.

:peace:

modwiz
18th June 2012, 12:43
The aggressiveness to be autonomous is often either not noted or misunderstood. The minimum is like a seedling breaking through the ground. In todays' mind-controlled, virus matrix it is more akin to a plant growing up through concrete. Multiply that by thousands and millions and the concrete/matrix will shatter. That kind of aggressiveness is hampered when a virus is whispering notions of heteronomy in ones' ear, creating illusions that stifle that urge. As well as patterns of behavior that are anything but autonomous. Transformation would not be called for if the need was not so extant. Heteronomy is the norm, with a few autonomous freaks thrown in, here and there. Changing that balance is called for to produce results other than the mind prisons humanity has lived in for thousands of years.

Rollo
18th June 2012, 13:06
You just started very importand thread SotOK. I hope we will end up with

16923

Many thanks

mountain_jim
18th June 2012, 14:09
I absolutely and utterly agree that the All is connected. That being said, the All as is expressed on this planet is a constant drag down the scale to the lowest common denominator, which is currently devolving ever lower. This simply is not the end of the scale I wish to play in- and absolutely never has been- and this in itself causes problems for those at the other end of the scale, because they have no grasp whatsoever of the concepts that I'm talking about and this makes them freak out. I've experienced this since the age of three. It hasn't improved in general, it's just that I'm much much more discerning of who I even think about revealing my Self to. This gap in not only understanding but the actual *ability* to make those kind of synaptic connections in the first place causes its *own* problems, one of the ones explored in the recent X-Men movie: how do a bunch of fundamentally and profoundly differently experiencing and thinking Beings exist in the world *without* those who *aren't* like them freaking out and throwing bombs on them.

So far, the answer has been, be invisible and don't rock the boat. This, however, is a profoundly unsatisfactory option- don't do anything to disturb the tranquil pond of the masses, despite the obvious issues- such as the pond being anything *but* tranquil. I'm not interested in the slightest with that option anymore, and I'm not interested in playing nice with the heteronomy that is pimped at me on a daily basis under the guise of being part of the 'All'- it's not 'All", it's very very selectively set up to NOT embrace expressions and experiences such as I Am. So it's an 'All' that is geared towards the perspective of the masses, the lowest common denominators, the collective- and the collective is constantly choosing heteronomy.



I don't disagree with any of the above.

When I went from being a cynical, depressed outcast to having an awakening to connection and meaning, the All signal I was becoming aware of was not particularly focused on the deluded automatons content in their Illusionary existence that I had so rebelled against - it was more about walking in the stars as the I AM realization of (my) true Selfhood, activating dormant circuits and energies to go further out and in, and Realizing, (echoed in the words of a poet of great influence for me - Robert Hunter, lyricist for The Grateful Dead, here from the tune Ripple), that each must ultimately find/realize their own connection to Source and meaning (or perhaps waste the opportunity and hopefully get another chance).



There is a road, no simple highway
Between the dawn and the dark of night
And if you go, no one may follow
That path is for your steps alone


Sui generis indeed. :)

ps: Walking in the Stars was a concept that first occured to me on the water's edge on a starlit beach at night, with a former lover, both in altered states, and the bioluminescent organisms in the water and on the wet sand beneath our feet seemed to merge with the Starry Sky, and my I AM self and partner walked among the stars for a timeless-time.

http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_ideas/BioChem_p033.shtml

http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_ideas/BioChem_img036.jpg

Figure 1. Bioluminescent dinoflagellates (a form of algae) caused the blue glow in this wave near Carlsbad, California. (Wikipedia, 2009.)




Marine dinoflagellates are the main contributors to a phenomenon commonly known as phosphorescence of the sea. When the concentration of these bioluminescent organisms in the water near shore is high, the wave crests glow with a luminous blue light (see Figure 1, below). Wet sand on the beach even glows blue when you step on it! The reason that the light appears on wave crests and in the sand near your feet is that the bioluminescent organisms glow when they are subjected to mechanical stress. They sense that they are being pushed and pulled in the waves, and in the sand near your feet, and respond by producing the light. It is not clear what sort of adaptive advantage this light might have for the organisms, but it makes for a beautiful show if you are lucky enough to witness it.

There are many examples of bioluminescence in nature, with the most familiar being the firefly. Bioluminescence evolved independently in many different organisms. The biochemical basis for bioluminescence is the luciferin-luciferase reaction, shown in Figure 2, below. In this reaction, the enzyme luciferase oxidizes the substrate luciferin to convert chemical energy into light energy. Luciferase is an enzyme, a type of protein that speeds up chemical reactions. The reaction that luciferase catalyzes is the oxidation of luciferin by molecular oxygen (O2) to form oxyluciferin plus light.

Mad Hatter
18th June 2012, 15:00
Setting up triangulation :crazy_pilot:

Setting up tech support :pop2:

Prepping for fart in a spacesuit :painkiller: (just in case)

Fires up the heteronomy detector :bs:
Bookmarks and :bump:

Marie
18th June 2012, 15:05
Thank you for that post mountain_jim. Your sharing has a flavor of my own understanding. :)

ljwheat
18th June 2012, 15:07
Programming,--- its all programming that’s programmed that will bring up questions---- instead of existence--- is just existence arising as it rises. Endless possibilities-- with out end ---for all of eternity. Limited focus is the beast that asks a question? All knowing is silence. Lack in one tinny thing in any area of all that is will raise the beast or questioning. Silence brings the end to all creation. Bliss-- totaly being complete in ALL that is.
Feeling with out lable's and words. Webb of words will always keep one in prison of its definitions of endless possiblity's in conceptuality. its a sticky webb, the spider is a noisy beast. and the beast is not you, its what your looking at. your the silence thats watching it.

zzB5DXopVs8
T0T4xttkhVw
8VrTyFgWAUM

WE ARE COMPLETE BEHIND ALL THIS NOISE ?

eh8Hp_CChdo

lol John Complete !!!!!! in silence.

vWXpPGL55No

So how much transformation is actually wanted, really? === transformation in thought-- what is. the silent watcher allowing you transform or formulate thought can not be changed or wanted ------ really ! and that silence is always tapping you on the shoulders. Knock, Knock. thanks for your video WhiteCrowBlackDeer. John
:cantina:

RunningDeer
18th June 2012, 16:13
John, I am honored! Thank you for including my vids.



So how much transformation is actually wanted, really? === transformation in thought-- what is. the silent watcher allowing you transform or formulate thought can not be changed or wanted ------ really ! and that silence is always tapping you on the shoulders. "Knock, Knock" & "I AM". thanks for your video WhiteCrowBlackDeer. John

"Knock, Knock" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0T4xttkhVw)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0T4xttkhVw

"I AM" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VrTyFgWAUM)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VrTyFgWAUM

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 16:31
The aggressiveness to be autonomous is often either not noted or misunderstood. The minimum is like a seedling breaking through the ground. In todays' mind-controlled, virus matrix it is more akin to a plant growing up through concrete. Multiply that by thousands and millions and the concrete/matrix will shatter. That kind of aggressiveness is hampered when a virus is whispering notions of heteronomy in ones' ear, creating illusions that stifle that urge. As well as patterns of behavior that are anything but autonomous. Transformation would not be called for if the need was not so extant. Heteronomy is the norm, with a few autonomous freaks thrown in, here and there. Changing that balance is called for to produce results other than the mind prisons humanity has lived in for thousands of years.

This is exactly, exactly the reason why I write what I write, keep refining what it is that I am communicating, keep breathing through the distress and mindf*uck that can come from skirting the heteronomy while carrying the sui generis. I want was is going to work. To me, there is no issue greater than facing the heteronomy in all its forms, no matter how subtle and seemingly innocuous and naming these things for what they really are. This to me is the beginning of bringing everything out into the light of day, and seeing what is really being done in the name of 'love' or any of the myriads of other contortions.

My passion has been not to talk about the prison, not to endlessly, recursively discuss how ugly the art on the walls is, or how the warden is a complete cockhat, or how the uniforms are uncomfortable and the food sucks: my passion, my purpose and intention in engagement, is to dissolve the prison entirely and expose it for what it is, a complete and utter fiction. I know how insidious the matrix is- I've been tracking it in my own DNA and energetic systems, this vast Monsanto coded claim on my Being- and I'm utterly clear that there's nothing more absorbing for me than to fully, completely stand in my Sui Generis, my autonomy and my absolute, because a society that is based on all Beings knowing who they are can never be controlled, dominated or subjected. There is no virus in such a society, and all the expressions of the virus have no fertile ground in which to endlessly sprout.

All gods shall dissolve not by resistance, but by starvation, because there will be none to give them the energy they need to keep existing.

Dennis Leahy
18th June 2012, 16:54
...

Much of the debate- and occasionally, discussion- that goes on in this forum revolves around the idea of discarding the current paradigm by replacing it with a different paradigm, as suggested by better authorities and Purveyors of Reality, so that the *new* paradigm will have a more solid footing. Better Politicians.

...

It seems to me that almost all the posts made in this forum fall into the category of encouraging nothing more than a different form of heteronomy: here is an authority! no, HERE is the authority, ...

...

I'm aware of all of these arguments and I have never, ever found a single one that was not pimping, either overtly or covertly, the agenda of the heteronomy. Which, as the recent history of the majority species currently on this planet attests, creates nothing but closed systems that eventually collapse on themselves and simply arise again to recreate themselves in another, corruptive and polluted form. The desperate rhetoric of this time, this time ti will work, we'll have the *right* king, the *right* president, ...

...

To me, this is where my personal evolution is heading. Does anyone else want to play in this realm?
For me, a good analogy of what we have actually tried so far is like taking a pool of prison guards and prison owners, and allowing the prisoners to elect which ones within this pool will create the rules and do the guarding. No wonder it always turns out badly - for the prisoners.

Heteronomy looks really bad when it is imposed by malevolent beings, rather that worked-out and accepted by the group. Like the old saying, "don't sh!t where you eat." - I see no problem with the majority accepting that as "law" and agreeing to follow the advice, as law, even though some individuals may wish to insist that they have every right, by virtue of their autonomy, to relieve themselves wherever and whenever they want.

I'm with you on the concept of full autonomy for individuals - up to and including suicide - in whatever only affects the individual, but not autonomy in society where the individual's actions (negatively) affect others.



Concerning autonomy verses heteronomy, all my life I have rebelled against belief-systems, accepted mass ritual behaviors, organized religious programming, and against all laws which come from a place of nanny-state-hood or attempts to regulate and control anyone's behavior when it is not affecting another being.
...

I admit this is where I get stuck. I can visualize autonomy between a group of friends, maybe a family, maybe a commune. I get stuck when I get to the real-world examples of individual (greed-driven and/or control-driven) humans that will not play nice.

If the premise is, "Let's co-create a new planet, where no one owns anything (or everyone 'owns' everything) and everyone respects and agrees to do no harm to anyone or our new planet. Now, do we prefer autonomy or heteronomy?" then I can easily, joyously vote "Autonomy!"

But back here on Earth, everything is owned. Everything. Even the air! (think of the term 'airspace', laws permitting air pollution, etc.) Even the near-space around the planet is regulated (try shooting a rocket up and emplacing a satellite without the permission of one of the major governments.) Not only that, but ownership is accepted as a condition of life. The day I was born, instead of being born into a full co-ownership of the planet (where ownership becomes moot), every molecule on Earth was already claimed as someone's property - and many of them would defend that ownership with threat of injury, incarceration, or death.

Then we have the ecocidal sociopaths themselves that are in control. Give them autonomy? Well, they have a significant amount of autonomy, and we see what they do with it. As long as these people exist, I cannot see how - in reality, not just theoretically - we could live under full autonomy.

Jim's example of someone regulating whether or not I'm "allowed" to take a psychoactive drug truly exhibits the 'nanny-state' mentality. However, tell the CEO of Monsanto his actions are free from regulation, free from laws of any kind, and well, we already know what happens. (For those that would jump to the notion that each of us has autonomy to eat or not eat GMO, remember that in the current real-world, many cannot make that choice. If necessary, think of a different example of a polluter, like the Atomic Mafia, spewing radioactive particles that no one can choose to simply ignore.)

So for me, I really have spent little time trying to envision an autonomous world, and I'm trying to envision a vastly improved heteronomous society. Remove ALL of the nanny laws, allow as much autonomy as possible, yet protect all of us from some of us. The Reset Button is far from being an idealistic dream-world, and is (in my estimation) the path required to take a major leap away from the malevolent controllers. Once achieved, and lived, I visualize a vast improvement in all of our lives, much more freedom and autonomy, and after (at least) a generation would go through a (voluntary) education that deliberately was focused on providing the tools for creativity, free-thinking, and problem solving, the next phase of society would be even better (and allow even more autonomy.) Even then, my puny little 2012 brain simply cannot imagine a world where full autonomy and anarchy were granted to all, with no restriction or consequence for the malevolent, greedy, and controlling.

Dennis

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 17:16
Programming,--- its all programming that’s programmed that will bring up questions---- instead of existence--- is just existence arising as it rises. Endless possibilities-- with out end ---for all of eternity. Limited focus is the beast that asks a question? All knowing is silence. Lack in one tinny thing in any area of all that is will raise the beast or questioning. Silence brings the end to all creation. Bliss-- totaly being complete in ALL that is.
Feeling with out lable's and words. Webb of words will always keep one in prison of its definitions of endless possiblity's in conceptuality. its a sticky webb, the spider is a noisy beast. and the beast is not you, its what your looking at. [B]your the silence thats watching it.

Ok, I watched 1:36 of the first one before becoming rigid with the heteronomy signal, the second was an expression of WCBD's sui generis art, the third was laugh out loud funny and I'll watch it again, and the fourth I got through 1:22 because I thought I would give it a go and see if it was going to be as annoying as I thought it was going to be. It was- a case of "I haven't yet died, so I have no authority on which to speak about that, so I'm going to make some up and pimp the heteronomy a bit more while sounding good'.

As for the 'All knowing is silence' , you and I have engaged on that one before and you didn't really appreciate my response. I appreciate that you think that *and* you are here expressing this as an absolute, as a heteronomy, a 'this IS how it is': what I respectfully point out is, this is how it is FOR YOU. That's all. It's certainly not how it is FOR ME. I have made it clear in other places, this perspective is not one I engage in or even faintly resonate with. Speaking in sui generis language, prefacing this post with 'this is my personal experience' does worlds towards taking out the tone and authority that can be experienced as preachy.

Personally, I'm not interested in some guy telling me what happens at death: I have personally died twice as a child and it did nothing but leave me with permanent PTSD that I am now having to dissolve on a molecular level. That's MY experience, I'm not assuming that it's going to be anyone else's. Part of the sui generis and autonomy is that NO ONE assumes that their experience is the one that *everyone else* is going to be having, or should be having, or needs to be having in order to be on the 'right path' or having the 'proper understanding' of anything at all.

There is a lot of this 'silence is the desired place to be' on this forum, particularly in the spirituality thread. I'm not discussing spirituality here, although sui generis and autonomy certainly does factor in to spirituality- there are no gods, no 'right' paths, no 'correct forms', there's just exploration of the individual's path as they are called to. If I was interested in silence, I wouldn't bother writing, or communicating on this forum, or engaging in any other kind of connection that involved the sharing of perspectives. I express that in part, my purpose and intention at this point in time is engagement, the exploration of co-creation, of the experience of connecting with other Beings, holding up my hologram with 'this is what it looks like from where I am, would you like to share what it looks like from where you are and enrich my own perspective?'. That's what *I* am personally into. To each their own.

As a Sui Generis, there is a language that I am crafting so that I can communicate with others in such a way as to avoid the perception that I'm shoving my way of Being down their throat. It's an important crafting, because it allows the freedom of all Beings to simply Be whatever they are choosing in that moment without judgement, censure, being preached to or any of the other myriads of subtle ways the heteronomy seeks to keep its stranglehold on the world. I ask that you please preface your comments with 'this is my personal view' with the understanding that it is absolutely nothing more than that. It will be of great help to holding the signal and space for the autonomy.

RUSirius
18th June 2012, 17:20
Thank you Songs, you have addressed my biggest challenge as well, all I can say is this, I feel somewhat clueless, its almost like not knowing what is real any more, not knowing what to believe, only knowing that so much of what we believe has been "taught" through programming, that I have lost "faith" in my self to some degree. All I want is truth, all I want is what works, I know we can/have to figure it out.

Songs, I'm not at all surprised this thread stemmed from you, thanks again for all you contribute.

mountain_jim
18th June 2012, 17:20
http://www.davidicke.com/images/stories/June20128/burgers.jpg

How much transformation is actually wanted.

onawah
18th June 2012, 17:26
From all the signs, this thread is well on it's way already!! :high5: :rockon: :tea: :cheer2: :nod: :first: :plane: :grouphug:
This may be the Avalon Renaissance I've been waiting for.


I'm glad some fresh turf has been established here for the ongoing discussion of sui generis, which, though central to the Pub thread as well, is a subject worthy of plenty of exploration.

*grins at you* mmm, let's see how it goes, first...

Carmen
18th June 2012, 19:57
Beware the 'rescuers'! Those who think 'they' know best what is the 'right' way, what is light and what is dark!! It's just another form of control. These 'so called experts' are great at censorship and seek to curtail others exploration. I please myself thank you, I am my own authority!. Freedom to be or not to be, freedom to make my mistakes and learn from them,priceless!

I am the God of my own Righteous Kingdom! So be It!!

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 21:41
How much transformation is actually wanted.

*grins at you* I don't eat burgers.

*waves at you from ahead along the left fork *

I have a superfood chia smoothie and a kickarse salad here at my picnic, if you want some.

The conversation isn't too shabby either. :P

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 21:46
Dennis- this is where in the Pub I have written the sui generis and *do no harm*- I hadn't gotten into that here yet, and thank you for reminding me of that. Clearly this is the aspect that needs to be discussed when I've had some sleep.

*hugs*



...

Much of the debate- and occasionally, discussion- that goes on in this forum revolves around the idea of discarding the current paradigm by replacing it with a different paradigm, as suggested by better authorities and Purveyors of Reality, so that the *new* paradigm will have a more solid footing. Better Politicians.

...

It seems to me that almost all the posts made in this forum fall into the category of encouraging nothing more than a different form of heteronomy: here is an authority! no, HERE is the authority, ...

...

I'm aware of all of these arguments and I have never, ever found a single one that was not pimping, either overtly or covertly, the agenda of the heteronomy. Which, as the recent history of the majority species currently on this planet attests, creates nothing but closed systems that eventually collapse on themselves and simply arise again to recreate themselves in another, corruptive and polluted form. The desperate rhetoric of this time, this time ti will work, we'll have the *right* king, the *right* president, ...

...

To me, this is where my personal evolution is heading. Does anyone else want to play in this realm?
For me, a good analogy of what we have actually tried so far is like taking a pool of prison guards and prison owners, and allowing the prisoners to elect which ones within this pool will create the rules and do the guarding. No wonder it always turns out badly - for the prisoners.

Heteronomy looks really bad when it is imposed by malevolent beings, rather that worked-out and accepted by the group. Like the old saying, "don't sh!t where you eat." - I see no problem with the majority accepting that as "law" and agreeing to follow the advice, as law, even though some individuals may wish to insist that they have every right, by virtue of their autonomy, to relieve themselves wherever and whenever they want.

I'm with you on the concept of full autonomy for individuals - up to and including suicide - in whatever only affects the individual, but not autonomy in society where the individual's actions (negatively) affect others.

gripreaper
18th June 2012, 21:55
All I want is truth, all I want is what works, I know we can/have to figure it out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlzrNKN3rZI

ljwheat
18th June 2012, 22:32
).I speak about a concept called Sui Generis: I get that.

2 ). Heteronomy is another concept: I get that.

Concepts have dissectible words. That can fit nicely into little box’s all in a row.

You keep putting Silence in human wikipedia box were there is nothing. The place or thing or area I’ve tried to point at with words, (thats all I have to work with) this silent watcher, has no word box you can neatly stuff it in to. And putting what I’ve been pointing at stuffing it into a neat little box you’ve missed what I see.

The silent watcher is silent, as it has nothing you can add, no original thought in a brainy ack attack box-- its, all of creation-creation that includes all the little box’s you can throw at it, there already there. that’s why its silent it has no questions---- its complete.

Hell I can’t explain it, I can only point at the depth and wonder--- that space that contains everything. Yet you seem to think it can be capitalized and explained away with your words. Words have now substance that can touch what I see as the life force in all things-- seen and unseen-- words will not take you there its just to big to rap a human or non human mind around.

That presence or space is the black board for all our little speaking of words and all our combined concepts. When in Rome -- the playing field I see and have referred to is not-- nothing with nothing in the nothing box--- you’ve so happily tried to place it in. since you cant see what I’m pointing at, there’s nothing for you to lock away in a little box, what I see can't be explained away when no one is capable of explaining it in the first place.

You can only point.-- It just will not fit in a box.-- its beyond my touch,-- and beyond your words. -- its what give's you awareness and space for your words and is nuetral--- it dose not encompass ---it is for me. Omnipresent in a rock, tree, bee, deer, human, Et, awareness, no awareness, matter, non matter, the size of a quork, the size of known space is to small to hold it, so how to point at the all that is.

The wisdom that is all wisdom and there fore needs no definition or me explaining it.

Even the movie “Contact” they in Hollywood tried to use words and visual aid to point a Conceptual finger at what I see, and try so hard to speak at or point to.

There is nothing in this universe that I can hold up for you to see. For I can only see it. And I am at piece with my speechlessness. and I will still point at what few see and the rest throw 3D words at. big sigh-- :tape2:

John :drama:

uhSYbRiYwTY

Floating in my human tin can in a very peculiar way. Words wont help me now, drifting into space all controls are out control to maj tom ---- help ! LOL its all vanity. :crazy:

mountain_jim
18th June 2012, 22:52
How much transformation is actually wanted.

*grins at you* I don't eat burgers.

*waves at you from ahead along the left fork *

I have a superfood chia smoothie and a kickarse salad here at my picnic, if you want some.

The conversation isn't too shabby either. :P

Waving back, also from the left fork. :wave:

The last (meat) burger I had was in 1976, from a McDonalds on I-75 in Georgia, after going vegi for about 6 months. I had my first bite in my mouth, near to swallowing, when I realized that was not what I wanted at all. At all. :doh:

Spit out that mouthfull, threw the rest away, and headed on down the highway. No beef, pork, or chicken since.

Currently feasting on fat blueberries, raspberries, strawberries, fancy greens and spinach, all picked today from our little garden. :)

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 22:54
For me, a good analogy of what we have actually tried so far is like taking a pool of prison guards and prison owners, and allowing the prisoners to elect which ones within this pool will create the rules and do the guarding. No wonder it always turns out badly - for the prisoners.

Heteronomy looks really bad when it is imposed by malevolent beings, rather that worked-out and accepted by the group. Like the old saying, "don't sh!t where you eat." - I see no problem with the majority accepting that as "law" and agreeing to follow the advice, as law, even though some individuals may wish to insist that they have every right, by virtue of their autonomy, to relieve themselves wherever and whenever they want.

I'm with you on the concept of full autonomy for individuals - up to and including suicide - in whatever only affects the individual, but not autonomy in society where the individual's actions (negatively) affect others.

Here is where the previous writings on sui generis that I've done kick in. Sui generis autonomy is the recognition that just as one is one's own jurisdiction and authority, so are *all* their own authority *which means 'do no harm' is also part of the mix*. There can be no true autonomy without the deep recognition of the right of the Other to determine their own path and live into their own authority also- without this, autonomy simply because dictatorial dominance no matter where in the picture it is placed. Any time any group by whatever means acts as the authority for another Being that has a degree of competence, this is heteronomy and it carries the seeds of the virus, *always*. There is no way to create a virus free world on one side of the equation while holding heteronomy in the other. Heteronomy is dictatorship and the removal of another's free will in some way or another. Always. It is an incursion into another's sui generis, which is why the principle of 'do no harm' is embedded into true autonomy- we cannot invade the space of another in such a way that invades their integrity.

Integrity here is an important element. There are many that run rampant virus in the guise of 'integrity' and their 'rights'; it's up to us as individuals to discern the difference between autonomy and the perversions of it. If an individual is claiming that their autonomy allows them to invade, harm, interfere with or overpower another individual in any way, they're actually running heteronomy and domination. They have no integrity. I respond differently to these individuals.

In equity, there is a maxim: 'he who wishes equity must do equity'. This is a fundamental principle of autonomy: 'he who wishes autonomy must extend autonomy'. Part of the mark of heteronomy is the claiming of rights that are not extended to others in anything but lipservice. There are many subtle and toxic claims that invade and suck on the energy and sui generis of others with one hand while making grand gestures with the other. This is the way of all those who wreak harm on others. It doesn't matter that they *believe* their rhetoric or perspective, it doesn't matter how *sincere* they are: if any individual is attempting to invade the autonomy of another, they are actually agents for the virus. And the virus is a death signal.



Concerning autonomy verses heteronomy, all my life I have rebelled against belief-systems, accepted mass ritual behaviors, organized religious programming, and against all laws which come from a place of nanny-state-hood or attempts to regulate and control anyone's behavior when it is not affecting another being. ...


I admit this is where I get stuck. I can visualize autonomy between a group of friends, maybe a family, maybe a commune. I get stuck when I get to the real-world examples of individual (greed-driven and/or control-driven) humans that will not play nice.

But in this, we're not talking about autonomy, are we: we're talking about a bunch of individuals who want to exercise their own brand of heteronomy on others. It isn't autonomy. Sui generis doesn't turn the other cheek- that's heteronomous distortion crap disguised as spirituality, designed to keep the heteronomy firmly in place without challenge- sui generis does not tolerate the abusers, the dictators and the manipulators. It calls these what they are, it sees things clearly and it moves in aikiddo with it.


If the premise is, "Let's co-create a new planet, where no one owns anything (or everyone 'owns' everything) and everyone respects and agrees to do no harm to anyone or our new planet. Now, do we prefer autonomy or heteronomy?" then I can easily, joyously vote "Autonomy!"

But back here on Earth, everything is owned. Everything. Even the air! (think of the term 'airspace', laws permitting air pollution, etc.) Even the near-space around the planet is regulated (try shooting a rocket up and emplacing a satellite without the permission of one of the major governments.) Not only that, but ownership is accepted as a condition of life. The day I was born, instead of being born into a full co-ownership of the planet (where ownership becomes moot), every molecule on Earth was already claimed as someone's property - and many of them would defend that ownership with threat of injury, incarceration, or death.

Dennis, we have the *claim* of ownership. This claim *first* needs to be dissolved *within us*, because there's no action we can take that will carry the power and resonance necessary if I haven't dealt with the internal belief and Monsanto coding that says I *can* be owned by another's will and dictatorship. This is what the heteronomy banks on, in part- we'll get caught up in the enormity of it all and be disempowered yet again. Did you ever see the movie A Bug's Life? The undoing of the grasshoppers is when the ants finally, truly find their power and then realise that, numbers wise, they vastly outweigh the small force of their opposers.

The heteronomy exists to demonstrate to the individual all the cracks and nooks where the autonomy fails to fill. There can be no real emptiness inside a Being- the physical universe doesn't roll that way, space isn't 'empty' and neither is the individual, so if the space is not filled with true autonomy then it's going to be filled by *something* and that's where heteronomy jumps up on to the podium with upraised hand and says 'hey, that's mine! I'm happy to take that!'. It's an individual's path, multiplied out into the billions- that's how it has been taken on, one mind and Being at a time, and it can be undone the same way. It's like this: remember Neo infecting Agent Smith and dissolving his avatar from within, not through war or fighting, but simply by being his true Self?

I have that knowing in me, Dennis. What I know is, the attempts of group heteronomy failed in the sixties experiments of communal living and new ways of relating, as it has consistently failed in any other attempt. These always devolve into heteronomy of one kind or another, and then they tear themselves apart. Because of my early life and exposure to many cultures and perspectives, I have come to see the underlying heteronomy in *every system on the planet*; I spent time in the punk culture and that was when I saw the glimmer of a way out of the virus because the anarchy, as clumsily expressed as it was, was an attempt to turn towards the autonomy. I watched the virus infiltrate the punk culture, as it does with all subcultures: it's self learning, so it might flail at times while it attempts to catch up with the latest expression of the Essence, the evolution Consciousness, but it eventually is able to insert the heteronomy into any expression and suck it back down into the morass. There is no answer to this constant construement and absorption, the constant drive towards homogeny and neutralising the power contained in the I Am, unless that answer is the individual becoming utterly and completely immune to infection. The virus response to the increasing presence of the Immunes is to drug them into submission, call their immunity a condition that needs remedy, a problem that needs addressing- but the signal of Immunity is on the planet and each individual can tap into it if they want to.

I am not here to save the world. That's more heteronomy crap, because it demands we look *outside Self* for answers, inspiration, guidance, direction, again; that's the trap. The 'new spiritualists' who are simply more servants of new twists on the same old story speak of 'worldwide' evolution, grand visions of a planetary level up that brings all along with it- but this is crap. Externalising what I need *as a sui generis, utterly unique and autonomous Being* is nothing more than me falling for the same tricks and lies that the heteronomy has relied on for millenia. It's a submission to virus.

I don't need mass conversion in order for me to hold my sui generis within me. I am aware that the Monsanto codes are still in operation within my biology; it's how I know that this bespelling runs ridiculously deep in me and that there is nothing greater for my evolution than to deal with this within me, because I cannot be a signal for autonomy while ignoring that some part of me agrees to be a slave. I am embracing and dissolving those codes in every moment by constantly turning towards my original blueprint, my autonomy, living into a language and way of Being that hasn't been on this planet for millenia, so I'm not as graceful with it as Paula is with her tai chi-

and I will be. I already am far more graceful and powerful than I was a year ago, six months ago, six weeks ago- I have been evolving the signal in every post I've written on it, embodying it deeper. I cannot do that for any other individual: I know the heteronomy says It Rules and it demonstrates this force on a daily basis, yet this I know: the virus in its controller form flees from me. The virus in its mirror form keeps revealing itself more and more, encouraging me to keep going and to embrace my autonomy in ever deepening ways. I am leaving fear behind because fear is what it feeds on. I don't have any answers to the masses, I just have the contrast between the fruits of the heteronomy and the fruits of sui generis. In my deepest place of Being, I know that my ability to embrace and wield my autonomy in a truly sui generis way is the key to unlocking the dormant Otherkind codes within me. I'm experiencing this in my physical world. I'm rebuilding my body from physical injury that includes *fused bones*. The sui generis is what I've got to offer. I know their law system recognises and is utterly undone by it. Their fictions cannot handle it in any way, but one can't deal with the minions, on any level, and that includes the 'expert' anythings.


So for me, I really have spent little time trying to envision an autonomous world, and I'm trying to envision a vastly improved heteronomous society. Remove ALL of the nanny laws, allow as much autonomy as possible, yet protect all of us from some of us. The Reset Button is far from being an idealistic dream-world, and is (in my estimation) the path required to take a major leap away from the malevolent controllers. Once achieved, and lived, I visualize a vast improvement in all of our lives, much more freedom and autonomy, and after (at least) a generation would go through a (voluntary) education that deliberately was focused on providing the tools for creativity, free-thinking, and problem solving, the next phase of society would be even better (and allow even more autonomy.) Even then, my puny little 2012 brain simply cannot imagine a world where full autonomy and anarchy were granted to all, with no restriction or consequence for the malevolent, greedy, and controlling.

Dennis

So stop looking at the outside forces, who will always tell you the heteronomy story of 'you are powerless'. Like everything else it pimps, this too is a lie, but until you *know* this, balls to bone, you aren't the One yet.

And that is precisely what autonomy, sui generis and absolute are all about.

Carmen
18th June 2012, 22:55
This is an excellent thread! Its really causing me to ponder and reason and think and wrestle with all that pondering and thinking!!

After agreeing and disagreeing with what is written (I agree with protecting the innocent, but where does that cross over into control, like 'I'm doing this for your own good!!) Take parents who are big time drug users and their kids have no loving, secure environment to grow in. At what point do those children get taken off them for the kids sake? Or, did those kids incarnate into a druggy environment because they had been drug users in another life and needed to experience how it was for their kids then!! This is just one line of my thinking,thinking!

Then, I switched off the thinking, reasoning,and this is what came to me!

Sui Generis is alive and well in this realm. It's called free will. And we have it all to do with what we will, over eons of 'time' and incarnations. What we do not learn, or refuse to learn in one incarnation, we come back 'as' in the next. We are the embodiment of what we are to learn! No punishment, just learning. as an example I know that I had many incarnations 'as' a very devout person, very judgemental of sexual and moral promiscuity! I came back to this incarnation as a very sexual person with a passion to explore my own repressed sexuality! I did just that and learned the lessons well and truly. In learning this lesson it also revealed another life of sexual abuse and usery that had brought on the repression of sexual expression. All the players from that abusive life are back to complete the learning, as it is/was'time'.

So, from here to eternity, we have free will/Sui generis/autonomy, to do what ever we wish. And it's on our terms, whether we be victim, tyrant, anything in between, but when we understand it, (the game) we transcend it and get to hang out with dudes of a completely different nature. Birds of a feather do really flock together! It's not easy though, transcending this 3d realm, it's not meant to be easy. The kingdom of heaven is well guarded from the ignorant. It is in consciousness!

Well, Songs, in my experience, it is!

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 23:02
From all the signs, this thread is well on it's way already!!
This may be the Avalon Renaissance I've been waiting for.

onawah, YOU are the Renaissance you've been waiting for. I am mine. *That's* how sui generis actually works. Autonomy and sui generis tells me, in every moment, that I Am what I need. I will say this every time- there is nothing outside that can give an answer greater than the evolution and essence signal within. I'm just holding that signal.

We are not Fallen from anything, including 'grace', because there was never anywhere to fall. In my 'Verse and sui generis expression, 'Virtue' and 'grace' and all the rest of the heteronomy disguised as spiritual wisdom are nothing more than concepts created to instill the illusion that there is a greater authority *outside our Self* that we 'need' to be listening to in order to find the right path. Strangling down the infinite possibility and evolution into a closed system, over and over again. There is *nothing* that the heteronomy can show me that is true * of me* except to serve as a mirror to alert me to my own infection.

I Am that which I look for. That's what it's always been about.

songsfortheotherkind
18th June 2012, 23:23
Sui Generis is alive and well in this realm. It's called free will. And we have it all to do with what we will, over eons of 'time' and incarnations. What we do not learn, or refuse to learn in one incarnation, we come back 'as' in the next. We are the embodiment of what we are to learn! No punishment, just learning. as an example I know that I had many incarnations 'as' a very devout person, very judgemental of sexual and moral promiscuity! I came back to this incarnation as a very sexual person with a passion to explore my own repressed sexuality! I did just that and learned the lessons well and truly. In learning this lesson it also revealed another life of sexual abuse and usery that had brought on the repression of sexual expression. All the players from that abusive life are back to complete the learning, as it is/was'time'.

So, from here to eternity, we have free will/Sui generis/autonomy, to do what ever we wish. And it's on our terms, whether we be victim, tyrant, anything in between, but when we understand it, (the game) we transcend it and get to hang out with dudes of a completely different nature. Birds of a feather do really flock together! It's not easy though, transcending this 3d realm, it's not meant to be easy. The kingdom of heaven is well guarded from the ignorant. It is in consciousness! Well, Songs, in my experience, it is!

http://www.madtomatoe.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/matrix04-758056.jpg

Yes, yes- this is what I have been writing about in other places, pointing out that the controllers really do obey the law of free will, it is just that individuals choose to do some pretty craptastic things with their power, including constantly giving it away for beads and trinkets.

http://andreas.oszkiel.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/cap2.jpg

I know consciousness, I don't know heaven, and I think I get what you're saying when you say 'kingdom of heaven': it's always been within. That sui generis, autonomous perspective transcends the heteronomous religions and death culture. Virus free.

There is a world of difference between *thinking* you are the One-

http://somethingoffensive.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/matrix-bullets.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fU1ucRe7BMg/T6rLQ4tyASI/AAAAAAAAAno/-sN0ydfKNq8/s1600/The+Matrix+Keanu+Reeves+Neo.jpg

and knowing it.

Constant embodiment eventually becomes the unconscious competence, that which we do with the ease of Being. That's what I'm embracing, every day.

Dorjezigzag
18th June 2012, 23:43
Great thread songsfortheotherkind, helps me understand your perspective.
Many of the worlds mythologies can be seen to represent a clash between heteronomy and autonomy.

This is very much the theme of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, The work of Joseph Campbell and even Star Wars

We often loose autonomy through feelings of guilt
It is interesting that one of the definitions of innocence is to be free from guilt.

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 00:10
We often loose autonomy through feelings of guilt
It is interesting that one of the definitions of innocence is to be free from guilt.

Absolutely. Guilt is one of the most powerful control tools of the external authority- who is it that sets the parameters of what an individual is 'supposed' to feel guilty about? Guilt trips are a dead set giveaway for the manipulation and control tactics of any Being or group trying to absorb the autonomy, regardless of the rationalisations that might go along with the guilt tripping. I have observed some of the most hideous guilt trips have been created and are done in the name of 'love': it made me wonder what 'love' actually is beneath the noise, the exploration of which constantly leads me to interesting places.

ljwheat
19th June 2012, 00:15
Here is a good example of what i try to point at. John

BwSxIfwPU8U

Antagenet
19th June 2012, 00:31
because a society that is based on all Beings knowing who they are can never be controlled, dominated or subjected.


Do all human beings want freedom from domination? In my experience, there are many who truly are followers and seek the security of being told what to do. Some lack an inner compass, others are emotionally weak, then there are the not so intelligent who don't have the discernment. I wish so much for a Sui Generis world of individuals, but I doubt that some have the capacity or desire for it.

Carmen
19th June 2012, 00:51
Antagenet, wanting to be dominated, to follow someone, is also free choice! People have done this for many lifetimes! It's easy, they don't have to think or take responsibility. That's their Sui generis, their free choice and that is honoured also. Then, there may come a moment, an event, in a lifetime, where they say to themselves 'to hell with this, I'm sick of following orders, someone else's agenda!" so they don't, and they start on a very different journey. Or they might just stay following. It's all choice!

Also, some people just love to moan and critisize. They love it, it's their modis operandi. Their brains are wired that way,because that attitude is well used those neurones have become automatic habit, like a super highway in the brain. What they usually don't realise is that their creative energy goes out from them to create something, whether it be a person or situation, that really pushes those familiar buttons that gets them to moan and complain. It's a self fulfilling loop, and very self satisfying. Also very boring and repetitive to others and not pleasant to be around. But hey, they get to do it as its their choice, their free will. Attitudes like this are very hard to change mass to mass because they are sub-conscious and automatic. It's not until one can transcend, even for a moment, that those ingrained responses and limiting habits can be looked at objectively and changed. It takes attention and presence to change ingrown, limited attitudes of a conditioned mind. Blame doesnt help, it just keeps us powerless.

Antagenet
19th June 2012, 01:27
)
There is nothing in this universe that I can hold up for you to see. For I can only see it. And I am at piece with my speechlessness. and I will still point at what few see and the rest throw 3D words at. big sigh--


Some people prefer the spacial brain hemisphere to the conceptual and wordy hemisphere. Both are valid and I would suggest most people have a mixture of the two. One is not better than the other, and neither is blending the two. Enlightenment can look like blissful silence or the eureka of a conceptual solution.. or infinite other ways...

My personal path has always been to look at what cannot be explained, and try to put words to the sensation, experience or communication so that I can share it. But without the silence of direct subjectivity, words will
come from the external heteronomous paradigms.

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 02:45
Here is a good example of what i try to point at. John


Here is my experience of this:

those who say that the silence is the goal are rarely silent. If silence really *is* the goal, then that's what they'd be doing- contemplating in silence. What is being expressed at the *end* of the silence is a lot of non-silence expressing what it's like to be silent. This again is not silence. Silence is silence-anything other than silence is *not* silence, in which case silence isn't what is being discussed. Using a lot of non-silence to extol the virtues of silence is, in my universe, utterly counter-intuitive: how can one use the mechanisms that one is suggesting are inferior in some way to express the concepts of something that doesn't express itself in communication?

Am I the only one that finds this entirely redundant and disingenuous? To me, if an autonomous Being feels that silent contemplation is the key, they'd be doing it and demonstrating it personally, rather than sitting there talking to others to convince them of the power of silence and no mind. One needs to have *conscious presence* and *not silence* to communicate in this realm- even using the works of others to demonstrate one's perspective is actually *not silent* because they are using the voice or consciousness *of another* to present the ideas. To illustrate my point: my integrity calls me to express the concepts that I express on this forum and in my life. I strive to live in harmony with this because this is cohesion, which is an element of autonomy: cohesion deals with 'is one actually living into the things that one is espousing or is there a fundamental conflict?' To me, the one espousing silence and 'without words' etc with true signal is living that which they espouse. Personally, that philosophy is not my thing-actually, *all philosophy* isn't my thing- so I'm creating my Art all over the place and getting on with living into what *I* am passionate about, resonate with, am called to, follow as my path, create from the inspiration within me. This is how the signal is transmitted: I'm unique, singularity, my own authority and autonomy, why on earth would I want to get caught up copying other's Art? The heteronomy says that studying 'the masters' is what trains an artist but actually the opposite is generally true; those who bring something new to the art world are either self taught or have to spend years undoing what their 'instruction' taught them before they can find their own artistic voice.

I personally resonate much more to the 'keep my own voice in the first place' method, because the latter really sucks, especially when it's the virus one is booting. So this video actually does nothing whatsoever to assist me in grasping what it is that you actually personally resonate with because it's not your personal experience, it's someone else's, who is actually not doing the thing they're talking about. I don't resonate with this. This is the issue that I *have* with the 'in the silence is the goal' kind of perspectives, because there's not a lot of co-creation going on there: as soon as co-creation comes into it, the silence has to morph into *some kind* of communication- which is not silence. Telepathy counts as not silence. Interacting counts as not silence. Energetic connection counts as not silence, because in all of these things *ideas* and *concepts* of the singularity are being exchanged, no matter how subtle, which drops the Being out of the silence and into communication. So, given this perspective, technically this contemplation can a) only be done in isolation and b) by not ever talking or communicating about it. This seems fairly straightforward to my processes.

I'm interested in something entirely different. If anyone talks to me about the virtues of silence I start giggling at the oxymoronic nature of their activity. If someone says 'I find great benefit in spending six months of the year in isolation and contemplation, so that I can come back to communication with my own insights and sharpened perspectives to offer' and they actually *do* this, then there is something of value there in the Being that they carry, because they are living in integrity with what they are espousing. They're also not trying to use not silence to tell me that silence is the way to go. Everything outside actual cohesion and individual integrity is just spiritual onanism. That's my perspective. Others are absolutely free to have their own.

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 02:56
because a society that is based on all Beings knowing who they are can never be controlled, dominated or subjected.


Do all human beings want freedom from domination? In my experience, there are many who truly are followers and seek the security of being told what to do. Some lack an inner compass, others are emotionally weak, then there are the not so intelligent who don't have the discernment. I wish so much for a Sui Generis world of individuals, but I doubt that some have the capacity or desire for it.

I've never suggested that all beings want freedom for a really good reason: it's my observation that they don't. I said I was exploring what elements a society that *wants* freedom would need to embrace to achieve their aims, as seen from my perspective. I'm not here for those that crave the heteronomy- that's going to sort itself out as things progress. There are infinite possibilities there, so I'm satisfied with sharpening my own autonomy on the wetstone of others who are interested in expanding their own experience of autonomy. It's a gorgeous co-creation that I love to be in. I'm not interested in what those who want heteronomy want to do with things- I got halfway through the book and set it on fire, went into the cinema and walked out after ten minutes and jogged straight on past the hideous t-shirt and collector's popcorn cup.

In wishing for a world filled with self authority, autonomous Beings, you just stepped out of your own autonomy and got into theirs- you're in *their* business now, thinking that you know what they can and can't do, what they 'should' and 'shouldn't' do. That's the foundation of heteronomy- thinking that we know what's *right* for everyone else. I don't want to be anyone's god, guru or geisha, which means the best place for my attention is in my own integrity, focusing on my own cohesion and internal knowing. Put *that* out into the world and see what happens, is what I'm doing- and look, that seems to be having interesting results. Sitting here focusing on what *others* are doing is what the rest of the forum mostly does- and that is worlds of Goo all complaining in the back of the unfunvee.

I'm here hanging around in the funvee. It's way more fun. :D

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 03:21
. Also very boring and repetitive to others and not pleasant to be around. But hey, they get to do it as its their choice, their free will.

Your post inspired me to this observation about my own experience of this. Thanks for your perspective. :)

Absolutely. And it's utterly my free will and choice to give that expression zero energy, which is often taken by those individuals as judgement. It's not, but it *can* be depending on what I'm holding inside- am I holding a space of superiority and outrage, am I using words that are loaded with negative connotation and energy, am I venting and spreading my perspective around to all and sundry, or am I just declining with a genuine 'no thanks' and dancing on my way, already thinking about something else?

I can tell where I'm at by the words I use, the energy and purpose behind the words, the way I engage in the subject: if it's running around in circles in my head, if I'm obsessing about it, getting caught in the loop, then the heteronomy has me by my nose ring and is leading me wherever it wants. The way I keep my Self clear of this manipulation is to put down all my rationalisations regarding a situation, all my focus on the other, bring all my energy back into my lower chakras and close the gates, so that I am my own Being again. This practice of closing the gates is something I mentioned on the Pub with regards the entraining to blow out the lower chakras and relate from there, so I've been really conscious of this since I found that in my Self. I bring my Self back to me, to my expression and focus, what I am called to put out into the world and get out of everyone else's business. When I do this, I can move more easily through all the noise that others are triggered into putting out about how 'selfish' I look, how 'self absorbed' and arrogant, or uncaring, or any of the other things that the heteronomy has created to emotionally manipulate the strays back into line: either that or cause them to fall into a deep hole of self abuse, guilt and recrimination, which leads to paralysis, or institutionalisation, or heavy medication, or addiction, or....

Staying with my Self allows me to release them from my limitations. This then releases me too. It's a process I deeply resonate with.


http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2010/130/a/c/magical_powers__by_m0thyyku.jpg

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 04:03
).I speak about a concept called Sui Generis: I get that.

2 ). Heteronomy is another concept: I get that.

Concepts have dissectible words. That can fit nicely into little box’s all in a row.

Sometimes. Othertimes they inspire symphonies and sculptures and dance and amazing technologies and expressions and interactions and co-creations and they still can't be encapsulated. To my way of seeing things, it's rather connected to how creative the individual concerned is, and what they are inspired to express.


You keep putting Silence in human wikipedia box were there is nothing. The place or thing or area I’ve tried to point at with words, (thats all I have to work with) this silent watcher, has no word box you can neatly stuff it in to. And putting what I’ve been pointing at stuffing it into a neat little box you’ve missed what I see.

I'm not entirely sure who 'you' is in this post. Are you talking to me? Or someone else? If you're talking to me, I just made a post that may help clarify my perspective.


The silent watcher is silent, as it has nothing you can add, no original thought in a brainy ack attack box-- its, all of creation-creation that includes all the little box’s you can throw at it, there already there. that’s why its silent it has no questions---- its complete.

This to me indicates something that can no longer evolve and is thus in a space where it will begin its natural dissolution process. I'm interested in evolution, expansion, increased complexity, increased points of the hologram. I keep expressing this. This is what I am interested in. You are free to NOT be interested in this. There is no issue at all with that. It's far more helpful to use *I* statements when describing one's own path that in getting into everyone else's business and either globalising one's own perspective as if it 'should' apply to others (which is heteronomy) or using 'you' in a way that makes the conversation heteronomous in a different way.

Is there some way that you can present your perspective *without* the underlying heteronomy?


Hell I can’t explain it, I can only point at the depth and wonder--- that space that contains everything. Yet you seem to think it can be capitalized and explained away with your words. Words have now substance that can touch what I see as the life force in all things-- seen and unseen-- words will not take you there its just to big to rap a human or non human mind around.

In my 'Verse: Heteronomy. Assumption. Globalisation. Not my experience.


That presence or space is the black board for all our little speaking of words and all our combined concepts. When in Rome -- the playing field I see and have referred to is not-- nothing with nothing in the nothing box--- you’ve so happily tried to place it in. since you cant see what I’m pointing at, there’s nothing for you to lock away in a little box, what I see can't be explained away when no one is capable of explaining it in the first place.

In my 'Verse: Judgement. Superiority. Heteronomy. Um, not my experience.


You can only point.-- It just will not fit in a box.-- its beyond my touch,-- and beyond your words. -- its what give's you awareness and space for your words and is nuetral--- it dose not encompass ---it is for me. Omnipresent in a rock, tree, bee, deer, human, Et, awareness, no awareness, matter, non matter, the size of a quork, the size of known space is to small to hold it, so how to point at the all that is.

"It is for me". This is the first thing that has resonated in all this *for me*. Ah, you're talking about *your* perspective. Not everyone else's reality. This makes more sense. This would be clearer with more subjective, rather than globalising language.


The wisdom that is all wisdom and there fore needs no definition or me explaining it.

And yet here you are, endeavoring to do just that. Which seems contradictory to me and my saying that is more than likely going to sound offensive to you, and I get that. What I don't understand is the propensity for doing the thing that is being spoken against, like adults who hit children while yelling 'you're not to hit anyone, understand?'. No, no I do not.


There is nothing in this universe that I can hold up for you to see. For I can only see it. And I am at piece with my speechlessness. and I will still point at what few see and the rest throw 3D words at. big sigh-- :tape2:

If only you can see it, then that makes sense you cannot communicate it. You aren't being really speechless, which by definition means 'without speech', and I'm observing communication, which means perhaps speechless isn't the word. As for the big sigh, that's just more heteronomy- oh, all those who don't get what *you* get. I would have so loved to hear your actual experience, or your expression of that, without all the judgements, assumptions and superiority- the expressed frustration has at its roots superiority even if you're unaware of that. It's distancing and creates dissonance- but perhaps that is the idea.


LOL its all vanity. :crazy:

IN YOUR OPINION. That's *all* you have- your OWN opinion. Ever. You are not the bastion of All Wisdom, Ever. Your experience may be shared by no other Being, and if so, does that make yours superior? Not in an autonomous multiverse.

This is a discussion on autonomy in contrast to heteronomy. Those engaging in it don't experience it as vanity, they're interested. It strikes me as disingenuous to go into a vegetarian restaurant and complain loudly about the lack of meat dishes on the menu and what a crap establishment it is because of this. What is your *actual* intention and purpose in doing that- are you genuinely attempting to communicate and are just not skilled at it, or do you like creating drama so that you can keep your own story about being misunderstood and how you're surrounded by those that just don't get it?

One of these things is not like the other- one has a remedy.

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 04:11
My personal path has always been to look at what cannot be explained, and try to put words to the sensation, experience or communication so that I can share it. But without the silence of direct subjectivity, words will come from the external heteronomous paradigms.

My direct subjectivity is not silent. Yours may be so. Are you saying that because mine comes from 'nonsilence' my words are coming from external heteronomous paradigms? I don't think you'd be intending to say that. So what is dissonant here? Because you have said an absolute that I personally don't experience. What now?

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 04:25
The vast difference between the language of autonomy and the deep entrenchment and unconscious tendency towards encouraging or insisting on *external* authority are more than worlds apart. I'm not in any way being a smart arse with this language- I'm pointing to the hidden belief systems that carry the heteronomy into the space, like delivering a bunch of virus infested flowers. Triangulating together is the only way it can be brought into the sunlight- without the multiple perspectives, we're only going to get the same heteronomy again and I'm so utterly disinterested in that.

Hold on to my autonomy and Self. Operate from there. See what happens. That's how I go into the virus noise. It's been useful so far. :)

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 10:52
So talk to me about some of the favorite words- love, relationship, connection, light- through the lens of autonomy and sui generis. Show me the multiple lenses of the hologram in how these things operate within this framework. I would like to go deeper with all this. :)

Moxie
19th June 2012, 15:07
One my earliest memories embodies internalized observations that being "me" was not entirely acceptable or wholely permitted. It feels like there are so many constraints being human, that much about me caused continual feedback.... I like the word 'singularity' and I see that mine survived however much backlash was "had" and impact made from whatever affect-shuns were met.

As I became a child, the fact that I had to eat food seemed like the ultimate contraint, such a bother to me, this necessity. I thought it was a waste of time and energy and now see the condition of life feeding on life as one of the two main objections I have to this existence... I've heard it said - "god's got some 'splainin' to do". The other one is having to experience death. What thunk THAT up???

Not eating very much food resulted in being the recipient of other's views that I was a beanpole and a pain in the arse rebellious. But hey, I win now right? Not fat! (big grin).

These laws that have dominion over us, eating, having to go to the toilet. What kind of mind I had, so exasperated was I at such a tender young age.

I could do nothing without feedback from others whether it was correction, guidance, direction, objection, punishment, opinions, moods, whatever reaction, they came from being around others.

Of course, at that time I was not able to articulate my disturbance in being human and I was a pouty sad eyed being and do recall saying out loud to my mother at the age of 7 "why can't I just be me?".
She looked at me like I was alien, even then. One learns to keep their mouth shut. I became one of "them". (belly chuckles).

Subsequently, furrows developed between my eyebrows as early as my 20's which are deep slits now at 59, 5'9 and a perfect size 10 thank you.

Autonomy is hardly doable in a world of 7 billion people, much less 6 in a household.
Gawd I dislike the word "program", still the tapes run constantly and interaction with others automatically reinforces them, I see it. You're not alone Song.

auto = self
hetero = other
onomy = laws of; knowledge as a whole; a particular field

Words, that's another 'thing'... One that I've pondered a bit is the word under stand. I've not a lot of study in (maritime) law and legal jargon, just enough to "get it" that it opens up the inner standing how ones autonomy is betrayed. These are the programs. Commerce = Intercourse.
What a good job of dupedom, ya have to admit. Isn't it strange the word under + stand?

The word connection / connect shun... polarity ends in one word? No wonder we're con fused.

Honesty is being practiced in this thread Song and I appreciate the progress you've made spotting the mind virus (I chuckled to see you use that because I have been saying it for a while now myself and it's refreshingly simple for others to grock (rather than under stand)..smirks.

I probably won't be participating much but I do recall you mentioning in your other 160 some page thread that I wish I had time to read... that you TOO tango with the ultimate question or inquiry of whether or not we truly ARE autonomous, singularities for eternity or are actually a part of (owned, the possesion of another greater creator being), you know, if our soul was extended as this expression we each have thinking we are some one... that we are not our own. I hope I got that right as perceptions are a bitch... I marvelled because I appear to my self as being one of not many to wonder the same.
Do we merge back into and relinquish our identity... do we even have one? ok, that's enough of a train wreck right there huh?

back to the garden! I'm not sure what love is while I do love your mind Song.

Antagenet
19th June 2012, 16:12
My personal path has always been to look at what cannot be explained, and try to put words to the sensation, experience or communication so that I can share it. But without the silence of direct subjectivity, words will come from the external heteronomous paradigms.

My direct subjectivity is not silent. Yours may be so. Are you saying that because mine comes from 'nonsilence' my words are coming from external heteronomous paradigms? I don't think you'd be intending to say that. So what is dissonant here? Because you have said an absolute that I personally don't experience. What now?

No I am not assuming that you or anyone is like myself. I will put my statement another way...

My personal path has always been to look at what I sense, experience, and understand that I have not heard explained by others,
and try to define for myself and share with others, what the exact as yet unexplained place I am in is like. To give voice to some
aspect of my human life that might in doing so be a contribution to others, in that they might have a widened palette of understanding
because I took the time to explain something new to me, and possibly new to them.

The sense that something is new and not yet explained is often surrounded by a sense of chaos, a void, a huge question mark FOR ME
and I find it takes courage to continue with the avenue, that I have an urge to run away and hide in some familliar activity. This is the
temptation for me of the heteronomous seduction because to look at the NEW takes more energy that I sometimes have... but instead of
allowing myself to fall into easy answers given by someone else, I often choose to keep my chaos or unexplained space open and not put
a word, a definition, or an explanation to my experience prematurely. Often after being patient with the new sensations, I have eureka
moments where my understanding suddenly catapaults through, and I can express with clarity something new that I have never heard
communicated before, whether it includes a new idea, or a new feeling.

mountain_jim
19th June 2012, 16:41
While looking up for a different thread, I found these Terence McKenna quotes I thought perhaps relevant to this one. I met Terence, and his books (I have Food of the Gods, True Hallucinations), writings, and spoken word rants were worthwhile to me in many areas, including the autonomy of one's consciousness and inalienable right to experiment on same.

http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/9243.Terence_McKenna



“We have to create culture, don't watch TV, don't read magazines, don't even listen to NPR. Create your own roadshow. The nexus of space and time where you are now is the most immediate sector of your universe, and if you're worrying about Michael Jackson or Bill Clinton or somebody else, then you are disempowered, you're giving it all away to icons, icons which are maintained by an electronic media so that you want to dress like X or have lips like Y. This is ****-brained, this kind of thinking. That is all cultural diversion, and what is real is you and your friends and your associations, your highs, your orgasms, your hopes, your plans, your fears. And we are told 'no', we're unimportant, we're peripheral. 'Get a degree, get a job, get a this, get a that.' And then you're a player, you don't want to even play in that game. You want to reclaim your mind and get it out of the hands of the cultural engineers who want to turn you into a half-baked moron consuming all this trash that's being manufactured out of the bones of a dying world.”

“Chaos is what we've lost touch with. This is why it is given a bad name. It is feared by the dominant archetype of our world, which is Ego, which clenches because its existance is defined in terms of control.”

“If the words 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' don't include the right to experiment with your own consciousness, then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp it was written on.” :)

“You have to take seriously the notion that understanding the universe is your responsibility, because the only understanding of the universe that will be useful to you is your own understanding.”

“Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual who is a member of a neurotic culture against the facts of the matter. And culture, which we put on like an overcoat, is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable.”

“Television is by nature the dominator drug par excellence. Control of content, uniformity of content, repeatability of content make it inevitably a tool of coersion, brainwashing, and manipulation.”
― Terence McKenna, Food of the Gods: The Search for the Original Tree of Knowledge A Radical History of Plants, Drugs, and Human Evolution

“The cost of sanity in this society, is a certain level of alienation”

“Right here and now, one quanta away, there is raging a universe of active intelligence that is transhuman, hyperdimensional, and extremely alien... What is driving religious feeling today is a wish for contact with this other universe.”

“Life lived in the absence of the psychedelic experience that primordial shamanism is based on is life trivialized, life denied, life enslaved to the ego.”

“My voice speaking is a monkey's mouth making little mouth noises that are carrying agree-upon meaning, and it is meaning that matters. Without the meaning one has only little mouth noises ”
― Terence McKenna, The Archaic Revival

“If you don't have a plan, you become part of somebody else's plan.”

“Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behaviour and information processing. They open you up to the possibility that everything you know is wrong.”

We tend to disempower ourselves. We tend to believe that we don’t matter. And in the act of taking that idea to ourselves we give everything away to somebody else, to something else.”

“Nobody is smarter than you are. And what if they are? What good is their understanding doing you?”

Eram
19th June 2012, 17:58
Here is a good example of what i try to point at. John


Here is my experience of this:

those who say that the silence is the goal are rarely silent. If silence really *is* the goal, then that's what they'd be doing- contemplating in silence. What is being expressed at the *end* of the silence is a lot of non-silence expressing what it's like to be silent. This again is not silence. Silence is silence-anything other than silence is *not* silence, in which case silence isn't what is being discussed. Using a lot of non-silence to extol the virtues of silence is, in my universe, utterly counter-intuitive: how can one use the mechanisms that one is suggesting are inferior in some way to express the concepts of something that doesn't express itself in communication?

Hi songsfortheotherkind,

The silence that you are referring to in the above reply to ljwheat is all about the silencing of the mind and has nothing to do with actually being silence in relation to communication with other human beings...

It could be enlightening :lol: for you to read this (http://www.successconsciousness.com/index_00001a.htm) so we all get to be on the same page about what it is that is discussed when we are talking about this silence.


Most people keep thinking the same kind of thoughts, and visualize the same mental images in an unconscious automatic manner. This means they keep viewing the same movie in their minds, and consequently, go on creating and living the same kind of life.

You can change the thoughts and images in your mind, which is equivalent to inserting a new cassette into the VCR of the mind. As thoughts create events and circumstances, by changing the habitual thoughts, life's events and circumstances change too.

Most people don't know or don't believe that it is possible to change their way of thinking. The reality of this possibility has never occurred to them.

There are people who have the knowledge and make the effort. If they persist in their efforts to become more conscious of their thinking process, and attempt to control and filter the contents of their minds, they realize in a practical and direct way that their thoughts are creative and possess power.

Silencing the mind is a higher stage that very few know about, and fewer take practical steps to achieve. If and when one reaches this goal he realizes that he is not his mind or his thoughts, but something beyond. He realizes and experiences in a very clear and direct manner the reality of his True Essence, and the illusion of what is called "reality".

The ability of silencing the mind is the key to the switch of the mind, enabling us to turn it on and off as we wish. When we are able to switch it off at will, we experience serenity of mind, strength, confidence and happiness. When the mind and its thoughts are quiet, we are able to use the mind in a most effective way.

Silencing the thoughts and the incessant, tiring, consuming chatter of the mind makes us enjoy a peaceful and joyous consciousness. At this stage, we become the boss of the mind.

~Remez Sasson~

Carmen
19th June 2012, 20:03
Silencing of the mind is not understood until it is experienced. It is the switching in to another realm that has always been there, we just never 'realized' it. My first experience of this 'switch' was when I was heading up the road on my horse one day. I was busy thinking, then ran out of something to think about, caught my self doing this, and said inwardly, "stop thinking all the time!!" Then poof, I was in a spaciousness of no thought, a space of 'being'! It was quite blissful, delicious, and I understood this place of 'being', firsthand. I endeavour to be in that space, that place often, as I go about my daily life cos it's a marvellous contact with a deeper intelligence of my Self that kinda gets things done and smooths the way of all my life. Creative people are very familiar with this space, it's the zone they create from, ot so it seems to me. I have talked at length about this to my artist friend.

I liken the intelligence of this place of beingness, this space, to the intelligence that runs our body, the automatic processes that are just automatic and there, like our temperature, the way our cells work, our immune system. When you think about what's going on in our bodies all the time, it is truly miraculous.

After the realisation of this space of being and the intelligence of it, I was amazed how events and things in my life just seemed to work out in ways that my personality self could never, with thinking and reasoning, achieve. It was a letting go of all that worrying and reasoning stuff. It was and is like a touchstone that is always present and available. To me it is the intelligent, animating life force of our bodies and all things material, but it is unseen, chaotic, until it is observed 'as' something, then it becomes material. It is all around us, like water is to fish, in it we move and live and have our 'being'.


Here endeth the first lesson!!! Hahaha! 'bows low and back out of the room!'

Swan
19th June 2012, 20:25
So talk to me about some of the favorite words- love, relationship, connection, light- through the lens of autonomy and sui generis. Show me the multiple lenses of the hologram in how these things operate within this framework. I would like to go deeper with all this. :)

Ok, Here goes…

My experience of Connection and No Mind - so far

One day in the play park six years ago, I suddenly realized that on some level I was communicating with a nearby tree. Or rather, the tree was communicating with me. A short time after, I found out I was pregnant, and I thought – so that was what the tree was telling me.

I hung out with the tree, and other trees throughout my pregnancy, enjoying the new connection.

A few years later this feeling of connection expanded and I found myself experiencing a connection with the wind, the sun, the sea, the sky, the rain…

I can only describe this experience as blissful. In fact, it was so overwhelming I honestly began to question my sanity.

Anyway, I am not saying I live in a state of bliss, far from it. But I have noticed that I can “tune my frequency” into connection. I do this by letting go of my thoughts ( my mind ) and “listen” with my being to all the dimensions I can be aware of. I can feel the difference in vibration in my body. And I feel my heart opening.

It is in this state of No Mind, and Connection that I feel alive, joyful, peaceful.

The evolution for me right now, is accessing this state more and more often. Because I am still very much caught up in old patterns of thinking and feeling that do not serve me.

I do not mean that I aspire to sit silently, experiencing connection and bliss. Well, maybe I do.

But I also want to live an active life with others “and” experience connection. I need to practice this.

the_vast_mystery
19th June 2012, 20:36
I've never suggested that all beings want freedom for a really good reason: it's my observation that they don't. I said I was exploring what elements a society that *wants* freedom would need to embrace to achieve their aims, as seen from my perspective. I'm not here for those that crave the heteronomy- that's going to sort itself out as things progress. There are infinite possibilities there, so I'm satisfied with sharpening my own autonomy on the wetstone of others who are interested in expanding their own experience of autonomy. It's a gorgeous co-creation that I love to be in. I'm not interested in what those who want heteronomy want to do with things- I got halfway through the book and set it on fire, went into the cinema and walked out after ten minutes and jogged straight on past the hideous t-shirt and collector's popcorn cup.

In wishing for a world filled with self authority, autonomous Beings, you just stepped out of your own autonomy and got into theirs- you're in *their* business now, thinking that you know what they can and can't do, what they 'should' and 'shouldn't' do. That's the foundation of heteronomy- thinking that we know what's *right* for everyone else. I don't want to be anyone's god, guru or geisha, which means the best place for my attention is in my own integrity, focusing on my own cohesion and internal knowing. Put *that* out into the world and see what happens, is what I'm doing- and look, that seems to be having interesting results. Sitting here focusing on what *others* are doing is what the rest of the forum mostly does- and that is worlds of Goo all complaining in the back of the unfunvee.

I'm here hanging around in the funvee. It's way more fun. :D

I think the first parameter that must be considered for any sort of autonomy-based society is to consider in full how to prevent psychopaths/sociopaths from ruining it. Trust based society really is the most harmonious and beneficial for all but it's trivial for a psychopath to exploit. How do you in your full exercise of autonomy ensure that those who have zero ethics/morals, a cunning charm, and quick wit do not get the better of you? For any society to first function I think it has to consider how it will handle all its worst case scenarios. The first one being that if we were to set up such a society here that it would inevitably be the target of various forces not limited to psychopaths or governments strongly desiring to prevent their citizens from emigrating to any sort of autonomy-based state.

While it's nice to keep to "our business" in this world many others desiring of heteronomy will MAKE it their business to destroy you in any way they can. So that's a tough problem to solve I'd think.

778 neighbour of some guy
19th June 2012, 20:57
Setting up triangulation :crazy_pilot:

Setting up tech support :pop2:

Prepping for fart in a spacesuit :painkiller: (just in case)

Fires up the heteronomy detector :bs:
Bookmarks and :bump:

Sigh, once again you made a smile appear on my kisser.

( not hitting on you )

778 neighbour of some guy
19th June 2012, 21:03
Thanks Songs, you are a good teacher. And fun.

Fred Steeves
19th June 2012, 22:32
I hung out with the tree, and other trees throughout my pregnancy, enjoying the new connection.

A few years later this feeling of connection expanded and I found myself experiencing a connection with the wind, the sun, the sea, the sky, the rain…

I can only describe this experience as blissful. In fact, it was so overwhelming I honestly began to question my sanity.

Anyway, I am not saying I live in a state of bliss, far from it. But I have noticed that I can “tune my frequency” into connection. I do this by letting go of my thoughts ( my mind ) and “listen” with my being to all the dimensions I can be aware of. I can feel the difference in vibration in my body. And I feel my heart opening.
this.

Wow Swan, you described it better than I have thus far articulated it to myself, minus the questioning of sanity part that is.(LOL)

When I am of mind to "tune in", there is literally no thing that I cannot communicate with, at a certain level that is. Of course no language is necessary. The interaction is self evident, but on an extremely subtle level, no? For me this was a touchstone moment, to catch just an unmistakable glimpse of this subtle world, that is always at the ready, and itching to be recognized. Once this is duly noted, there are still trials and tribulations to wade through, but it's also the beginning of game over I think.

Now like you Swan, lest anyone mistake that I claim to live in some kind of world of eternal bliss, well just banish that thought. But actually today is a good example. Often at work I like to listen either to music, or Alex Jones.

A day like today? Suddenly at 3:30 p.m., I looked up, and realized I had missed A.J.'s entire 3 hour broadcast, from 12-3 my time. What was I distracted with? The various shadows about were whispering, the bright green Florida summertime plant life was bursting with pride and energy, the clouds were puffy and friendly, and the occassional breeze a caress. Even the shrill scream of the skill saw had it's rightful place.

Now I didn't intend to lose those 3 or so hours, it just happened, and it felt good.:p There were also some co-conspirators involved. http://www.bigtenfever.com/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif

Cheers,
Fred

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 23:02
Hi songsfortheotherkind,

The silence that you are referring to in the above reply to ljwheat is all about the silencing of the mind and has nothing to do with actually being silence in relation to communication with other human beings...

It could be enlightening :lol: for you to read this (http://www.successconsciousness.com/index_00001a.htm) so we all get to be on the same page about what it is that is discussed when we are talking about this silence.

Wakytweaky, I am fully cognizant of the concept that lj wheat was putting forward- the concept of 'silence of the mind' is something that has been around for eons and I ran into it as a kid through my *mother's* explorations. She couldn't do it either.

My comments still stand. I do deep trance work in a way that I have developed my Self, which entails engaging in the otherrealms in interesting ways. I get the silence. It's a pass through point, one doesn't *stay* there or all creation and Being ceases. IN physical terms, the permanent experience of 'silent mind' is called catatonia and this doesn't go well. I know, I've nursed catatonic children. They all would have died without the external support of those with engaged minds. Anyone permanently in profound silent mind will also die, because "I need to eat" is a thought.

I really do get it. I just get that it's a pass through point, and when one comes out of it, NOT silence is the next bit. The NEXT bit is where all the space created by silent mind gets to express itself, because the irony of all this is, it's only ONE PART of the 'mind' that is silent in that space, the thin veneer of consciousness: other elements are buzzing like crazy and connecting in all sorts of brilliant ways with the *really* interesting realms that would be available *consciously* if individuals weren't so attached to their precious ideas about such things.

I'm not so attached to precious ideas. I live with a mind far more fluid that most I encounter, which frequently drives the others nuts. You might want to have a look at some of the things I've written regarding my experiences of multiple selves and sliding realms, so that *you* get an understanding of the individual you're writing to before assuming that I need elucidation on some point. I commented that I find the silence philosophy disinteresting- to then suggest I might want to be 'enlightened' about it (which is another loaded term in itself) is heteronomy: asking me would I care to engage in such a conversation is not.

This thread is a discussion regarding autonomy versus heteronomy, NOT yet another hijacking into a thread about 'silent mind'- I have noticed how often any thread that opens up new thought has the silent minders swooping in to stifle both the exploration AND the conversation. The continued existence of the Pub thread is due to my ability to rebut any philosophy of death fascination. Silent mind, taken to its ultimate expression of frequency, is a death of the creative expression and power: it is a WAY POINT, *NOT* a destination.

Those who know the Pub know this one makes both my fangs and horns gleam. If it is silent mind as a destination that you want to discuss, there is the spirituality thread to do it in and quite a few that would be happy to discuss it.

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 23:39
So talk to me about some of the favorite words- love, relationship, connection, light- through the lens of autonomy and sui generis. Show me the multiple lenses of the hologram in how these things operate within this framework. I would like to go deeper with all this. :)

Ok, Here goes…

My experience of Connection and No Mind - so far

One day in the play park six years ago, I suddenly realized that on some level I was communicating with a nearby tree. Or rather, the tree was communicating with me. A short time after, I found out I was pregnant, and I thought – so that was what the tree was telling me.

I hung out with the tree, and other trees throughout my pregnancy, enjoying the new connection.

A few years later this feeling of connection expanded and I found myself experiencing a connection with the wind, the sun, the sea, the sky, the rain…

I can only describe this experience as blissful. In fact, it was so overwhelming I honestly began to question my sanity.


I am beginning to suspect that the differences in expression with this are based on my lifelong awareness of being Other and the way those in the human realms experience these states.

I am going to express this from my Otherkind Self.

The states that you are describing here are not no mind, they are part of the experience of a Being that is connected to multiple expressions and streams of various 'realities' that are part of the evolution Signal that has been suppressed here in this current reality due to the lowering of the frequency. This state is a constant background state for all Otherkind. We do not experience it as an extraordinary state but rather like a background energetic interaction that is ceaseless. It is the human frequency stumbling across it in astonishment and the virus needing to couch it in mystical terms that has transformed a natural part of the frequency into an 'altered state'. It is also why the virus transformed this natural frequency state into base religions that involved focus on sex and food, feasting and orgying, to describe and express the natural richness of this frequency: it took the beautiful and turned it into the mundane and profane, which is what it does with all Otherkind expressions as a way to push this awareness out of the everyday and into the fringe elements of 'flaky hippydom' or 'new age wankery' or whatever. I'm utterly aware of this. I am *also* a Being that has constant interaction with the Otherrealms and have had since before birth. The state you describe is one I live in as a dual thread of Being. It sometimes makes me look really really weird, because this interaction is actually not silent, it's a stunning Song of energetic and awareness that is simply being sung on a level of awareness that most humans are utterly oblivious to.

You describe the tree communicating with you- this is not 'silent mind', this is the tree communicating with you. Just because energy doesn't stroll up and say 'why hello, lovely day, want to talk about life, the universe and everything?' doesn't mean profound and complex communication isn't going on. Human words are 'blah blah blah blah blah narrow frequency narrow frequency throw no pictures connect to nothing in the expanded realms' for an Otherkind- I've written elsewhere regarding my internal agitation at experiencing the vast majority as being able to 'throw' no pictures at all except a fuzzy and agitated 'white screen', which is one of the reasons I strangled down my ability to receive pictures as a child and used to go through crowds with my hands over my ears, trying to drown out the 'noise'. 'Silent mind' my nanna's ample butt. I've been around those practising 'silent mind' and have experienced it as little more than personal relief from the jangling human signal. They're still utterly deaf to anything else though.

This state you are describing is the beginning of the communication that goes on between the realms and in part is one of the skills involved with sliding between the realms. I'm not giving anything away in saying that, the virus has long tried to get through those and failed because it can't be faked- you either 'speak' it, which means connecting with it in a particular way, or you don't. It's a rich, ancient language that is virus free on a deep enough level. Perhaps now it can be understood that having it called 'silent' anything is irritating to an Otherkind.

All these human parameters expressed as 'truth' when they are nothing more than the heteronomy of species dominance. This is the same as the heteronomy of mammal dominance as a form of prejudice against those such as 'reptilian' or 'insectoid' forms. My Otherkind nature is secondary in this discussion to my diamond eyed dissection of the heteronomy in ALL its forms. Humans speak, live and operate from the perspective that their way of Being is supreme, absolute, the pinnacle of the expression of Life.

It really, really isn't. It's just ONE in a sea of infinite. The 'silent mind' concept is flawed in this regard because it makes both a boatload of assumptions and presents a perspective is Globalism. It simply is not.

In saying these things I am not suggesting that you are one of those individuals that have the heteronomy perspective intentionally or whatever; this is where the exploration has taken me. This is why I constantly orient the perspective *back to that of the Singularity* rather than anything else- some of the most exquisite *physically incarnate* Beings I have encountered are *insect like* and have no heartbeat, breath, sensation of body fluids moving about, no sensation of 'warm' or anything remotely like a mammal- and it's initially challenging to share the physical space with them because ALL the internal biomarkers of 'alive' disappear abruptly. Yet the nuance with which they experience Life is stunning and when I came back had me sobbing at the beauty of it all. My OWN, *personal* experiences of these things inform my perspective of the heteronomy as it is practiced here.

Thank you for your sharing of your experience. It has brought my own awareness to the surface of my skin this morning and I am entwined with that signal in a much deeper way, always blissful. :)

songsfortheotherkind
19th June 2012, 23:46
While looking up for a different thread, I found these Terence McKenna quotes I thought perhaps relevant to this one. I met Terence, and his books (I have Food of the Gods, True Hallucinations), writings, and spoken word rants were worthwhile to me in many areas, including the autonomy of one's consciousness and inalienable right to experiment on same.

http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/9243.Terence_McKenna

You met him? Tell me, did he have the 'Other' signal buried in there? I absolutely love these expressions and my Being feasted on them for my energetic breakfast: thank you so much for sharing these, they make my energy dance. :)

spiritguide
20th June 2012, 00:16
Autonomous is the cutting edge, the ability to be out front, to be an agent of change vs. reacting to it. IMO The unseen autonomy in the universe is the force that improves conditions naturally. We need only focus on our own autonomy, for it is when we achieve this that we realise that -isms are only barriers to that goal.

Fred Steeves
20th June 2012, 01:01
I'm not so attached to precious ideas. I live with a mind far more fluid that most I encounter, which frequently drives the others nuts. You might want to have a look at some of the things I've written regarding my experiences of multiple selves and sliding realms, so that *you* get an understanding of the individual you're writing to before assuming that I need elucidation on some point. I commented that I find the silence philosophy disinteresting- to then suggest I might want to be 'enlightened' about it (which is another loaded term in itself) is heteronomy: asking me would I care to engage in such a conversation is not.


Hey, Songsy...Care to take that one back?

mountain_jim
20th June 2012, 01:02
While looking up for a different thread, I found these Terence McKenna quotes I thought perhaps relevant to this one. I met Terence, and his books (I have Food of the Gods, True Hallucinations), writings, and spoken word rants were worthwhile to me in many areas, including the autonomy of one's consciousness and inalienable right to experiment on same.

http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/9243.Terence_McKenna

You met him? Tell me, did he have the 'Other' signal buried in there? I absolutely love these expressions and my Being feasted on them for my energetic breakfast: thank you so much for sharing these, they make my energy dance. :)

His signals were pretty 'Other' to me :)

His speech mannerisms and cadences are different from anyone else I have heard - you really should seek out some recordings of him talking to get a feel for that.

I met him at his Magic Maui Weekend event, 2/25/-27, 1994, -

Raving In the Light of the Third Millennium - Language About the Unspeakable

I was on the island visiting a friend (free place to stay saves alot there) and attended the one day lecture when I saw it advertised in the local paper. I understand the folks there for the whole event tripped with Terence on the Beach on some still-legal substance, but not certain of that.

Here is a link to Alien Dreamtime, a multi-media event (3 Raves, 2 Interregnums - states Terence) with Terence speaking (DMT experience and other stuff) and music by SpaceTime Continuum, Stephen Kent on didgeridoo, a performance in San Fran 2/93, a video I bought, perhaps when I bought his other books he signed for me after the talk.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2395498051948678069#

(I ccould not get the vid using google tags to appear right - below is first 10 minutes of a youtube upload of same.

Ru0W3x9EEDM

There is a DMT rap in here somewhere:



And it occurred to me, that these must be holographic viral projections from a non-atomous continuum ...

Carmen
20th June 2012, 02:19
Like I said, if a person has not experienced something directly and understood it, they do not 'know' and often 'assume'. I do not mean to pull this discussion off base,songs, but describing the silent mind as 'catatonic' is way off base. Where, clearmindedness and silent mind fit into this topic is that without autonomy, without Sui generis, silent mind is not possible. My silent mind is not bland and dull and dead, it is chock full of possibility, of energy, of passion, just waiting to fulfill my next creative endeavour. And that knowing is not just airy fairy new age stuff, it's the stuff of quantum physics, enfolded and unfolded universe, the stuff of the American Indian races who speak of the tonal and the nagual.

But, anyway it's your thread, I'll just go bugger off and play somewhere else.

Actually, I have one more thing to add as far as heteromney,( you know, that big word!) where we are dependant on outside authority. When we bring back our power and quit hanging off the words and knowing of others, there is a definite energy transfer back to us, we feel it, in the body and around us, and correspondingly, the ones that were 'feeding off' our power, lose it! They are disempowered by our lack of energy attention. Ones who are in their own Sui generis fill themselves with creative life force, spiritual energy, call it what you will. And, there is no separation of the material from the spiritual. It's all spiritual, whether you realise it or not.

Antagenet
20th June 2012, 03:46
I get the silence. It's a pass through point, one doesn't *stay* there or all creation and Being ceases.


Are you speaking for yourself or all of us? Maybe it's a pass through point for YOU but not for others. Perhaps you fall prey to the heteronomous urge
and need to be called on it. Your ideas are brilliant and you are a real word smith but I dont see you validating others realities, I dont see you reaching
out to affirm OTHERS autonomy. You come across as wanting to be right and ever better than ah those lower life forms, as you seem to feel so superior to..
the humans. I am sick of watching you trash others attempts at expressing what they go through with an arrogant attitude. I think what you are about is
living in a vacuum where your emotional impact on others is something you may not consider or care about.

another bob
20th June 2012, 04:06
For those who have not experienced the silence behind the mind (their own original nature), they may get confused and think that silent mind means no thoughts. If that were true, then rocks would be sages, eh. LOL! Awareness itself is the silence behind the mind, which has also been described as the light behind the mind. It is not an attainment, nor can it come and go depending on causes and conditions, or whether or not one believes themselves to be other than human and privvy to special capacities, frequencies, or signals. It is the fundamental basis. All arises and dissolves within it, and yet it cannot be characterized as either existent or non-existent, since it transcends dualities. It has nothing to do with thinking or not thinking (which are mere brain phenomena) -- abitrary, transient, and of no lasting significance except as modifications of consciousness. If I had to use one sentence only, I would say,"It is YOU!"

:yo:

Eram
20th June 2012, 07:30
Hi songsfortheotherkind,

The silence that you are referring to in the above reply to ljwheat is all about the silencing of the mind and has nothing to do with actually being silence in relation to communication with other human beings...

It could be enlightening :lol: for you to read this (http://www.successconsciousness.com/index_00001a.htm) so we all get to be on the same page about what it is that is discussed when we are talking about this silence.

Wakytweaky, I am fully cognizant of the concept that lj wheat was putting forward- the concept of 'silence of the mind' is something that has been around for eons and I ran into it as a kid through my *mother's* explorations. She couldn't do it either.

My comments still stand. I do deep trance work in a way that I have developed my Self, which entails engaging in the otherrealms in interesting ways. I get the silence. It's a pass through point, one doesn't *stay* there or all creation and Being ceases. IN physical terms, the permanent experience of 'silent mind' is called catatonia and this doesn't go well. I know, I've nursed catatonic children. They all would have died without the external support of those with engaged minds. Anyone permanently in profound silent mind will also die, because "I need to eat" is a thought.

I really do get it. I just get that it's a pass through point, and when one comes out of it, NOT silence is the next bit. The NEXT bit is where all the space created by silent mind gets to express itself, because the irony of all this is, it's only ONE PART of the 'mind' that is silent in that space, the thin veneer of consciousness: other elements are buzzing like crazy and connecting in all sorts of brilliant ways with the *really* interesting realms that would be available *consciously* if individuals weren't so attached to their precious ideas about such things.

I'm not so attached to precious ideas. I live with a mind far more fluid that most I encounter, which frequently drives the others nuts. You might want to have a look at some of the things I've written regarding my experiences of multiple selves and sliding realms, so that *you* get an understanding of the individual you're writing to before assuming that I need elucidation on some point. I commented that I find the silence philosophy disinteresting- to then suggest I might want to be 'enlightened' about it (which is another loaded term in itself) is heteronomy: asking me would I care to engage in such a conversation is not.

This thread is a discussion regarding autonomy versus heteronomy, NOT yet another hijacking into a thread about 'silent mind'- I have noticed how often any thread that opens up new thought has the silent minders swooping in to stifle both the exploration AND the conversation. The continued existence of the Pub thread is due to my ability to rebut any philosophy of death fascination. Silent mind, taken to its ultimate expression of frequency, is a death of the creative expression and power: it is a WAY POINT, *NOT* a destination.

Those who know the Pub know this one makes both my fangs and horns gleam. If it is silent mind as a destination that you want to discuss, there is the spirituality thread to do it in and quite a few that would be happy to discuss it.

Hi songsfortheotherkind,

No insult or talking down intended from my part.
I'm sorry you seem to take it that way.

I was just pointing something out that is obvious to anyone who experienced the stilling of the mind.
No catatonia can be found there, quite the opposite to be true.

No Hijacking of the tread going on here as well from my observations.

I wish I could find a way to come together on this, but it feels to me that it would be a hard nut to crack.
Either way, I felt compelled to point this out to you and others, because there are people who will read this thread and might get wrong ideas about this subject.

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 07:52
/headtilt/ Why would you think I wanted you to bugger off? If you want to that's fine, I'm just wondering why you would conclude this.


My silent mind is not bland and dull and dead, it is chock full of possibility, of energy, of passion, just waiting to fulfill my next creative endeavour. And that knowing is not just airy fairy new age stuff, it's the stuff of quantum physics, enfolded and unfolded universe, the stuff of the American Indian races who speak of the tonal and the nagual.

I utterly resonate with this. I write about this constantly. I live in this space. I have never suggested that it WAS airy fairy new age stuff.


Actually, I have one more thing to add as far as heteromney,( you know, that big word!) where we are dependant on outside authority. When we bring back our power and quit hanging off the words and knowing of others, there is a definite energy transfer back to us, we feel it, in the body and around us, and correspondingly, the ones that were 'feeding off' our power, lose it! They are disempowered by our lack of energy attention. Ones who are in their own Sui generis fill themselves with creative life force, spiritual energy, call it what you will. And, there is no separation of the material from the spiritual. It's all spiritual, whether you realise it or not.

Yes, it's all spiritual. I experience this, it's always been my personal perspective. To me the evolution frequency is utterly spiritual and the reasons for taking back one's power- the starvation of the controllers- is one of the major reasons I'm passionate about autonomy.

Are you writing from the perspective that I don't experience these things? Because if you are, then I'm curious as to how you got that perception when I bang on about it so the degree that I annoy others with it.

If you want to explore and remedy the temporary mutual glitch in communication, I'm happy to do that. :)

Carmen
20th June 2012, 08:00
We do speak the same language you and I. I've just been rather confused the way you write about the silent mind. It seems to quite upset you and I find that confusing. It was such a relief to me when all my constant inner dialogue shut the f--k up so could get to the Real Stuff.

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 08:44
No insult or talking down intended from my part. I'm sorry you seem to take it that way.

None taken. This isn't me being snarky at all, it's me attempting to be clear about the particular subject. Autonomy is ridiculously easy to lose when certain language is used and I am endeavouring to point out the buried heteronomy in particular language. I am not an expert at it by any means- I live in a particular kind of mindspace and am fully aware that I can also inadvertently fall into a subtle element of it my Self, which is why I use triangulation, the multiple perspective. There is buried heteronomy in the language you used in the comment. I recognise that my comments regarding hijacking could be taken as snarky *and* my comments still stand: I have observed many threads that open up a discussion about unrelated topics be swallowed up by philosophical entanglement and convolution; frequently the 'silent/ no mind' platform is the vehicle used to achieve this.


I was just pointing something out that is obvious to anyone who experienced the stilling of the mind.

I have experienced the stilling of the mind, in various ways. *MY* experience of it is different. Is this possible to accept? Is it possible that 'stilling of the mind' is a very very different experience to different Beings? And if *this* is so, is it therefore possible that saying 'this is the way it is' or 'this is what it looks like' in a *globalising* fashion is actually an expression of heteronomy? Even if it IS unintended? Are these things possible? Because that is what I am actually exploring here, the blind spot that has been cultivated socially to how subtle yet powerful heteronomy is exercised towards one another on a *daily basis*.

I say again, it's NOT personal. It's the heteronomy I am looking at, not the individual. I have no interest in saying 'you are a twit for thinking that' because I rarely think it those terms and an individual would have to really bring it right to my door for me to even move into that space with them. I'm a social hacker, married to a brilliant geek, in a family of various kinds of hackers- with hackers, the focus is on the particular bug, not the computer; in my realm, this means I'm focused on the issue, not the individual- if I was focused on the individual I'd be running hetereonomy.


No catatonia can be found there, quite the opposite to be true.

Then it is something *other* than silence, so as a linguist I'm asking "what are you actually talking about here? Because from MY perspective you are speaking about an altered state of CONSCIOUSNESS, which I experience in all kinds of ways, none of which are silent as *I* know silence to be, in *my* realms. So if you're talking to an *Otherkind* they are going to have a brow furrowed and puzzled response to your expressing things this way."

From this point there are a number of options.

1. Ignore the differences that are being expressed. Continue on with the same explanation and perspective. Assume that those who have a different perspective just don't get what one is talking about and that they just need to hear the explanation repeatedly and they'll get it, or they simply aren't able to have the experience and therefore can be dismissed. This option can also include factoring in various levels of spiritual/intellectual superiority.

2. Consider the possibility that there is lurking heteronomy in the expression. Hold up the ideas to the hologram and ask some interesting questions about the whole subject, including 'does my expression of my perspective hold the idea that others cannot have different experiences and expressions of this subject? Are there more useful ways of describing this particular thing so that it becomes one possible experience in a wide spectrum of experience rather than THE experience?'

Look at the language. Look at the way the language is used. I have had nearly 50 years on this planet and look at the misunderstandings my concepts and expressions create because of the [personal interpretations that are being made about the *way* I'm saying things, yet *I* am striving to communicate as clearly as I can. I am constantly watched from the Otherrealms and many ask me 'why do you keep trying to do this?' because they cannot stand to engage in any way the convoluted language spoken by the dominant paradigm. I don't use my voice in those realms for that very reason. I know the language of those realms and if anyone is interested in the cross realms communication, that's what I speak. If there is no interest in that, then that's fair enough. I'll be totally ok with that. Until I have had it definitively stated to me that it isn't possible then I will continue.


No Hijacking of the tread going on here as well from my observations.

I readily see that it would have been different if I'd written 'I am speaking pre-emptively here, because I have seen this happen before, and I have no wish for this thread to be hijacked in the same way'. I see that my original phrasing can be taken personally although no such intention was there. I do keep reiterating 'it's not *personal*, it's not *personal*, but that doesn't seem to be effective, so I'll explore other ways: to me, the autonomy discussion is far more important than my own situation.


I wish I could find a way to come together on this, but it feels to me that it would be a hard nut to crack.

Some of the things I am is a linguist and a social hacker. I have no doubt at all that with the pieces on the table and us holding them up and asking interesting questions, anything can be transformed. :) Some individuals think I'm an idiot for having this perspective, but I get that.


Either way, I felt compelled to point this out to you and others, because there are people who will read this thread and might get wrong ideas about this subject.

The compulsion itself is curious. The concern that others might get the wrong idea about the subject is the foundation of external authority- why the concern? What will happen if others HAVE these ideas *you* think are wrong? What happens if their experience is utterly and diametrically different from yours- does this means *theirs* is 'wrong'? Or yours? IS there a 'wrong'? Or is there simply infinitely *different* experiences and the infinite possibility/autonomous paradigm needs a different language to fully express this way of Being?

Can you see what I'm doing? What my focus and intention is? Because I really really don't do this personally. My mind really isn't interested in engaging that way. I want what works in terms of undoing the heteronomy.

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 08:55
We do speak the same language you and I. I've just been rather confused the way you write about the silent mind. It seems to quite upset you and I find that confusing. It was such a relief to me when all my constant inner dialogue shut the f--k up so could get to the Real Stuff.

Fuzzy language makes anything that much more difficult and fuzzy language is what I was getting frustrated with. I'm looking for a language platform from which to start the exploration, and that is fraught enough, let alone getting into the concepts I *really* want to be exploring in company. Perhaps I need to be more text book like in my explanations of where the fuzzy is coming up for me and where the concepts are bothering me? But I've found that individuals also seem to have a problem with my talking *that* way too. It is a conundrum.

*grinning at you, sideways eyed* Maybe the kinesiologist was right and I'm simply too much of an anomoly here, that the films will be the best way to do things: just put the ideas out there the way they work *to me* and leave others to argue the details amongst themselves. I'm not entirely convinced that the struggle to communicate in this realm is one I'd be best giving up- this is part of the continued personal experiment.

I resonate with the inner dialogue shutting up- that was an expression of the virus that took me awhile to dissolve, and I went a different route with that one that led me to some true treasure when it came to getting a bead on some shneaky shneaky stuff the virus was doing. This was useful. It's not everyone's way and that's utterly perfect. It's not a p!ssing competition, that's for sure.

It's always, always about the evolution signal, as I experience it, for me.

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 09:23
I get the silence. It's a pass through point, one doesn't *stay* there or all creation and Being ceases.

Are you speaking for yourself or all of us? Maybe it's a pass through point for YOU but not for others.

There is absolutely that. And I repeatedly insert 'this is MY experience' into my writing. And I uphold the experience of others while reiterating 'for you, this is YOUR experience, not mine.


Perhaps you fall prey to the heteronomous urge and need to be called on it.

I know full well I can get entangled, I've repeatedly invited the triangulation. What you're currently doing isn't triangulation because you've pulled one sentence out of a whole post and suggested that I'm telling others how things are. I'm interested in what you would have considered appropriate here- do I need to preface every utterance and expression with 'in my perspective/experience'? Is there a more useful way to discuss concepts that are going to be challenging at the best of times while *not* having to preface every sentence with 'ime' (experience)? Do you have suggestions, or are you content to just abuse and judge me?



Your ideas are brilliant and you are a real word smith but I dont see you validating others realities,

I don't validate: validation is heteronomy in action. That would indicate that either I thought a) that I was superior to them and therefore had some kind of stamp of approval to bestow upon them- and there are others who are connected to me that would promptly kick my arse if I tried that one or b) that the individual was feeling uncertain or somehow in need of some kind of bolstering and I was just the individual to give them such, (although in truth that feels like it's heading back to a to me) or some other rubbishy and rationalising convolution that ultimately is about me feeling superior to others.


I dont see you reaching out to affirm OTHERS autonomy.

That's because an autonomous individual doesn't need anyone else's affirmation. Not relying on external validation or affirmation is part of autonomy. I don't do either. I constantly write that I uphold their experience and then point out the heteronomy in their expression of that experience. This is a really important distinction. I can make this distinction. Sometimes, it's true, I'll come across some expression in the main forum that is so mindbogglingly mired in the controller paradigm that I will let my dismissal express itself, and this is about the ridiculousness of the idea, not the individual. Sometimes the separation of the two may seem blurry if I'm not excruciatingly careful with my language: I have a far ranging vocabulary and using it seems to create the assumption that I am arrogant. It happens. I spent two decades making my speech as simple as possible to put others at their ease and it only worked to create massive distress in me and it didn't ease others at all, so I've happily resumed my way of expressing my Self.

That's part of *my* autonomy.


You come across as wanting to be right and ever better than ah those lower life forms, as you seem to feel so superior to.. the humans. I am sick of watching you trash others attempts at expressing what they go through with an arrogant attitude. I think what you are about is living in a vacuum where your emotional impact on others is something you may not consider or care about.

This is entirely subjective and expressed as an absolute. I'm not sure what your purpose and intention with it is- if you were intending to simply express your opinion, then you have expressed it clearly. If you were expecting me to leap to my defense, *shrugs*. This does not in any way imply agreement on my part with your analysis, it's simply a disinterest in defense. If you wanted to engage me in a discussion, a different way of phrasing this might have been more useful; as it is, it's just heteronomy to me and I get how that works.

f you actually *do* want to discuss your subjective experience of me, is there a way you can frame your concerns so that I actually have something to constructively and co-creatively respond to? Your current method appears to me to be a crude attempt to emotionally trigger me into self defense, which isn't something I engage in.

modwiz
20th June 2012, 09:26
Songs, I do believe your attempts might meet less initial resistance if there were a few more examples of how the autonomous concept works in the highest courts. I'm not sure if that is possible but the self interest would lower some defenses. The enormity of your undertaking in a written format is complicated by the format. This subject would be challenging in a living room setting, in real time with body English and eye cues available.

The lack of autonomy as a concept and the deep programming of heteronomy make using a vested interest like the legal system a way to get people emotionally enrolled in the discussion. The current intellectual tack only will immediately become embroiled in emotional clouding because emotional approach to living is how most proceed. Even the coolest amongst us are still able to get tripped up now and again.

The written format does have the advantage of a record of what one puts out into the discussion. Verbal discussions are often rife with conversational amnesia.

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 09:27
I'm not so attached to precious ideas. I live with a mind far more fluid that most I encounter, which frequently drives the others nuts. You might want to have a look at some of the things I've written regarding my experiences of multiple selves and sliding realms, so that *you* get an understanding of the individual you're writing to before assuming that I need elucidation on some point. I commented that I find the silence philosophy disinteresting- to then suggest I might want to be 'enlightened' about it (which is another loaded term in itself) is heteronomy: asking me would I care to engage in such a conversation is not.


Hey, Songsy...Care to take that one back?

Hey Fred, care to elucidate as to what you're looking at/ what your point is? I am genuinely not sure what you're seeing.

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 09:33
Songs, I do believe your attempts might meet less initial resistance if there were a few more examples of how the autonomous concept works in the highest courts. I'm not sure if that is possible but the self interest would lower some defenses. The enormity of your undertaking in a written format is complicated by the format. This subject would be challenging in a living room setting, in real time with body English and eye cues available.

The lack of autonomy as a concept and the deep programming of heteronomy make using a vested interest like the legal system a way to get people emotionally enrolled in the discussion. The current intellectual tack only will immediately become embroiled in emotional clouding because emotional approach to living is how most proceed. Even the coolest amongst us are still able to get tripped up now and again.

The written format does have the advantage of a record of what one puts out into the discussion. Verbal discussions are often rife with conversational amnesia.

This is precisely what has been occurring to me this evening as I have been sitting here considering things. You are right- it's much easier to demonstrate concepts in the neutral rather than by trying to demonstrate things in real time with the language. I forget that others may not be as comfortable or familiar with self hacking as what I am to the degree that I do it: as I described in my recounting of my B12 experience, I do do things that could be interpreted as pretty harrowing in order to get the information I want. A bit of the Bene Gesserit, perhaps...

Thanks for the triangulation, it was synchronous. *grins across at you from the edge of the map, pointing out to the dark places* There's my territory- fortunately I seem to be ok with falling over cliffs and into bogs.

Fred Steeves
20th June 2012, 10:46
I'm not so attached to precious ideas. I live with a mind far more fluid that most I encounter, which frequently drives the others nuts. You might want to have a look at some of the things I've written regarding my experiences of multiple selves and sliding realms, so that *you* get an understanding of the individual you're writing to before assuming that I need elucidation on some point. I commented that I find the silence philosophy disinteresting- to then suggest I might want to be 'enlightened' about it (which is another loaded term in itself) is heteronomy: asking me would I care to engage in such a conversation is not.


Hey, Songsy...Care to take that one back?

Hey Fred, care to elucidate as to what you're looking at/ what your point is? I am genuinely not sure what you're seeing.

Oh, sorry Songs. I found your statement there to be arrogant and condescending, and was trying to point that out without having to say so.:whistle:

Cheers,
Fred

Mad Hatter
20th June 2012, 11:36
Mad Hatter dons his lateral cap for a bit of a tease,

Hmm...


If that were true, then rocks would be sages, eh.

IIRC an experiment (apparently repeatable) shows that life can be brought forth from the core of rocks (in this case granite) and is not all life concious to some degree or other.

So the rock has two neurons but you got a couple of billion, now let's factor in some of that fourth dimensional stuff (time)...

You get a hundred years if your lucky but the rock gets what? 13 Billion and counting!!

Tortoise vs hare anyone? Gotta love those assumptions. ;)

'Here I sit, the mountain and I
Until only the mountain remains'
Li Po

So what was that about sages again...

Please return to normal programming. :p

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 11:40
I'm not so attached to precious ideas. I live with a mind far more fluid that most I encounter, which frequently drives the others nuts. You might want to have a look at some of the things I've written regarding my experiences of multiple selves and sliding realms, so that *you* get an understanding of the individual you're writing to before assuming that I need elucidation on some point. I commented that I find the silence philosophy disinteresting- to then suggest I might want to be 'enlightened' about it (which is another loaded term in itself) is heteronomy: asking me would I care to engage in such a conversation is not.


Hey, Songsy...Care to take that one back?

Hey Fred, care to elucidate as to what you're looking at/ what your point is? I am genuinely not sure what you're seeing.

Oh, sorry Songs. I found your statement there to be arrogant and condescending, and was trying to point that out without having to say so.:whistle: Cheers, Fred

Oh, ok- subjectivity embedded judgementalism. There's as many subjective perspectives as there are individuals. Given that you've said this as a statement, I take it that you are simply wanting to express your opinion? In that case, intention achieved, although that does surprise me as I thought you had a different approach to communication- I hadn't experienced you as someone who was into making such assumptions and statements.

mountain_jim
20th June 2012, 12:46
The last page was a lot to take in with my morning first cup of coffee. And the blue jays are outside my window, pilfering the blueberries as I write.

(back from clapping at 'em)

Some of my earliest readings of influence were the Carlos Castenada books, and Don Juan's requirement that one must Stop the Internal Dialogue (as mentioned already in thread) to get past the limitations and restrictions of ego and a constricted view of reality and possibility.

I think those participating in this thread are expressing aspects of this from many methods, perspectives, and experiences, hopefully we can understand and encourage this diversity and still move onward productively toward's identifying and rooting out the embedded heteronomy control programming, an effort I appreciate, where it really appears to arise.

:)

ljwheat
20th June 2012, 13:25
Since this is a public forum, and weather or not--- I be totally clueless-- is not my quest or direction in posting my quarry at your feet, feed back or validation in how I fit in all this word play has left me in shambles in my attempt to show you my little part of the world I see into,-- I don’t like getting slapped around with words I don’t fully understand. Makes me feel stupid and deflamed.

I guess I’m like the aliens in the movie “Galaxy Quest” when Tim Allen as the Captain was told to explain it to the builders of your now captured space ship what a TV show is---" explain it to him as you would a little child. "

My hole attempt here at Avalon is to clarify in my, being what the hells going on-- in this 3D playground-- who has the right words, the real words,-- shell shock from words boggles my mind to no end, after finding out that 90 % of words can have other meanings like rocks people hide behind when brushing someone off. “lie’s” true foundational words seem to be in short supply. Here is a story I shared on my own thread “Who is it” at the age of 2 yrs. I had a experience, and at that age didn’t have all this mumbo jumbo word play, legal courts of words and concepts, I was two. Please remember that. EGO less.

So here we go.
My earliest encounter with (silent watcher) insert any label your comfortable with, as what I felt was not a definition or words.

I became in an instant the feeling -- was complete -- all knowing.-- Define less -- at the crisp age of 2 = 2 - ½ yrs of age before, indoctrination, domestication, pet slave to consumerism, forced vaccinated, coursed induced monkey see monkey do society.

Two older brothers 7 yrs older than I. Mother sick all the time self imposed sympathy seeker. Dad works 8 to 5 factory worker, living on a small vegetable truck farm 5 Acer strip of land. Veggie stand at road side for extra cash.

Pretty much left to my own devices no one wanted me around just to young for the families well established life style’s when I came along. Except for my best friend “BOOTS” collie dog. "We did everything together."

One day my brother’s at school, mom sick in bed, dad at work, Me and my friend decided to go to the back of the property were the tree line started. This is were there was a short path back to the sand pits. An area filled with sand doon’s and several natural ponds, spring fed.

The fields were freshly plowed on a sunny spring day, off to the sand ponds with my friend “BOOTS” I’m really not sure how long we were back there playing in the water, but at one spot along the bank squatting down watching some tad pole’s.

I reached down and scooped one up in a little pool of water in my little hand it was small in small hands.

Anyway I started to feel it moving in my hand, and feeling it suck in water to breath. I turned it over and could see threw the transparent belly skin its little tinny heart beating, and its stomach and lower intestines,-- flipping its tail, and righting itself, I was looking into its tinny eye’s --- at that moment-- everything-- in my little world stopped --noises,-- thinking --(not much at that age)-- I was aware of myself holding myself-- close enough to see me looking down at myself --as a tad pole,-- and the tad pole looking at-- and holding its self all at the same moment in time,-- I turned and looked at “Boots” and I was looking at me holding a tad pole looking at me from “Boots”eyes.

Standing up seeing my self stand up from two different angles. WOW self seeing self, seeing self. all at the same moment seperit and as all oneself.

Then out of the sky there came the sound of a swish at the same time lighting pain on the back side of my little leg’s.

Mom noticing I was no were to be found went looking and saw a pair of little shoe prints next to four paw prints leading towards the back of the property in the freshly plowed field. Pausing long enough to rip a branch off a weeping willow tree, that definition is correct i might add. Switched me all the way back to the house.

Now that I think back on it, why didn’t “boots” worn me my mother was approaching. Was “Boots” caught up in the same out of space time awareness as me and the tad pole, totally mesmerized? Till impacted LOL.

Anyway that was my earliest encounter with well YOU try and put a name on it, I’m still trying, the feeling into and the feeling looking back into myself from myself as a tad pole and as a dog. Twilight Zone stuff right?

And in the 50’s and 60’s you didn’t talk about stuff like that, at least I didn’t. -dont speak unless spoken too and all that plus my vocabulary wasn't much a 2.

So I know first hand-- that-- I am everything,- in everything,- being everything all at the same time. There are no words as it was a feeling and seeing omnipresent plural-- like falling,--- no more like moving into or on itself-- expanding-- no sense of boundary’s-- I didn’t know these terms back then and can only apply them now in retrospect.

Reliving that few moments, I have to let go of all the crap of this world and its endless noise. But when it pops and I enter that silent feeling zone. My head rushes out of me, that sense of falling starts to happen and my analytical mind ego pulls me back more offen than i want.

This is why I joined Avalon and started so many treads pointing at this --- this -- I don’t know-- wind --I become --that can move in all directions at once, feel everything at once, know everything at once. Words run from this --feeling-- or becoming when it begins to happen. And am left empty handed yet again.

I was the see’er, No I mean I am Seeing, always have and will. I am there --and yet in the world. Koo koo stuff right? John xxx

onawah
20th June 2012, 15:47
Speaking of Don Juan, I remember something from one of Castenada's books where he brought up some point to Don Juan from an Eastern (perhaps Buddhist, though I don't recall) point of view, and Don Juan basically said that that viewpoint was based in the Tonal, not the Nagual, and therefore was not useful to him as a warrior.

I think it might be useful in this discussion to acknowledge the differences in spiritual perspectives between the Eastern approach and the approach of the more indigenous shamans of the West, who seek not to escape the material realm so much as to explore the many realms that it connects with.

I think it is useful to have an understanding of all those different perspectives and acknowledge that they all have their uses (even including the Tonal or heteronomy, which I think are similar concepts.)

The goal of the Eastern approach to spirituality is dissolving the illusion of separation between the Atman and Braman, or in Buddhist terms, the merging of the self with Buddha, or the attainment of Nirvana. To achieve that state, it is generally said, takes countless lifetimes, though one may experience it also to varying degrees as one travels that path to final dissolution.
Other realms may be visited along the way, but the goal is to attain a state of Oneness so absolute that all materiality and thought of separation is dissolved in it, and the concept of one's separateness is absorbed into the state of Oneness with All.

While Don Juan and shamans and mystics who follow the more indigenous paths apparently focus more on exploring the many other realms of Being that we aren't normally aware of which parallel our own reality, and refining their power, integrity and strengths through experiencing and interacting with those realms, and bringing those strengths back with them to this one.

The journey itself is more the goal, and gaining more individual autonomy, integrity and the power and freedom to explore those realms is paramount.
If they think there is some final end to that journey, I have not heard of it.
But I think they trouble themselves less with what that "finish line" might be, as it might be more of a distraction than anything until it is actually in sight.

They may use ayahuasca or other mind altering plants to learn how to get into those realms, but with the understanding that they are not hallucinating those realms; the substances are just helpful in learning how to find them and to find allies who can help in their exploration.
Focusing the mind or meditation is also a tool used in that pursuit.

Eastern philosophies and practices seem very different from the more indigenous and shamanic, but in the successful practice of each, many of the same goals are achieved.
There is evidence that shamans and yogis both are able to not only find inner peace, achieve longevity, etc. but also do seemingly miraculous things such as levitate, teleport, shapeshift, read minds, project thoughts, heal themselves and others and so on...

Of course, much less is known about what the shamans might have achieved as they progressed, because of the Western world's incursions into their geographical domains and because they seem to have kept themselves more apart from the cultures they sprang from.

The blending of the Eastern philosophies with the cultures of their homelands probably have led to more opportunities for heteronomy to water down the core teachings, but that core message has also always been about freedom and autonomy, I believe.

I think it is a mistake to imagine that one is superior to another, however, and is much more productive to explore their similarities.

mountain_jim
20th June 2012, 16:06
views from a modern, western, physicist Shaman (as seen from Icke's headlines page today)


I got my degree in Nuclear Physics... and I like to say - if they trusted me with plutonium, then why not LSD?

LFHRwwYTFh0

songsfortheotherkind
20th June 2012, 16:29
to get past the limitations and restrictions of ego and a constricted view of reality and possibility.

I have a different perspective and experience of the word 'ego'. I personally experience a difference conceptually between what I call the virus mind (which I personally feel is the element of 'ego' that individuals are discussing) and that which has been labelled the 'ego', which to me is the necessary psychological interface between Self and the rest of the universe. Thus, I find the experience and interface of 'ego' useful, rather than something that needs to be overcome or done away with. Because of these perceptual and experiential differences, I find it difficult to create a mutual platform from which to explore these subjects.


I think those participating in this thread are expressing aspects of this from many methods, perspectives, and experiences, hopefully we can understand and encourage this diversity and still move onward productively toward's identifying and rooting out the embedded heteronomy control programming, an effort I appreciate, where it really appears to arise. :)

IN any creative endeavour that brings together many individuals from various areas of expertise or experience, one of the first tasks is to create a baseline language from which the exploration and development can occur. This is what I am endeavouring to engage in, although modwiz has suggested useful alternatives to doing that the more difficult- and possibly confrontive- way. :) I agree that the potential in terms of moving the virus/heteronomy dissolving skills forward is huge. It makes me bouncy even thinking about it. :)

mountain_jim
20th June 2012, 16:54
'Ego' is a difficult term usage-wise as it has so many indefinite versions of its usage, I agree.

I have sensed within me a conflict between my body and other aspects of me that I would not necessarily identify with virus mind, based on my understanding of your usage of that term.

(What I think is happening is) my body-consciousness (hard to define that too) has appeared to try and limit my ability to astral project and establish an awareness point of view temporarily independent of my body. My body seems to not like the possibility of this loss of 'control'. Something fearful shuts down the Kundalini, or finds some physical area to obstruct, when this is in process of occuring. (Bilocation appears not to trouble this area in the same way, though)

I was referring to this, plus any general aspects of emotion-based Fear, as well as the programmed-in 'virus mind' , as all being the 'ego' above as causing the limitations and restrictions to other aspects of awareness. If other aspects of the self-directing and self-determining Self are part of the definition of ego, then I agree with you I need a different term for what I was pointing to...

Carmen
20th June 2012, 19:40
:mod:I see what you are saying Songs, with reference to the ego. From my perspective the ego is our interface with this material, bodily realm and is most necessary. Also, from my learning, it's when the ego is disconnected from the spiritual guidance and knowing of our deeper self and is 'altered', 'conditioned', mind controlled by its limited conditioning of this controlled matrix. The ego is meant to be partnered, twinned, by the deeper part of ourselves, not disconnected and out of control. In my journey it was when I realised my 'altered' ego would rather see me dead than give in to a greater knowing. That's when I took control of it. I must say, I think it was relieved! It thought it would die but it only got intergrated!

another bob
20th June 2012, 23:07
From the vantage point of the silence behind the mind – pure awareness -- one can realize the insubstantiality of one's transient self-images. When they are seen through and recognized for what they are – cases of mistaken identity -- they tend to become obsolete, and what remains is a love that has no boundary or self-limitation.

Such love is our natural state, prior to the charades of conflicted incarnation. It is our primordial essence, and ever-present, though usually hidden beneath the conditional layers of neurotic personality that we consider “normal” in this time and place.

Aligning with this perspective both inspires and makes possible true transformation in the way we live and act in the human world, and frees us from the heavy burden of fear and doubt that clouds the usual vision. The fist at the heart opens and life breathes.

When this true nature, or essence, is first recognized as one’s prior identity in moments of genuine awakening, there is an enormous sense of ecstatic emotional relief, but typically one soon is drawn back into the conflicted egoic state by the weight of accumulated habit energy. Nevertheless, this glimpse creates the space and faith for further liberation to proceed, and thus begins the process of real cultivation.

This process generally involves systematically seeing through and discarding all within one’s own being that is not in congruence with the original recognition, such as hatred, greed, envy, and arrogance. It’s a process of embodiment, or full integration. As it evolves, a genuine concern for others replaces the selfish motive that previously characterized the individual, and true compassion becomes possible, as the natural state of unconditional love more and more shines through.

On the other hand, the habitual narcissism of the self-enamored personality cannot bear the light of such scrutiny, and will resist any change, sensing that such a transformation would supplant it from its power position, and so in fearful reactivity typically retreats and clings to familiar conditioned strategies of contrived reality that inevitably trace back to a socio-pathological root.

Furthermore, it serves little purpose to point this out to such a personality, since they will only respond to messages which confirm their particular complex, defensively rejecting all others as threats and insults. The mind so afflicted in its own elevation and survival, by its very nature, precludes any empathetic impulse or compassionate response-ability.

This is the mad child who constitutes the vast majority of the population here in this realm, and so if we are truly keen on authentic human progress, we need to start with our own self-absorbed craziness, the knot at our own hearts, rather than speculating about global transformation and fabricating evolutionary fantasies predicated on names and notions spawned from the very mind for which true empathy and compassion is yet a distant stranger. Ultimately, it must be seen that effective transformation can only be built on a foundation of real compassion, which is what true love is all about.

mountain_jim
20th June 2012, 23:57
When this true nature, or essence, is first recognized as one’s prior identity in moments of genuine awakening, there is an enormous sense of ecstatic emotional relief, but typically one soon is drawn back into the conflicted egoic state by the weight of accumulated habit energy. Nevertheless, this glimpse creates the space and faith for further liberation to proceed, and thus begins the process of real cultivation.



I am real familiar with this process, having gone through my most intense experiences, in what I have termed for myself aspects of the death > rebirth archetype more than once in this life.

However, I must confess I am not apparently as far along as Carmen for instance:



In my journey it was when I realised my 'altered' ego would rather see me dead than give in to a greater knowing. That's when I took control of it. I must say, I think it was relieved! It thought it would die but it only got intergrated!


as I can't claim to having fully taken 'control' or integrated the my higher and lower aspects of Self. I would not consider that the case while I still had fears, doubts, guilt, or aspects of possessiveness to acknowledge still existing in my life or being.

I would also be more successful at remote viewing, astral traveling, and other of the siddhi's I have touched upon, I suspect. And I am aware of the Eastern teachings POV regarding not chasing these emphemeri.

I also am aware that this current discussion does relate this thread with the Spirituality section of the forum, but then what subject wouldn't? :)

another bob
21st June 2012, 00:07
Hiya Jim!

Yes, it is all related.

As far as your confession, if we had cleaned up our act of all "fears, doubts, guilt, or aspects of possessiveness", then we'd be ready for the next curriculum, eh. It's why we keep coming back here (most of us anyway) -- there's still stuff that sticks, which thankfully shows us where our work is, and we're given plenty of tools and support for the job. It's only our reluctance to follow through that holds us back, and so we can examine that reluctance, and see what's at the root of it. Invariably, from what I've observed, it's a contraction at the heart, for which love is the only solvent.

Blessings!

songsfortheotherkind
21st June 2012, 01:26
'Ego' is a difficult term usage-wise as it has so many indefinite versions of its usage, I agree.

I have sensed within me a conflict between my body and other aspects of me that I would not necessarily identify with virus mind, based on my understanding of your usage of that term.

Then if you are amenable, I'd like to begin by exploring my perspective of why I experience this conflict as part of the mind virus.

When one holds a baby in one's arms, it is clear that there is no conflict within their body. As they grow, it's clear that they are *in* their body until they are frightened or trained out of it somehow. How does this happen? By the external influence of those around them. Conflict has as its roots a fundamental condition of opposition between two sttates- like magnets pushing against each other. This is not the natural state of a child. This has been demonstrated by the observation of children raised in native cultures that have a laid back approach to their children and their life; the more heavily invested in any particular paradigm- in native cultures, this tends towards heavy handed taboo/religious systems, external systems designed to create a specific kind of behaviour and thinking within the individual in such a way as to restrict, modulate, constrict in some way the individual's natural, free flowing state of Being.

As someone who both experienced this constriction and had a hacker's mind about it, I spent a lot of years plunged into the mind of the constriction and external authority, free falling through the space constantly on fire but with an unwavering eye on finding who or what was f*cking with me. I came to see the overmind directing these various systems of thinking that are fundamentally aimed at control and domination; always with the same agenda, to direct the natural, powerful energy of the individual towards some other place. This redirection was *never* a positive thing for the individual and resulted in a continual loss of autonomy and energy. This system is worldwide- it looks different in different places, sure, and sometimes it's hard to spot because it can be wearing the most benign face and make the most peaceful gestures, but the same purpose and intention is there- to divert the natural autonomy and individual's power to an external source. I have seen it so thoroughly now that I don't question its presence anymore- to my experience, it's a worldwide system that has at its core a system of energy and focus that very much has it's own purpose and intention. This is what I call the virus- because I understand the behaviours of viruses and parasites, I went investigating a raft of concepts to help me explore this mind system I was observing. What I observed fulfilled the description of both virus and parasite:

vi·rus  [vahy-ruhs]

noun, plural vi·rus·es.
1. an ultramicroscopic (20 to 300 nm in diameter), metabolically inert, infectious agent that replicates only within the cells of living hosts, mainly bacteria, plants, and animals: composed of an RNA or DNA core, a protein coat, and, in more complex types, a surrounding envelope.
2.Informal . a viral disease.
3. a corrupting influence on morals or the intellect; poison.
4.a segment of self-replicating code planted illegally in a computer program, often to damage or shut down a system or network

virus (vī'rəs)

Any of various extremely small, often disease-causing agents consisting of a particle (the virion ), containing a segment of RNA or DNA within a protein coat known as a capsid . Viruses are not technically considered living organisms because they are devoid of biological processes (such as metabolism and respiration) and cannot reproduce on their own but require a living cell (of a plant, animal, or bacterium) to make more viruses. Viruses reproduce first either by injecting their genetic material into the host cell or by fully entering the cell and shedding their protein coat. The genetic material may then be incorporated into the cell's own genome or remain in the cytoplasm. Eventually the viral genes instruct the cell to produce new viruses, which often cause the cell to die upon their exit. Rather than being primordial forms of life, viruses probably evolved from rogue pieces of cellular nucleic acids. The common cold, influenza, chickenpox, smallpox, measles, mumps, yellow fever, hemorrhagic fevers, and some cancers are among the diseases caused by viruses.

Computer Science A computer program that duplicates itself in a manner that is harmful to normal computer use. Most viruses work by attaching themselves to another program. The amount of damage varies; viruses may erase all data or do nothing but reproduce themselves.

par·a·site

[par-uh-sahyt]
noun
1. an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
2.a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.
3. (in ancient Greece) a person who received free meals in return for amusing or impudent conversation, flattering remarks, etc.
Origin:
1530–40; < Latin parasītus < Greek parásītos one who eats at another's table, orig. adj.: feeding beside, equivalent to para- para-1 + sît ( os ) grain, food + -os adj. suffix

parasite par·a·site (pār'ə-sīt')
n.

An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

In conjoined twins, the usually incomplete twin that derives its support from the more nearly normal fetus.

parasite (pār'ə-sīt') Pronunciation Key
An organism that lives on or in a different kind of organism (the host) from which it gets some or all of its nourishment. Parasites are generally harmful to their hosts, although the damage they do ranges widely from minor inconvenience to debilitating or fatal disease. ◇ A parasite that lives or feeds on the outer surface of the host's body, such as a louse, tick, or leech, is called an ectoparasite . Ectoparasites do not usually cause disease themselves although they are frequently a vector of disease, as in the case of ticks, which can transmit the organisms that cause such diseases as Rocky Mountain spotted fever and Lyme disease. ◇ A parasite that lives inside the body of its host is called an endoparasite . Endoparasites include organisms such as tapeworms, hookworms, and trypanosomes that live within the host's organs or tissues, as well as organisms such as sporozoans that invade the host's cells. See more at host.

host (hōst)

The larger of two organisms in a symbiotic relationship.

An organism or cell on or in which a parasite lives or feeds. ◇ A definitive host is an organism in which a parasite reaches sexual maturity. The anopheles mosquito is the definitive host for the malaria plasmodium because, while the mosquito is not adversely affected by the plasmodium's presence, it is the organism in which the plasmodium matures and reproduces. ◇ An intermediate host is an organism in which a parasite develops but does not attain sexual maturity. Humans and certain other vertebrates are the intermediate host of the malaria plasmodium. ◇ A paratenic host is an organism which may be required for the completion of a parasite's life cycle but in which no development of the parasite occurs. The unhatched eggs of nematodes are sometimes carried in a paratenic host such as a bird or rodent. When a predator eats the paratenic host, the eggs are ingested as well.

The recipient of a transplanted tissue or organ.

A computer containing data or programs that another computer can access by means of a network or modem.

From where I was hanging, out in the otherrealms, what I was observing was a vast, parasitic virus system, a powerful fusing of the elements of biological and computer analogies, that was designed to specifically interact and interfere with the sentient species on this planet. This clicked into place a language with which I could communicate concepts and experiences I had had since birth but had only had an energetic and telepathic language with which to communicate my experience- and I was in a world populated by telepathic deafness. It took the evolution of the computer world and language to truly find metaphors that could be understood.

There is an external system of control and manipulation that inserts itself, to a greater or lesser degree, through the instruction and transmission by the child's *outer world of caregivers*, into the child. The foundational purpose and intention of the virus- which is *sentient* to a degree in and of itself- is to replace the natural autonomy of the frequency of the evolution Consciousness that the child naturally carries with an external system of harvesting energy, which I have named the heteronomy- that which seeks to control and dominate the individual to the ultimate detriment of the individual. The virus has *it's own* agenda and intention, NONE of which are about the wellbeing of the host: how can it be, when the virus itself NEEDS the energy of the host in order to survive? This is the endoparasitic element of the virus, with sentient Beings as the target, for the specific purpose of diverting the enormous CREATIVE power of the fully expressed autonomy to it's OWN survival and dissemination.

Now, go back to the conflict that you first mentioned and look at it from my perspective: to me, the constriction of your natural ability is unnatural to your Being in itself, not part of the evolution Consciousness signal as you naturally would express it and therefore, *to me*, part of the expression and intention of the virus.

I am *not* here saying that the emergence of the virus is some kind of expression of 'evil' or any of the other concepts that religion is interested in pimping, that state of rigid duality, black and white: *to me*, the emergence of the entire system that created the virus in the first place is all ultimately part of the evolution signal its Self, because the evolution will *always* occur, regardless of how hard any individual or group is striving to prevent it: there's nothing going on here that 'shouldn't' be happening and at the same time, that doesn't mean that it's the *best option* either. Just as with all parasites and viruses, we have choices: we can create a symbiotic balance with it, in which we're never really well but aren't sick enough to stop being a host- religion, philosophy, government etc are ways that this sickening and draining symbiosis happens; we can be overwhelmed by the virus parasite and die, either spiritually or physically (and the former leads inevitably to the latter) OR we can use our spiritual/energetic immune system, get to know the symptoms of a virus incursion, pump our spiritual immune system to the max and dismiss the virus without nothing more than a mild temperature and a few cleansing glasses of superjuices. All viruses and parasites serve the evolution signal in that they challenge the immune and adaptive systems of the host with a view to either making these stronger, or discovering the weakness of the Being and exploiting it. So far, the collective has been trading autonomy for exploitation because of the perceived benefits of such exploitation, which in essence are nothing more than chemical tricks caused by the parasite itself, like toxoplasmosis chemically convincing the rat that the cat is the sexiest thing it's ever seen so that it will go and get eaten by the cat: all part of the parasite's plan and purpose, but not so great for the rat. Perhaps a more critical eye at the Great Green Head is in order, because at the foundation is a bunch of chemical and psychological contortions with a specific purpose and intention that is NOT positive to the host.

This is a glimpse into this world as seen by my mind. ANY preacher, no matter how cosily they are preaching, no matter how 'friendly' and 'helpful' the 'adjustment' they are attempting to assert might seem to be, no matter how 'spiritual' or 'enlightened' they may present themselves to be, ALL preachers are preaching nothing but the heteronomy: religion, philosophy, psychology, education, government: all are designed to force or entice the individual into giving away the thing of TRUE value, the creative power within them that is expressed in part as the individual's autonomy. That's what I look at, constantly: everything I experience is filtered through the overarching theme of 'is this something designed to siphon off my autonomy?'. I hold the lens of autonomy up to everything, like the stone in Spiderwick Chronicles: I got used to everything of the system looking like hideous toads underneath all the contortions and self serving and smiling manipulation disguised as 'helpfulness' or 'caring' or 'authority' or any of the myriads of other tactics the virus uses. For me personally, the bottom line is simple: if applied to its greatest expression, is this idea/concept/philosophy/platform just another fertile ground for the re-emergence of the heteronomy? Unless the expression is founded absolute in autonomy then the answer has always come back to me as 'yes', in which case everything halts there, my dragons at the gate, and the infected material cannot pass, no matter how precioussssssssssss it is to the host or how elaborate a rationalisation can be made for it.

Virus infected concepts only have two paths: in one, there are elements of the concept that can be resuscitated from the grip of the poison, detoxed, left to recover in a sunny spot in a comfy chair for awhile and then reintroduced to the signal; in the other, there's nothing but immune system response and natural dissolution, death and release of the energy back into the All to be recycled back as a less closed system form. There's no such thing as 'it's only a little bit infected'- try telling that to the Native Americans who died from blankets that were 'a little bit' infected by smallpox. As physical Beings who encounter viruses and parasites, we fundamentally grasp the nature of these things and we get that there's no such thing as healthy co-existence with a debilitating and draining parasite.

That's where I come from. I'm not here to make the lie more palatable, I'm here to call things what they are and reject the complex entangling- spiritual, physical, legal, psychological and energetic- that the virus creates. It's the system that has created the miasms and matrix we currently find our Selves in and for me personally, I've got waaaaaay better things to do, to create and to Be.



I was referring to this, plus any general aspects of emotion-based Fear, as well as the programmed-in 'virus mind' , as all being the 'ego' above as causing the limitations and restrictions to other aspects of awareness. If other aspects of the self-directing and self-determining Self are part of the definition of ego, then I agree with you I need a different term for what I was pointing to...

Now you know a bit more about how many pieces I hold in my head at one time regarding this issue: what I've written about are just a few of these elements, so when it's being discussed perhaps now my 'fnurgh, clunk' element can be seen as possibly something OTHER than others thinking I'm arrogant. *wolfish grin at you*

I need to go make breakfast now- this came off the top of my head when I woke up.

songsfortheotherkind
21st June 2012, 01:47
From the vantage point of the silence behind the mind – pure awareness -- one can realize the insubstantiality of one's transient self-images.

Is it possible to shift this from heteronomy to autonomy speech? As it is currently written there is no autonomy at all, but a great deal of preaching the heteronomy disguised as 'spiritual wisdom'. I am allergic to heteronomy in any form and choose not to engage with it at all, so I didn't fully read past the first sentence, I just zoxed the rest, knowing the hurdy gurdy tune. Then again, you may not actually be interested in engaging with me or the actual discussion that this thread was started about- autonomy as the answer to heteronomy- which would be understandable given the repeated refusal on your part to respect my own autonomy by insisting on bringing this heteronomous philosophy to the threads I create.

I see that. I'm calling it as I see it. Unless autonomy language is used, I'm not interested. You are a very smart man, you know what I'm talking about. I know you like to set things up so that you can demonstrate the wounded and misunderstood philosopher who is just trying to point out some grave error of thinking. You have been quite open about your opinion of me and my 'delusional state' and yet here you are again, preaching the heteronomy and managing to slide in a few pointed barbs against anyone whose autonomy does not match the markers presented. Why is that, I wonder? Am I that much of a threat to the virus? That's interesting and encouraging in itself.

I'm not perturbed. I know virus when I see it. Now the watchers get to see what you do when you're called out about it- are you going to insult and demean me again? Or go the other way, digging in deeper to the heteronomy, looking for support from others who see things the same way, which is just more heteronomy and can easily be seen to be so. You know the difference? I'm out here, on my own, not asking for homogeny of thought, not looking for agreement, not relying on the wisdom of 'masters' to substantiate my position: I'm me, just putting my Self out into the signal, my autonomy pointing to the element of the hologram I can see and saying 'this is what I've got, I'd love to co-create if there's any to be had out there'. The heteronomy writes dismissal of others, of 'correction' back to some 'proper' course, some preordained and correct way of seeing and doing things and is pointedly insulting and demeaning of anything *outside* these parameters, such as


The mind so afflicted in its own elevation and survival, by its very nature, precludes any empathetic impulse or compassionate response-ability.

which is loaded with judgement, superiority and focus on shaming the other into compliance with a particular set of behavioural parameters. Thanks- you demonstrated the heteronomy and virus in your own words far better than I could have.

Also in your own words, in my experience it is the heteronomy that is


the mad child who constitutes the vast majority of the population here in this realm, and so if we are truly keen on authentic human progress, we need to start with our own self-absorbed craziness, the knot at our own hearts

I couldn't have put it better. Care to demonstrate your own willingness to put your heteronomous madness aside?

Sebastion
21st June 2012, 03:20
...........no...........




i have been on this forum for awhile now, moving around the different areas and peeking in various windows. I am now moved to bring to the table a perspective that i am opening for discussion.

Those who know me know that i speak about a concept called sui generis: It's a term that i learned from my deep law studies and it basically means that one is unique, without peer, one's own jurisdiction and authority. In the terms of the law, it raises an individual above every act, statute and external authority on the planet, but that aspect requires some discussion and isn't the focus of my current post. It's a really important concept.

What i am interested in discussing is the peculiar nature of most of the threads that are posted on this forum, with perhaps the exception of the alternative health thread. To this end, i'd like to introduce a concept: heteronomy.

here's a dictionary defnition:

Het`er`on´o`my
n. 1. Subordination or subjection to the law of another; political subjection of a community or state; - opposed to autonomy.

(note: There's a second definition here which defines the word according to kant, which is a heteronomous definition in itself, so i've ignored it)

webster's revised unabridged dictionary, published 1913 by c. & g. Merriam co.

Heteronomy
1. The state or condition of being ruled, governed, or under the sway of another, as in a military occupation.
2. The state or condition of being under the influence or domination, in a moral, spiritual, or similar sense, of another person, entity, force, etc. Cf. Autonomy. — heteronomous, adj.
See also: Government
the condition of being under the moral control of something or someone external; inability to be self-willing. — heteronymous, adj.
See also: Will
the condition of being under the rule or domination of another.
See also: Politics

-ologies & -isms. Copyright 2008 the gale group, inc. All rights reserved.

Source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/heteronomy

according to this definition, heteronomy is the opposite of autonomy- so here's a look at what autonomy means:

Au·ton·o·my pronunciation (ô-tn-m)
n. Pl. Au·ton·o·mies
1. The condition or quality of being autonomous; independence.
2.
A. Self-government or the right of self-government; self-determination.
B. Self-government with respect to local or internal affairs: Granted autonomy to a national minority.
3. A self-governing state, community, or group.
[greek autonomi, from autonomos, self-ruling; see autonomous.]

autonomy [ɔːˈtɒnəmɪ]
n pl -mies
1. (government, politics & diplomacy) the right or state of self-government, esp when limited
2. (government, politics & diplomacy) a state, community, or individual possessing autonomy
3. Freedom to determine one's own actions, behaviour, etc.
4. (philosophy) philosophy
a. The doctrine that the individual human will is or ought to be governed only by its own principles and laws see also categorical imperative
b. The state in which one's actions are autonomous
[from greek autonomia freedom to live by one's own laws; see autonomous]
autonomist n

collins english dictionary – complete and unabridged © harpercollins publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003

autonomy - from greek autos, "self," and nomos, "law," i.e. a person or unit that makes its own laws.

farlex trivia dictionary. © 2012 farlex, inc. All rights reserved.

Au·ton·o·mous pronunciation (ô-tn-ms)
adj.
1. not controlled by others or by outside forces; independent: An autonomous judiciary; an autonomous division of a corporate conglomerate.
2. independent in mind or judgment; self-directed.

sui generis encompasses all of the relevant concepts within these definitions, as well as an abundance more, which i'm not going to go into now or else this post will move beyond 'possibly epic' and into 'war and peace, redux'. What is of interest is the contrast between heteronomy- authority that comes from *external* to the self- and autonomy, the authority, direction and law that comes from within.

Much of the debate- and occasionally, discussion- that goes on in this forum revolves around the idea of discarding the current paradigm by replacing it with a different paradigm, as suggested by better authorities and purveyors of reality, so that the *new* paradigm will have a more solid footing. Better politicians. A shinier economy. Nicer religions.

It seems to me that almost all the posts made in this forum fall into the category of encouraging nothing more than a different form of heteronomy: Here is an authority! No, here is the authority, with impressive credentials and a pointy stick to point at the points with! No, you're all wrong, the true authority is this guy over here - and then the noise ensues, which is nothing more than the different brands of heteronomy arm wrestling with themselves while the mind virus laughs hugely in the back ground at the whole debacle, knowing that the individuals concerned are all still firmly stuck in the tarpits.

Heteronomy will never, ever be user friendly, because the user isn't engaged in the process of their own life: They're engaged in the process of trading their autonomy for whatever bright beads and trinkets they're willing to settle for. Sometimes these beads and trinkets are elaborate psychological and intellectual constructs that can appear so excellently presented and persuasively presented as to surely be spiritual wisdom of the highest order because it resonates, it creates an internal vibration that feels right.

There's only one problem: If one has been profoundly, down to the level of the genes, immersed in the deeply layered indoctrination to the heteronomy, then how can one trust one's responses if there's nothing to contrast with? There is very little autonomy discussed in this forum in a way that indicates that the writers or commenters themselves practice deep level autonomy or are comfortable with the infinitely singular expressions of such autonomy: What i observer instead are claims to autonomy that then degenerate into ideological battles, which amount to nothing more than an attempt to overlay one individual's autonomy with another's authority- which, by definition, is heteronomy. And is thus the foundation of all the current things about the paradigm that many say they are against.

Is it a case that autonomy is only ok as long as others agree with the version favored by any particular individual? Which is heteronomous in intent. When any individual advocates the election of *this* individual rather than *that* one, they are advocating heteronomy. The same goes with religious and spiritual perspectives- when there are those that do not feel the same way, or have a different perspective, the superior and condescending tones of the heteronomy emerges, or the 'gentle correction' or the not so gentle admonition; however it is couched, the heteronomy, the constant tracking back to submission to some kind of external authority, is the guiding force.

I am fully aware of the endless earnest and persuasive arguments of the heteronomy, particularly those that insist beings cannot be trusted to be their own authority: These indoctrinations begin before birth and continue to the moment of death, this constant bespelling of who and what we 'really' are, the 'sin' and 'untrustworthy' nature that beings on this planet are subject to and thus in need of a benevolent saviour of *some* kind or another, some grand external authority to tell the masses what is the correct thing to think, to do, to not do...

I'm aware of all of these arguments and i have never, ever found a single one that was not pimping, either overtly or covertly, the agenda of the heteronomy. Which, as the recent history of the majority species currently on this planet attests, creates nothing but closed systems that eventually collapse on themselves and simply arise again to recreate themselves in another, corruptive and polluted form. The desperate rhetoric of this time, this time ti will work, we'll have the *right* king, the *right* president, the *right* religion, the *better* economy, blah blah blah- and each time the answer comes in the negative because ultimately an externally governed group cannot spiritually evolve in their own singularity.

This may seem like obvious stuff, yet in relation to this forum it actually isn't- the general tone of the posts are heteronomy in one form or another, the general tone of the replies are the same: Where is the cutting edge evolution that has the actual power to truly bring the controllers and their agendas to their knees?

Apparently, it's buried beneath more rhetoric and heteronomy.

autonomy as a concept is one that has infinite depth, flavour, expression and intention to explore and consider. It is also a concept and practice that cannot be embraced while the other hand is firmly stuck to the teat of heteronomy. Autonomy has nothing whatsoever to do with homogeny of thought, nothing to do with 'agreement', nothing to do with compromise or any of the other things that the heteronomy has bleated is necessary for groups to get along together: Truly autonomous, sui generis beings are as interested in engaging with those concepts as they are in removing their left foot with a fork, for reasons that i'm not going to go into right now. Suffice to say, the practice of 'autonomy' is one where a constant interested eye is kept on any indicators of lurking heteronomy with a view to prompt removal.

So how interested are individuals in the prompt removal of the heteronomy that emerges here in teh forum? Are there any that truly believe modified heteronomy is the answer? The benevolent hand of those that consider themselves truly able to rule in a fair and considerate fashion? (for a price, of course). Is anyone who is truly interested in transformation rather than recycling going to suggest to me that behaving like an insane being (doing the same thing again and again while expecting a different result) is the best tool of the evolution there is?

I'm interested in what actually works, what is actually going to work in terms of true evolution of being. Which means some sacred cows of belief, thought, psychology, 'wisdom' and other bastions of the paradigm are going to have to be left on the roadside no matter how much the programming within screams not to. That's the nature of programming and it's been done very very well- protect and serve the virus at all costs. Viruses and parasites do that- they alter the behaviour of the hosts to serve the interests of the parasite rather than the best interests of the host.

http://tobiastenney.com/2010/06/toxoplasma/ you *really* think you're in control of your self? You really think there's no virus? Perhaps try this experiment: See what happens internally when you embrace and practice the idea of autonomy for all beings and watch what triggers inside of you.

How would this practice manifest in the forum? For a start the criticism of channeling would cease- the criticism of *any* perspective would cease, because the pervading platform of connection would be with the respect for the autonomy of all individuals, not just those that agree with the particular individual. There would be a sense of co-creation and exchange rather than going into any thread with the intention of 'correcting' any 'wrong' thinking, or to go in and call another poster, using various benign- and not so benign-words, a prime idiot for believing/thinking/saying/doing that. All such self righteous actions would cease, or be something that other individuals would question.

The superior tones of self importance regarding *any* belief or perspective would cease, as would the self congratulatory enclaves when a poster dares to express something that the rest find ridiculous. There would be a genuine focus on exploring the skills of communication rather than debate; there would be a genuine interest in and exploration of the differences between the practical expressions and skills of a group that is consciously cultivating autonomy of all beings. There would be an interest in expressing from "i" rather than globalising, which is an assumption that as it is for the individual expressing the opinion, it must also be so for everyone else. Autonomy says otherwise.

This is what interests me. I've always been interested in connecting with individuals who genuinely want to explore the deep level expression of sui generis autonomy rather than engaging in heteronomous onanism. This is still my interest and intention. I am underwhelmed by the current possibility of true evolution on a planetary scale if the tone of this forum- in which the focus itself is in part supposedly towards doing things on this planet in a more cohesive and intelligent way- is any indicator. Fortunately for me, i have never been interested in mass conversion or dependent on the idea that the future of the planet relies on *everyone* getting a clue. Still, the level of uninspiration is rather a bummer.

So rather than being bummed i thought i'd send out a flare and see what it lit up. I am looking for individuals that want to approach all things from the perspective of a sui generis, autonomous being, comfortable with the infinite possibility and expressions that arise from these, and who can tell the difference between acceptance of autonomy and having to participate in things unfun.

To me, this is where my personal evolution is heading. Does anyone else want to play in this realm?

another bob
21st June 2012, 03:40
Hiya Songs!

Your response to my post was as expected, so I'll just note how wonderful it is to participate in a forum that can accomodate such divergent views, and leave it at that.

Blessings!

Borden
21st June 2012, 04:56
Here's my experience. You can take it or leave it, and if anyone doesn't like the sound of it then they should be secure enough in their own autonomy to accept that I just see things differently to them. I am not preaching that you should see things my way. I'm expressing it because there are certain forms of imposition that I see as sugar coated poison and tyranny. They make me angry, and they make me angry because I know what it's like to feel that I must believe various purveyors of 'spiritual wisdom' even though my intuition tells me otherwise.

I'm not like that any more. I have evolved. I am aware that as unique as all of us are as individuals - there are commonalities. So I know that one and I know others have a similar experience. I know what it feels like to be cowed by people who talk in a certain way, and to feel that whether I like it or not I must listen. I get angry on behalf of the people who still feel that way, and who may be struggling to find their own autonomy in a sea of people telling them what they should believe. Far be it from me to tell them the nature of their autonomy, that would be missing the point somewhat, eh? But I will say that I believe they don't have to be cowed. So, as someone with a mind of his own I'll speak up. Not to convert anybody to anything ... but simply to demonstrate that I'm not cowed by any system of thought or belief, no matter how heavyweight it may look, no matter how old it is or how many followers and temples it has, no matter how 'knowing' it may seem in its presentation ... and no matter how it may insinuate or state that if you don't 'get' what it espouses you are wrong, unenlightened, and must inevitably get there in the end.

In my experience ... to my mind ... that STINKS of heteronomy and control.

What's hilarious to me is how those who preach obliteration of or rising above the ego, and a state of silent knowing - are so often those who cannot bear to hear about anything different. The inherent joke of this is ghastly. IN MY VIEW, it is not compassion that drives them ... it is not infinite 'love'. It is the same old heteronomy in sheep's clothing. IN MY VIEW, their ego is no less present. It has merely become a limp, atrophied, withered claw with which they scratch feebly at anything resembling a different attitude than theirs ... a different attitude in someone else's existence and experience!

They, like every other proponent of the mind-virus in whatever stage of elaboration and conceited delusion, will betray exactly the same obnoxious blindness. It's their way or the highway ... and yet their own conceits force them to cloak that sentiment in something else. It's a deception, and depressingly, I believe it's usually even a self-deception. But of course, that's how this whole mind-virus business works, isn't it.

"Let go of your ego and embrace the silence and utter compassion or you're a nasty narcissist!"

Anyone can believe whatever they want. I won't try to change that. They try and foist it on me though or impugn the fact that I see alternative ways of being for MYSELF ... and that's a different matter. It's transparently corrupt.

onawah
21st June 2012, 06:45
I think the only people who even approach an understanding of what the Buddha meant to demonstrate by his life can be summed up by the Zen saying, "If You Meet The Buddha On The Road, Kill Him!"
IMHO, only at the point when that is grasped, can real autonomy begin...
The rest is just like dry old concepts that have been stuck away in dusty boxes for two thousand years.

Carmen
21st June 2012, 07:19
When this true nature, or essence, is first recognized as one’s prior identity in moments of genuine awakening, there is an enormous sense of ecstatic emotional relief, but typically one soon is drawn back into the conflicted egoic state by the weight of accumulated habit energy. Nevertheless, this glimpse creates the space and faith for further liberation to proceed, and thus begins the process of real cultivation.



I am real familiar with this process, having gone through my most intense experiences, in what I have termed for myself aspects of the death > rebirth archetype more than once in this life.

However, I must confess I am not apparently as far along as Carmen for instance:



In my journey it was when I realised my 'altered' ego would rather see me dead than give in to a greater knowing. That's when I took control of it. I must say, I think it was relieved! It thought it would die but it only got intergrated!


as I can't claim to having fully taken 'control' or integrated the my higher and lower aspects of Self. I would not consider that the case while I still had fears, doubts, guilt, or aspects of possessiveness to acknowledge still existing in my life or being.

I would also be more successful at remote viewing, astral traveling, and other of the siddhi's I have touched upon, I suspect. And I am aware of the Eastern teachings POV regarding not chasing these emphemeri.

I also am aware that this current discussion does relate this thread with the Spirituality section of the forum, but then what subject wouldn't? :)


Whoa! Mountain Jim, I haven't taken complete control of my ego either, it's just more obedient LOL than it used to be. I don't allow fear and doubt to hold sway anymore, and I don't have various voices in my head anymore. I do hear a voice in answer to questions quite frequently. When that first happened I was really surprised cos it was unlike anything my personality could come up with. Guilt, I decided ages ago was a useless, energy sapping attitude. When I f--k up now I don't have a problem apologising. Interacting with the deeper self is humbling, and it can spot 'games' a mile off, especially mine.

And no, I don't consciously astral travel or leave my body. That's something I really, really want to do and have ordered a couple of second hand books on the subject that someone recommended here. I think we have been convinced through many lifetimes that we are useless sinners who will never be worthy to even think of approaching a godlike ideal. That's bull****, we all possess the animating life force, the intelligence, that which is termed God. It's just that if you are told something lifetime after lifetime and probably murdered to enforce the idea a few times, unworthyness becomes part of our very genes. It often, in my opinion, takes passion, determination and bit of 'mongrel' in us to recognise the number done on us and break out of the cultural tribe. It took, for me anyway, following the thread of fear to its root which was fear of death and saying to it "I don't care, I'd rather die that live this **** anymore". It's like calling fears ' bluff ' and it's never as bad as we think it's going to be, at least it wasn't for me.

I love this 'energy' this feeling of 'presense'. Its there when I put my attention on it. I live alone but I am never lonely. It me and 'it' and that's just great, it's blissful! I do have lots of family coming and going but I love my aloneness.

mountain_jim
21st June 2012, 12:08
Whoa! Mountain Jim, I haven't taken complete control of my ego either, it's just more obedient LOL than it used to be. I don't allow fear and doubt to hold sway anymore, and I don't have various voices in my head anymore. I do hear a voice in answer to questions quite frequently. When that first happened I was really surprised cos it was unlike anything my personality could come up with. Guilt, I decided ages ago was a useless, energy sapping attitude. When I f--k up now I don't have a problem apologising. Interacting with the deeper self is humbling, and it can spot 'games' a mile off, especially mine.

And no, I don't consciously astral travel or leave my body. That's something I really, really want to do and have ordered a couple of second hand books on the subject that someone recommended here. I think we have been convinced through many lifetimes that we are useless sinners who will never be worthy to even think of approaching a godlike ideal. That's bull****, we all possess the animating life force, the intelligence, that which is termed God. It's just that if you are told something lifetime after lifetime and probably murdered to enforce the idea a few times, unworthyness becomes part of our very genes. It often, in my opinion, takes passion, determination and bit of 'mongrel' in us to recognise the number done on us and break out of the cultural tribe. It took, for me anyway, following the thread of fear to its root which was fear of death and saying to it "I don't care, I'd rather die that live this **** anymore". It's like calling fears ' bluff ' and it's never as bad as we think it's going to be, at least it wasn't for me.

I love this 'energy' this feeling of 'presense'. Its there when I put my attention on it. I live alone but I am never lonely. It me and 'it' and that's just great, it's blissful! I do have lots of family coming and going but I love my aloneness.

I appreciate your clarification. :)

I also have identified the root of most if not all of my fears, internalized as energy obstructions at times, as stemming from the fear or death of personality. When I am successful at leaping off my energetic cliff, I experience freedom from that fear and it's intensely wonderful, but then eventually it or some aspect of it returns. My life has put me into some situations where I really believed I was about to die, and accepted that and let go of all resistance. The experienced 'death' and 'rebirth' results in me being in a bliss-connected state for weeks or even months, yet the experience wore off and I start the cycle again.

I also feel or hear my inner voice or intution directing me when I need to choose a path at a fork in the road - and it has saved my life more than once. In my youth, I consulted the I Ching often for help in connecting to this.

A work in progress am I.

I have travelling on the truck from Amazon now 2 books by Bullman recommended here, to see if I can move the ball on out-of-body experiences forward. (I finally ordered when the blue-jays in my blueberries convinced me to get some netting so that's on the truck also.)

mountain_jim
21st June 2012, 12:19
'Ego' is a difficult term usage-wise as it has so many indefinite versions of its usage, I agree.

I have sensed within me a conflict between my body and other aspects of me that I would not necessarily identify with virus mind, based on my understanding of your usage of that term.

Then if you are amenable, I'd like to begin by exploring my perspective of why I experience this conflict as part of the mind virus.

When one holds a baby in one's arms, it is clear that there is no conflict within their body. As they grow, it's clear that they are *in* their body until they are frightened or trained out of it somehow. How does this happen? By the external influence of those around them. Conflict has as its roots a fundamental condition of opposition between two sttates- like magnets pushing against each other. This is not the natural state of a child. This has been demonstrated by the observation of children raised in native cultures that have a laid back approach to their children and their life; the more heavily invested in any particular paradigm- in native cultures, this tends towards heavy handed taboo/religious systems, external systems designed to create a specific kind of behaviour and thinking within the individual in such a way as to restrict, modulate, constrict in some way the individual's natural, free flowing state of Being.

As someone who both experienced this constriction and had a hacker's mind about it, I spent a lot of years plunged into the mind of the constriction and external authority, free falling through the space constantly on fire but with an unwavering eye on finding who or what was f*cking with me. I came to see the overmind directing these various systems of thinking that are fundamentally aimed at control and domination; always with the same agenda, to direct the natural, powerful energy of the individual towards some other place. This redirection was *never* a positive thing for the individual and resulted in a continual loss of autonomy and energy. This system is worldwide- it looks different in different places, sure, and sometimes it's hard to spot because it can be wearing the most benign face and make the most peaceful gestures, but the same purpose and intention is there- to divert the natural autonomy and individual's power to an external source. I have seen it so thoroughly now that I don't question its presence anymore- to my experience, it's a worldwide system that has at its core a system of energy and focus that very much has it's own purpose and intention. This is what I call the virus- because I understand the behaviours of viruses and parasites, I went investigating a raft of concepts to help me explore this mind system I was observing. What I observed fulfilled the description of both virus and parasite:

....< snip>

Now you know a bit more about how many pieces I hold in my head at one time regarding this issue: what I've written about are just a few of these elements, so when it's being discussed perhaps now my 'fnurgh, clunk' element can be seen as possibly something OTHER than others thinking I'm arrogant. *wolfish grin at you*

I need to go make breakfast now- this came off the top of my head when I woke up.

It would take me all day to create and type that much text. :)

That's why I have to choose my spots, not get into this communication too deeply, for time spent here is not spent outside tending my garden, or being with the streams, meadows, and forest. It is in merging with Nature where I most easily drop the programming, the 'virus', or all the conceptual frameworks you are hacking, and see and feel the truth for me. It's why I moved here (and why I need to get work flowing again to keep the payments current, when I really won't be around the forum so much).

I think the main conflict I experience, as discussed with Carmen, is still my body's fear of death. Another part of me does not have the fear, know's better. I have resonated with your posts to the extent I have because of my own fight for autonomy and rooting out the bad programs (virus).

I was a software developer / programmer in my earlier days), the ones from society and religion were more easily dealth with for me than the ones from my mother, who tried to program within me a fear or anxiety about every possible thing in the world(s) going wrong all the time. The work to root those out continues as well.

My primary deprogramming aids were shamanic experiences using various aids for 'altered' states to see the programs running (I have been calling those programs ego, I see that's not been the best term.)

Now the primary aid in positive change is the energetic transformation that is ongoing after over 30 years of (occasionally) flowing Kundalini, recognizing and releasing obstructions, a relatively good diet, and drinking well or spring water for last 25 years.
carry on :)

songsfortheotherkind
21st June 2012, 12:31
It would take me all day to create and type that much text. :) That's why I have to choose my spots, not get into this too communication too deeply, for time spent here is not spent outside tending my garden, or being with streams, meadows, and forest. It is in merging with Nature where I most easily drop the programming, the 'virus', or all the conceptual frameworks you are hacking, and see and feel the truth for me. It's why I moved here (and why I need to get work flowing again to keep the payments current, when I really won't be around the forum so much)

I have previously posted images of the place where I live, so I fully get the connection with nature element. I don't expect others to write the way I do- I'm expressing my own stuff with a view to creating a similar language platform, that's all, so that when individuals ask 'what do you mean by 'blah' then I can point to something. The confusion is something I'm not into.

When I came to Avalon I was interested in exploring the level of cohesive platform that might be here and discovered that there really wasn't one, so I'm exploring that now. It's just this thing I do.

I like the idea of the meadows and streams and forest. I used to live entirely in the rainforest-18 years of staying out of the world- and energy has booted me out of that and into other things now. We're all in our own journey. It's cool on every level. :)

mountain_jim
21st June 2012, 12:35
And I just finished my first cup of morning coffee, fixing to go let the dogs out and walk the stream path with them now. Our schedules are so different. :)

songsfortheotherkind
21st June 2012, 12:39
And I just finished my first cup of morning coffee, fixing to go let the dogs out and walk the stream path with them now. Our schedules are so different. :)

And for me, I am fixing my bed as a snuggly nest, getting comfortable and ready to drop into writing space, with my headphones on listening either to inspiring music or binaural beats, because I love messing around with my own brainwaves just to see what I can get to. :D

Hope your day is beautiful.

songsfortheotherkind
21st June 2012, 13:33
I think the main conflict I experience, as discussed with Carmen, is still my body's fear of death. Another part of me does not have the fear, know's better.

I fully resonate with this conflict, as I encounter the same fear within my avatar: I have died twice as a child from suffocation from asthma and this resulted in a deep level fear that I am having to approach from many angles in an effort to dissolve. It's proving difficult- my avatar simply *knows* what it's like to die while struggling to breathe and everything is going dark. It wasn't peaceful. Neither was coming back. I also have experience with a mother who was able to create combat level fear of dying in me from an early age and I find that once I get to a certain depth within me I run into a wall of physical terror in my avatar that leaves me scratching my head in puzzlement as to what to do with it.

I have been looking at this closely and it's caused me to question some of the ideas I have regarding what I used to be able to do as a child: I thought I was able to astral travel but I am no longer sure that this is what I was doing. I'm wondering if I was using the same mechanism that I later used to explore multiplicity and sliding between realms; if this is so, it indicates that the physical trauma in me was established at such an early age I've never really been free of it. I know it's one of the reasons I opted to share this avatar, rather than fully do the incarnation/lose memory thing: if I could keep my Self out of the worst of the physical disconnect then I wouldn't lose my Self utterly. This had limited success. So I resonate with the situation you face.


I was a software developer / programmer in my earlier days), the ones from society and religion were more easily dealth with for me than the ones from my mother, who tried to program within me a fear or anxiety about every possible thing in the world(s) going wrong all the time. The work to root those out continues as well.

I have now taken the route of completely ignoring the noise (the things that I don't want) and focusing on reasserting the original blueprint I came in with. This is proving to be far more successful and positive than the previously seemingly never ending task of rooting out the 'negative' and so I'm pleased to have found a focus that is actually taking me more towards what it is that I want. I like elegant solutions. :)


My primary deprogramming aids were shamanic experiences using various states to see the programs running (I have been calling those programs ego, I see that's not been the best term.)

*nodding* I am big on the shamanic experiences, although I tend to trigger these with things like spirulina, chocolate and B12. :P I'm arranging my life at the moment so that I can do another Bene Gesserit self poisoning exercise so that I can have a go at bringing more light to the death fear code on my biology. I *have* tried evolving my Self through less brutal means and frankly, it seems too slow to me; I seem to prefer to burn away the dross than to chip at it slowly. :P That does get exhausting sometimes.


Now the primary aid in positive change is the energetic transformation that is ongoing after over 30 years of (occasionally) flowing Kundalini, recognizing and releasing obstructions, a relatively good diet, and drinking well or spring water for last 25 years.

I resonate with the diet and water focus; I am more and more living on superfood juices and smoothies loaded with chia, not really eating 'food' as such. My body just doesn't want the ordinary kind of food. I have been experimenting with amping my brain function with various nutrients and oils, which seems to be having interesting effects; what I really want is to amp my DMT levels again, my life gets really interesting when my system is naturally swimming in my natural DMT. I resonate also with the releasing obstructions; this is something I am on a daily quest to do in my own life.


carry on :)

*grinning* I don't know how not to. Size 52 mouth and all that...

Fred Steeves
21st June 2012, 13:44
Autonomy vs. Heteromy = Us vs. Them. The "in" group on high, looking down to the "out" group.
And so on...

I think Roger Waters had it nailed a long time ago: "Up and down, and in the end it's only round and round".

qfrvlFQStkg

Just my musings...

778 neighbour of some guy
21st June 2012, 14:11
here's my experience. You can take it or leave it, and if anyone doesn't like the sound of it then they should be secure enough in their own autonomy to accept that i just see things differently to them. I am not preaching that you should see things my way. I'm expressing it because there are certain forms of imposition that i see as sugar coated poison and tyranny. They make me angry, and they make me angry because i know what it's like to feel that i must believe various purveyors of 'spiritual wisdom' even though my intuition tells me otherwise.

I'm not like that any more. I have evolved. I am aware that as unique as all of us are as individuals - there are commonalities. So i know that one and i know others have a similar experience. I know what it feels like to be cowed by people who talk in a certain way, and to feel that whether i like it or not i must listen. I get angry on behalf of the people who still feel that way, and who may be struggling to find their own autonomy in a sea of people telling them what they should believe. Far be it from me to tell them the nature of their autonomy, that would be missing the point somewhat, eh? But i will say that i believe they don't have to be cowed. So, as someone with a mind of his own i'll speak up. Not to convert anybody to anything ... But simply to demonstrate that i'm not cowed by any system of thought or belief, no matter how heavyweight it may look, no matter how old it is or how many followers and temples it has, no matter how 'knowing' it may seem in its presentation ... And no matter how it may insinuate or state that if you don't 'get' what it espouses you are wrong, unenlightened, and must inevitably get there in the end.

In my experience ... To my mind ... That stinks of heteronomy and control.

What's hilarious to me is how those who preach obliteration of or rising above the ego, and a state of silent knowing - are so often those who cannot bear to hear about anything different. The inherent joke of this is ghastly. In my view, it is not compassion that drives them ... It is not infinite 'love'. It is the same old heteronomy in sheep's clothing. In my view, their ego is no less present. It has merely become a limp, atrophied, withered claw with which they scratch feebly at anything resembling a different attitude than theirs ... A different attitude in someone else's existence and experience!

They, like every other proponent of the mind-virus in whatever stage of elaboration and conceited delusion, will betray exactly the same obnoxious blindness. It's their way or the highway ... And yet their own conceits force them to cloak that sentiment in something else. It's a deception, and depressingly, i believe it's usually even a self-deception. But of course, that's how this whole mind-virus business works, isn't it.

"let go of your ego and embrace the silence and utter compassion or you're a nasty narcissist!"

anyone can believe whatever they want. I won't try to change that. They try and foist it on me though or impugn the fact that i see alternative ways of being for myself ... And that's a different matter. It's transparently corrupt.


greaaaaaaaaaaat

another bob
21st June 2012, 14:44
Just my musings...

"He's the virus!"

No, she's the virus!"

"No, they're the virus!"

"No, you're the virus!"

"But really, them's the virus!"

"No, the virus is the virus!"

"No, the only virus is you!"

"No, I'm no virus!"

"Yes you are."

"Not!"

"Am too!"

"I know you are, but what am I?"

"You're the virus!"

"No, you!

"No, you!"


http://i45.tinypic.com/2je20ia.jpg

Borden
21st June 2012, 15:09
If one is to attempt humour in one's struggle to deflect attention from certain behaviours, twist someone else's points, and cast their view into the arena of the absurd and therefore inconsequential ... one really needs to a) appreciate that people can see through that sort of thing, and b) be good at humour.

Mad Hatter
21st June 2012, 16:05
Mad Hatter dons his triangulation cap...

So the way I see it so far is we have a discussion going on with one side arguing from authority (heteronomy?) and the other arguing from autonomy (sui generis?).

ROFLMAO am I the only one that sees the delicious irony in that battle for control !?!!

Can I get anyone a side of oxymorons to go with that or would you just like some popcorn instead? :p

mountain_jim
21st June 2012, 16:52
Mad Hatter dons his triangulation cap...

So the way I see it so far is we have a discussion going on with one side arguing from authority (heteronomy?) and the other arguing from autonomy (sui generis?).

ROFLMAO am I the only one that sees the delicious irony in that battle for control !?!!

Can I get anyone a side of oxymorons to go with that or would you just like some popcorn instead? :p

Well I am not arguing any side :ranger:

just trying to interact and find where I and my experiences relate to all 'sides' of these viewpoints of the nature of things.

I have had issues with control systems and programming blockages. I have had joyous periods of union with the All that I don't really have words for. Silencing the Internal Dialog was a prelude to That.

But do pass the :popcorn:

:)

PurpleLama
21st June 2012, 17:00
Having an affection for the members all around, I am also waiting in the wings, wondering and watching.

NzlG28B-R8Y

another bob
21st June 2012, 17:00
Mad Hatter dons his triangulation cap...

So the way I see it so far is we have a discussion going on with one side arguing from authority (heteronomy?) and the other arguing from autonomy (sui generis?).

ROFLMAO am I the only one that sees the delicious irony in that battle for control !?!!

Can I get anyone a side of oxymorons to go with that or would you just like some popcorn instead? :p


What continues to amaze me is how much (unnecessary) conflict is generated when concepts are mistaken for reality.

:yo:

Borden
21st June 2012, 17:01
There can't be a battle for control where those who truly value autonomy are involved, Mad Hatter. That's where the irony is. Personally, I have no desire to control anyone's beliefs. The only battle there could be in that situation is for freedom from control.

Those who wish to control the thoughts of others do use such predictable tactics. You're supposed to see the irony, and you're supposed to see a battle. And then you're supposed to see an aftermath that leaves the heteronomy looking blameless, as though it didn't walk into a situation where it thought it could denigrate the intended purpose and assert its own while wearing plausible deniability. That's the point, mate.

Anyway. If you're offering, I'll have some chilled paradox tea with a spoonful of conundrum to go with my popcorn, thanks very much.

onawah
21st June 2012, 19:16
Hmmm....this sounds like a familiar debate.
I can only think to contribute to the discussion with a description of my own experience, again, as I did the last time.

The best thing that my “Buddhist years” provided me with was a natural setting, a Zen Center/commune in the mountains of Virginia.
I was free from all the distractions of survival in the city, and so was able to open to and merge with Nature.
And to a much more intimate and natural way of living and being with others in a natural, flowing communal setting.

When the Center failed and I was thrust back into survival mode in the city, I had to let go for awhile of my dream to go deeper and deeper into the direct experiencing of the Tao that I had fallen in love with on the mountain.
I had begun to think of myself as a Taoist more than a Buddhist, because the door to the essence of Beingness for me, I had begun to see, was through Nature and through the Divine Feminine, which to me at the time, was the Tao.
I wanted to connect more with Being, with the heart of Nature, which isn't about words and definitions, disciplines and practices and systems and lineages, but simply about joy and spontaneity, naturalness and the flow of Life, evolution and creativity.
Buddhism felt safe and tidy to me at the time I was involved with Buddhist groups, but I eventually realized it was still part of the hegemony, and I knew that was something I wanted to be free of as much as possible.
It is and has always been a very patriarchal system and therefore very unbalanced in my view, so it has become increasingly dry, sterile and homogenized seeming to me over the years.

When I discovered Castenada's books, a whole different chapter opened up for me in my exploration.
In Don Juan's world, women are not seen as inferior and are not forced into a mold that men designed for them.
We are seen as the more powerful gender and that was a revelation to me, though it was what I always felt, deep down.
Our uniqueness, our worth and our potency are acknowledged and honored, as is the power and potency and worth of Nature, of Creation.

The adventure and Mystery that is at the heart of the Shaman's approach is alive and juicy, since it is understood that Creation is still and always will be inventing and re-creating itself anew, and we each have our own unique place and way of evolving in that Mystery.
It is no wonder that more and more people (especially young people) are abandoning the “isms” and being drawn to that.
Mystery can never be defined, dissected or put in a box.
Though we may leave guideposts for each other, in its exploration each of us must find our own way,

songsfortheotherkind
21st June 2012, 21:35
Mad Hatter dons his triangulation cap...

So the way I see it so far is we have a discussion going on with one side arguing from authority (heteronomy?) and the other arguing from autonomy (sui generis?).

ROFLMAO am I the only one that sees the delicious irony in that battle for control !?!! Can I get anyone a side of oxymorons to go with that or would you just like some popcorn instead? :p

I don't argue, hatter- I present my perspective and if that's going to be 'argued', I walk away. What I'm doing on this thread is pointing to something I see, describe it as I see it, ask 'does anyone else want to explore this?' and create my Art. The heteronomy is something that likes to play all those games; I don't. If I experience something as an argument then I simply go and do something else, because my personal experience is that arguing is a boring and useless exercise, with the purpose and intention of persuading another to one's perspective. That's heteronomy in my experience and I'm not interested in its boring, constricting and death dealing tactics: getting caught in that is what appears in part to have kept the paradigm in place.

The issue with what happens that I've observed is that it becomes a situation where once the heteronomy starts it keeps bombing, attempting to derail the discussion with incursions specifically designed to derail the discussion. Whatever. If others want to keep thanking the heteronomy for its useful posts, that's entirely their choice and I'm not going to engage. I am frequently bemused by the suggestion of 'argument', because it leaves me a little puzzled as to what the expected 'proper' response is- tolerate abusers using invasive tactics? Ignore them? (the old stupidity adults spouted at me- 'ignore them and they'll go away'. No, actually, that is utter rubbish; they don't go away, they up their game.) These days, I do what I do regardless, and despite how it might be interpreted via the written word there's no argument going on- how can one argue anything? Blargh. I'm interested in the evolution, not getting trapped in the recursive, like Neo in the subway station. Yeah, right.

Delight
21st June 2012, 23:09
I know this is about "how much transformation is really wanted" and heteronomy as contrasted with autonomy, oxymorons arguing and stuff. I have read this thread as I do really appreciate transformation. And this is totally a nonsequiter but I felt compelled.....

Carlos Castaneda wrote very well. He also convinced people to follow certain practices that he insisted he practicised but did not. I heard a tale that is backed up if you research it. My friend who now has left the planet but actually was a part of his group at the end of Castaneda's interactions with groups devastated me once. At the time of the story, Castaneda was in the charge of some ladies who were called "the Witches" and there was much heteronomy for a version of behavior that was about autonomy so people were fooled.
My friend fell very uncomfortably onto the ground stumbling after this path carved by others.

At least that is how my friend saw it when I so glowingly was exhorting this all as the truth to learn from.

Only after he died (as opposed to taking his body elsewhere) from liver cancer (on heavy allopathic medicines at the end), was this "truth" sussed by some students who spied on him.

As far as I can see, I would rather be stupid in my own way than giving over to anyone who can write, talk and spell bind me in any fabulous manner. George Gurdjieff said that it is far wiser to be an authentic idiot than to have an elegant but false overlay. Frankly, I am in no position to know anything about any one else but I can at least see something about me.

And that is why I am so happy to let everyone else take themselves as seriously as they like or not....whatever anyone has or does ot have of truth....it will not effect my degree of stupidity at all. Equal opportunity to be idiots by claiming what we have not or wise by claiming nothing and just being whatever we really are at the moment is very wonderful and I am so sure we have that freedom.

Just had to spout off about Cataneda since I was disillusioned once upon a time. maggie

songsfortheotherkind
21st June 2012, 23:42
Autonomy vs. Heteromy = Us vs. Them. The "in" group on high, looking down to the "out" group. And so on...

Curious. I am struck by the perspective of 'healthy/unhealthy'- if differentiation is undesirable in terms if choosing particular signals, then the act of differentiating between an organic vegetable and a McDonald's burger is essentially an act of the organic being 'on high' and 'looking down' on the McDonalds. This would also extrapolate out to include every single issue that is mentioned in this forum- the 'on high' perspective of wanting chemtrail free skies 'versus' the existence and presence of the chemtrails themselves, as well as the perspective of those who feel they have the 'right' to spray these over the population. Given the perspective that you are demonstrating, I cannot see how one can choose anything at all, because any choice can be seen as the act of putting one's Self 'on high' from all those things that one has *not* chosen.

Ah, so again, we're back to the 'not choosing anything' realm, which isn't one I choose. Then again, I can see that perhaps the issue is the notion that the autonomy group is holding its Self 'on high' from heteronomy: here again, personal interpretation and suggestion hold sway. I speak my observation, singularity experience, perspective and Art regarding something that I have observed holding a curious grip on the collective and individual mind; what others do with my observations is entirely up to them. Someone doesn't like them? That's perfectly fine- I'm expressing, not demanding consensus or homogeny: those are things I've observed as being antithesis to autonomy and I'm not interested in them personally. It doesn't bother me if I'm not anyone's cup of tea- it does puzzle me when said individual comes marching into wherever I am to bang on about how I'm *not* their cup of tea and all the reasons why I'm not and how it would behoove me to do these things here, here an here in order to *become* their approved cup of tea and that they're going to move into my house and follow me around constantly talking at me until I *do* change to meet their standards.

0-o

I'm discussing autonomy in part by contrasting the shadows outside it. It's an artist's tool. There's no malice in it. So where has this idea that there's 'argument' or 'us vs them' come into it? Does this automatically arise when an individual as a boundary? That in itself is interesting, because who or what has issues with individuals having boundaries? Skin is a boundary. Huh. There are also issues with the physical embedded within the heteronomy's mantras. *To me*, it all makes sense and is interconnected at a greater source point. I'm going to keep exploring that and the heteronomy can do what it likes, although I do find it telling that part of what it does is keep invading spaces in order to exert its doctrines. Oddly enough, all dictatorships have done exactly the same thing. I don't have an interest in tolerating abusers, this came up in the Pub regarding this subject and unsurprisingly, involved the same individual. Go figure.

I know the recursive nature of the 'tolerate everything, have no boundaries' perspectives. I'm not interested in the slightest in exploring that which advocates doing nothing about anything because of blah blah blah. I'll say it again- I take responsibility for what I write. I take no responsibility for the way these things are interpreted and I'm not interested in soothing the heteronomy's feathers. If what I write about, what I explore, how I see things doesn't suit the individual then they can exercise their autonomy and *not engage with my Art*. There's no mystery in it: infinite possibility is going to generate some expressions that aren't everyone's cup of tea, such as country music. Does that mean those who don't enjoy country music are justified in laying siege to those who do, setting up picket lines, shouting slogans and abuse, deriding and denigrating those who simply like a different form of expression? Yet that's what happens all the time in a forum, when a simple 'ah, not my cup of tea' and strolling on with nary a snarky thought towards the individual that enjoys that sort of tea would make far more sense, at least to me.

*sips her psychedelic tea appreciatively* I also have fresh baked hash cookies here if anyone wants one...

http://i.qkme.me/35njyf.jpg

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 00:23
I know this is about "how much transformation is really wanted" and heteronomy as contrasted with autonomy, oxymorons arguing and stuff. I have read this thread as I do really appreciate transformation. And this is totally a nonsequiter but I felt compelled.....

I'm familiar with Castaneda not being anything much that he said he was, nor practicing what he wrote about. I'm not sure of the context of some of the other things you mention- was it Castaneda that died of liver cancer or your friend? What was this 'truth' that was sussed? How were you devastated?

I agree with you about fabulous overlays and Gurdjieff's comments. I know 'truth' as a concept that is put forth, I have never resonated with it as a platform- what 'truths' can be expressed within infinite possibility? There's singularity expression, that's it, as far as I see things, but that's *my* personal perspective and I know this doesn't fit with the views of all- I don't look for that. What I look for is others that want to explore the elements of the hologram *I* find my Self dancing in, who are also intrigued by the Art I am delighted by and who want to engage in co-creative dances with those elements. I'm not telling anyone else that *their* way isn't ok, it's simply that I'm not interested in that kind of Art and I'm exploring something entirely different.

It's interesting, isn't it, that there is so much distortion that goes on because of the simple issue of experiencing things differently?


I would rather be stupid in my own way than giving over to anyone who can write, talk and spell bind me in any fabulous manner

Absolutely, which is why my *personal* approach to the things individual's express as being their Art rather than expressions of 'universal truth' makes things much easier *for me*. I have found that it's the purpose and intention of the writing that I more respond to, rather than if the language is complex or not; frequently the use of complex language is seen as suspicious or a sign of arrogance on the part of the writer when it's simply their expression and Art. Some are minimalists, some aren't- it's just their Art, and it's rather easy to tell propaganda from expression if one can see the purpose and intention. What is the marker that individuals use to decide if another individual is intending spell binding? That's a really interesting exploration in itself, at least to a mind like mine. Others may have no interest at all in discovering the operating system they're using to make these distinctions.

I personally enjoy exploration of subjects that many find triggering and controversial. This is ok with me- I've got my autonomy, my sui generis and my singularity as my compass, so I'm cool about what happens as a result of my explorations. Others can be not so fun with that, and that goes with part of the territory- go poking about in the matrix and the agents and sentinels are bound to pop up *somewhere*. I'm happy to do my thing regardless, because I figure I'll stumble across others who like to play in the same elements I do at some point or another; given that I like fluid mind, that's a lot of room for possibility as *I* see it. Others may see it entirely differently.

On a personal note: far out, I'm going to get sick of making those repetitious distinctions really quickly. Perhaps I have to go put it into my sig, just to save the hassle, because the 'normality provider' one doesn't seem to work. This is *not* aimed at you personally, it's something that's just occurred to me.

Thanks for expressing your perspective. :)

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 00:34
Those who wish to control the thoughts of others do use such predictable tactics. You're supposed to see the irony, and you're supposed to see a battle. And then you're supposed to see an aftermath that leaves the heteronomy looking blameless, as though it didn't walk into a situation where it thought it could denigrate the intended purpose and assert its own while wearing plausible deniability. That's the point, mate.

Ah, plausible deniability, a favorite backstop of abusers and controllers everywhere, like the "I was just -" and all the other devaluing/trivialising justifications that go with the territory that slithers about with derailing and manipulating back into the party line. Like 'we are doing this for your own good' while taking all freedoms away because the controllers are just 'protecting' the masses from themselves. Can't see the macro in the micro. *shrugs*

Those outside the system are always made out to be little more than deluded renegades in need of a good 'reality check'. Can't imagine who could be putting that particular idea out into the ether or for what purpose...

Carmen
22nd June 2012, 00:39
Thinking about Castineda. I read his books/book, many years ago and it was paradigm shifting stuff. To me it's not particularly important if Casteneda himself, practiced and lived what he was taught. His experiences and learning were at a time when the baby boomers were just starting to feel their oats and break out of the stultifying mindset of tradition. In many ways he was a trailblazer and good on him, he went through the teaching and wrote about it. How many of us read those books and were inspired by them. At any one time in our life and circumstances, we do the best we can. It's bloody easy to be an armchair critic, that doesn't take any effort. I like the ones who get up and 'do' something, even if it is imperfect. I know, in my experience, I have not attempted new stuff because of being afraid it won't be perfect or I won't get it right, or I won't win!! (that has been a biggy!)Who cares! It's not how many mistakes we make, it's the determination to get up and do it again. Remember, we all learned to walk once!

Fred Steeves
22nd June 2012, 01:18
I'm going to keep exploring that and the heteronomy can do what it likes, although I do find it telling that part of what it does is keep invading spaces in order to exert its doctrines. Oddly enough, all dictatorships have done exactly the same thing. I don't have an interest in tolerating abusers, this came up in the Pub regarding this subject and unsurprisingly, involved the same individual. Go figure.


O.K. Songs, if giving my honest perspectives on your thread puts me in the "VIRUS" camp, and therefore associates me with the old dictator model, then so be it. I shall hereby leave you to yours dear lady. Be well.

Heteronomously Yours,http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/smile.gif
Fred

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 01:46
I'm going to keep exploring that and the heteronomy can do what it likes, although I do find it telling that part of what it does is keep invading spaces in order to exert its doctrines. Oddly enough, all dictatorships have done exactly the same thing. I don't have an interest in tolerating abusers, this came up in the Pub regarding this subject and unsurprisingly, involved the same individual. Go figure.


O.K. Songs, if giving my honest perspectives on your thread puts me in the "VIRUS" camp, and therefore associates me with the old dictator model, then so be it. I shall hereby leave you to yours dear lady. Be well.

Heteronomously Yours,http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/smile.gif
Fred

Well, Fred, if you think this is the appropriate response, then that is how you feel. I have no idea what you are talking about, as my observations were regarding the constant hammering I'm getting from bob, in other places as well as in my own threads, and apparently that's all fine and dandy. If you want to make the comments about you, feel free. I'm over it, really, and I'm just going to go about making my Art and the personal abuse can do what it likes, because it's going to. So be it.

Cheers.

Delight
22nd June 2012, 02:17
I know this is about "how much transformation is really wanted" and heteronomy as contrasted with autonomy, oxymorons arguing and stuff. I have read this thread as I do really appreciate transformation. And this is totally a nonsequiter but I felt compelled.....

I'm familiar with Castaneda not being anything much that he said he was, nor practicing what he wrote about. I'm not sure of the context of some of the other things you mention- was it Castaneda that died of liver cancer or your friend? What was this 'truth' that was sussed? How were you devastated?

I agree with you about fabulous overlays and Gurdjieff's comments. I know 'truth' as a concept that is put forth, I have never resonated with it as a platform- what 'truths' can be expressed within infinite possibility? There's singularity expression, that's it, as far as I see things, but that's *my* personal perspective and I know this doesn't fit with the views of all- I don't look for that. What I look for is others that want to explore the elements of the hologram *I* find my Self dancing in, who are also intrigued by the Art I am delighted by and who want to engage in co-creative dances with those elements. I'm not telling anyone else that *their* way isn't ok, it's simply that I'm not interested in that kind of Art and I'm exploring something entirely different.

Thanks for expressing your perspective. :)

It was Carlos Castaneda who died of liver cancer. My friend also died but of a brain aneurysm last year. Her real name was Melanie. She had come to appreciate the upside of being let down by her faith in GURU-dom in the 90's.

I was devastated because I wanted to really believe that all of what I had read was "true". For me this "truth" pursuit was so important and how could C.C. LIE LIKE THAT! made me heart sick at the time. Actually I still feel some residual let down as evidenced by hating to hear people quote Don Juan. Every time I want to screech at people to stop quoting him because he is as real as the tooth fairy. Are the concepts real anyway? How can one know when they untested and I don't want to use fiction as a map.

Even if I die as the dullest blockhead, what little I know from my experience has to suffice. Verbiage is not trustworthy unless it is just to entertain. And really, I do enjoy hearing what people have to say, especially if what is said agrees with what I think. But does that make me an egotist? Yes. Maggie

Fred Steeves
22nd June 2012, 02:28
I'm going to keep exploring that and the heteronomy can do what it likes, although I do find it telling that part of what it does is keep invading spaces in order to exert its doctrines. Oddly enough, all dictatorships have done exactly the same thing. I don't have an interest in tolerating abusers, this came up in the Pub regarding this subject and unsurprisingly, involved the same individual. Go figure.


O.K. Songs, if giving my honest perspectives on your thread puts me in the "VIRUS" camp, and therefore associates me with the old dictator model, then so be it. I shall hereby leave you to yours dear lady. Be well.

Heteronomously Yours,http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/smile.gif
Fred

Well, Fred, if you think this is the appropriate response, then that is how you feel. I have no idea what you are talking about, as my observations were regarding the constant hammering I'm getting from bob, in other places as well as in my own threads, and apparently that's all fine and dandy. If you want to make the comments about you, feel free. I'm over it, really, and I'm just going to go about making my Art and the personal abuse can do what it likes, because it's going to. So be it.


That's all fine and good Songs, I now understand. Just do me a favor please...If you're going to lash out at Bob concerning underlying and burning issues, fine. Just next time, take better care to quote Bob, rather than yours truly, O.K.?

Thanks,
Fred

Mike
22nd June 2012, 02:30
if someone *chooses* the heteronomy, then aren't they by definition exercising autonomy? for example, if one selects, as a faith, something many here would consider heteronomous, like Christianity, using good ol' fashion free-will, what would we call that? -- autonomous heteronomy?;) (Borden, may i have a glass of that chilled paradox tea, please?)

what if a member begins to share thoughts that appear heteronomous (God, that's an annoying word to spell) to the majority here, but said member does not recognize or believe them to be heteronomous, and in fact believes themselves to be quite autonomous; and furthermore feels that those accusing her/him of heteronomy are themselves acting in a spirit of heteronomy....ok ok i think you guys get the point: objectivity is a myth.

in a related thought, if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is around to hear it.......................

Songs, if i know you like i think i do, you'll likely point out that many who practice Christianity (following my original example) didn't choose at all, and were, in fact, likely victims of virus manipulation -- and in many instances you'd be absolutely correct. but i guess my question would be: at what point does the 'virus' stuff stop and personal responsibility start?

at it's best, i think virus recognition and deletion can be enlightening and even life changing; but at it's worst paranoia inspiring , and i imagine if i indulged it too much i might be spending my days questioning everything right down to the color of my socks. at it's best, i imagine it can be spiritually liberating and soul refreshing; at it's worst it can sound just as bad as the rest of the fear mongering on the forum. i suppose i exist somewhere between the 2 extremes; my position changes daily.

hey, am i even on topic here?;) maybe i should be posting this in the pub?

embarrassing confession, Songs: this whole time i thought you were speaking metaphorically when you spoke of the mind virus. but if i understood you correctly recently, you believe it to be something else entirely, no? something *real*? and you may be right, and probably are; i acknowledge that you have explored corners of the etheric realms and various other realms i can't even mention here out of sheer ignorance, and i acknowledge my utter impotence regarding such matters; but if you take something like the virus and grant it a certain sort of reality, believing it to be partially responsible for many of the things you say and do, and discuss it endlessly, do you not then give it a power it wouldn't have otherwise had? do you not then, in some way, surrender a bit of your autonomy? do you not in some way forfeit personal responsibility? is it really too different from imagining a God in the sky or a devil in hell, saying yes to this and no to that, according to arbitrary whim and fancy?

these questions, btw, aren't meant to be confrontational -- just intended to spark discussion. i'm excited for your response and know it will be wonderfully enlightening and mind-blowing. i'll be disappointed if it isn't!;)

what i love about your message (and why i always felt religious/spiritual belief systems to be incomplete -- amongst other things) is that it includes things and ideas found nowhere else on the planet as far as i know, like distilling avatars and exploring slidier realms etc...your recent emphasis on autonomy and heteronomy is vital, and i'm thrilled you're taking the lead here and shining a light on it. the problem, ive always felt, is that otherwise autonomous people are, from their birth, constantly asked to declare allegiances (Virus!!!) to country, political party, religious faith etc, and things have become so black n white, so nuance deficient, that minds and spirits have atrophied to the point of impotence, incurable by conventional means, and are slowly drifting towards an insidious heteronomy -- one that they don't even realize is infecting their minds and spirits.

i don't know the answers, but it's not gonna stop me from going to the store right this second to pick up a 6 pack of guinness, a fat hamburger from Wendy's, and then eventually phoning that blond chick i met last night, having her come over, then...(fill in x-rated fantasy here...*or*... fill in alleged charming come-on followed by humiliating rejection followed by a fitful night of sleep thinking of what i would be doing if i hadn't been so shamefully rejected)


p.s. Songs, this would be a wonderful opportunity for you to highlight my hypocrisy regarding excessively wordy posts. please take it. i've never deserved it more;)

onawah
22nd June 2012, 02:46
Whether Castenada lived up to the standards that people expected of him or not was not a big concern for me.
The characters in his books were alive for me, and since the distinctions between reality and fiction have always been blurry for me anyway, I was able to simply extract everything from the books that was exciting, inspiring and constructively mystifying, and skip the disillusionment stage when people began prying into Castenada's private life in order to discredit his books.

For that matter, Gurdjeiff imbibed liberally of alcohol as well as drugs and tobacco and also died of liver cancer.
But we will always find weaknesses and faults in those who take the risk of exposing themselves,warts and all, to the public eye so that they may deliver their messages and gift us with what they have to share.
That takes courage, and may also come with a price, but I think rather than heap scorn on them for their imperfections, it makes a lot more sense to be grateful that they were willing to share of themselves.

update: Hi Chinaski! Nice to see you back here.
I like this:
but if you take something like the virus and grant it a certain sort of reality, believing it to be partially responsible for many of the things you say and do, and discuss it endlessly, do you not then give it a power it wouldn't have otherwise had? do you not then, in some way, surrender a bit of your autonomy? do you not in some way forfeit personal responsibility? is it really too different from imagining a God in the sky or a devil in hell, saying yes to this and no to that, according to arbitrary whim and fancy?

It's so cliche, but it's true--what we give energy to with our focus becomes more a part of our reality.
While I would like the discussion of sui generis and hegemony to continue, what I think might be helpful for me is gaining more perspective on how hegemony and the virus are actually also serving a purpose, since we are still stuck with them in our world for now at least.
Being in resistance to anything simply gives it a greater hold on us, but if we understand the dynamic better and are able to let go of paranoia, resistance, etc. and increase our skill Aikido-like in dealing with the negative side of this existence through greater understanding, then we can more easily walk through the fire without getting burned.

Carmen
22nd June 2012, 02:51
Loved this post. Brought up some good points and made me giggle and that's important!

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 02:58
I'm going to keep exploring that and the heteronomy can do what it likes, although I do find it telling that part of what it does is keep invading spaces in order to exert its doctrines. Oddly enough, all dictatorships have done exactly the same thing. I don't have an interest in tolerating abusers, this came up in the Pub regarding this subject and unsurprisingly, involved the same individual. Go figure.


O.K. Songs, if giving my honest perspectives on your thread puts me in the "VIRUS" camp, and therefore associates me with the old dictator model, then so be it. I shall hereby leave you to yours dear lady. Be well.

Heteronomously Yours,http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/smile.gif
Fred

Well, Fred, if you think this is the appropriate response, then that is how you feel. I have no idea what you are talking about, as my observations were regarding the constant hammering I'm getting from bob, in other places as well as in my own threads, and apparently that's all fine and dandy. If you want to make the comments about you, feel free. I'm over it, really, and I'm just going to go about making my Art and the personal abuse can do what it likes, because it's going to. So be it.


That's all fine and good Songs, I now understand. Just do me a favor please...If you're going to lash out at Bob concerning underlying and burning issues, fine. Just next time, take better care to quote Bob, rather than yours truly, O.K.?

Thanks,
Fred

hey, I'll go check what I wrote- if I quoted you, then I've done it utterly mistakenly! can you show me what I quoted?

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 03:22
p.s. Songs, this would be a wonderful opportunity for you to highlight my hypocrisy regarding excessively wordy posts. please take it. i've never deserved it more;)

http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1333676408810_9624873.png

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 03:28
Loved this post. Brought up some good points and made me giggle and that's important!

Excellent! It would be more excellent for me personally- because I'm quintessentially curious about many things- to know which post made you're referring to. :P

Delight
22nd June 2012, 03:48
The characters in his books were alive for me, and since the distinctions between reality and fiction have always been blurry for me anyway, I was able to simply extract everything from the books that was exciting, inspiring and constructively mystifying

Yes, if one is not caught up in wanting things to be true, one can use the mythic aspect. And if this is all about art and not "truth", and if one stops feeling the need for "truth", one can appreciate the art. The blurriness is just fine really unless one wants TRUTH.
I would never read Treasure Island and use the map in the front piece and go looking for the gold but I wanted to study CC's books that way.
If I was disappointed, If I was outraged, it was my own investment of importance on the whole matter.

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 04:30
I've been observing with interest the temporary sliding around in muddy areas of purported conflict and I've been engaging in it with a view to exploring it and discovering what expression aligns with my own perspective and autonomy. I've discovered it this morning, wrapped in my Art.

Here is my perspective:

I'm into infinite possibilities. It's the quantum floor that everything else is built on. As an expression of that infinite possibility, I'm here adding my singularity expression to the mix, in the ways I am inspired to. I experience this as my Art; I experience the multiverse as infinite Art, expression of creativity, exploration, dance. To me personally, there is the evolution Consciousness signal and it's this that I explore. There are also those who *don't* like the perspectives that I have and this is utterly to be expected: there are those who create Art, the Artists, and there are those who sit in their chairs with no creative inspiration or talent whatsoever and who make it their business to do nothing but criticise the expressions and perspectives of others- the self appointed critics. These ones have nothing to contribute, they just rely on the ignorance of other non-creatives so that their self importance can be elevated to that of 'expert' in nothing at all.

These ones I have zero interest in. They're empty of true creativity, regardless of how it looks to those even less creative: it's really easy to tear down someone else's work in comparison to coming up with anything truly innovative and risk taking. That's part of the illusion- they like to come across as innovative and insightful wherein what they are is simply a regurgitator, doomed to consuming the work of others so that they can vomit it somewhere else and make it look original. To true Originals and Creatives, the works of regurgitators are readily discernible and are profoundly disinteresting.

I'm here doing my thing. These conversations are part of my Art, here in the Gallery that is this forum; I don't require agreement, homogeny, approval, accolades or anything else, that's not why I create. I create because these are the things in me; what I do in putting my Art out there is it's my way of contributing to the signal, in my way, and this is connected to being open to discovering others who want to co-create and play in the spaces that I find interesting.

I find them interesting. Not expecting *everyone else* to find them interesting. Having said that, I find it bizarre and absurd when others march into the gallery and start shouting that the art is ****e, that it should all be landscapes, and in blue, with clouds here, here and here or else it's not REAL art, and where's the artist so that I can shout at them and force them to paint what *I* think is appropriate or else they are wrong and I can stand here calling them names?'

0-o

So here's the thing- if you don't agree with my Art, that's totally fine, I get that. If I'm personally not your cup of tea, or you don't like the language I use, the way I see things, the stuff I'm hanging here on the walls, that's utterly perfect and within the expression of the infinite possibility multiverse. There's nothing at all amiss there. Where it goes pear shaped and not so great is where that experience is interpreted internally as permission to have a go at me about my Art.

I'm utterly up for discussion, framed in autonomous language, that intends actual exploration or clarification of the subjects/Art at hand. I'm happy to co-create, to clarify, to engage in exchange, to be evolved, to share perspective with a view to increasing the complexity and richness of the signal. I love evolution and I'm utterly, absolutely up for it.

And here's where that ENDS- if any individual wants to make my Art about *them personally*, if they want to attack me *personally* about the issues that have come up *for them* due to my Art, if they want to constantly bombard me with criticism- no matter how floridly it speaks, how festooned with courtly flourishes, how artfully bewigged and powdered it might think itself to be

http://www.history.org/Foundation/journal/Holiday07/images/Pix51C_R2.jpg

its still nothing I'm interested in.

I am no longer going to respond to those sorts of posts with anything *other* than a link to this one. That's it. I am giving that signal not one iota more energy or attention than it has already garnered from me, because that's precisely what feeds it. So this is my response- all individuals have the freedom to respond to any Art in whatever way they wish, and the Artist has the same. Artist's don't have to stand there and listen to individuals *talk crap* at them: if someone doesn't like *my* brand of Art and wants to do something about it, they can MAKE THEIR OWN AND PUT IT OUT THERE. That's a far more constructive thing to do than tearing down the work of others, as I see it- this too is my own personal perspective and I'm happy to stand on that platform.

Here is my permanent response to those that love the sound of their own rhetoric and self importance and who have nothing but criticism, in whatever form, to add to the discussion:

http://lifeisaboutcreatingyourself.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/windup-monkey-at-organ-grinder-pizza-21397377.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_jOcDtFE7txo/TJxitseuaAI/AAAAAAAAAjg/zbXAstJtnLs/s1600/monkey+cymbals.jpg

http://voiceofthemonkey.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/The-Monkey-Playing-Cymbals.gif

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 04:45
Yes, if one is not caught up in wanting things to be true, one can use the mythic aspect. And if this is all about art and not "truth", and if one stops feeling the need for "truth", one can appreciate the art. The blurriness is just fine really unless one wants TRUTH.

Yes, absolutely- in an infinitely possible multiverse what is 'truth' anyway? Whose truth? Says who? In what context? It all creates fertile ground for

http://www.indiestreak.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/1bodysnatchers.jpg

OMG SOMEBODY IS WRONG ON THE INTERNET or somewhere else AND SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!! and then we move to

http://www1.assumption.edu/users/mcclymer/us%20survey/6th_regiment_copy.jpg

and soon even Kirk and Spock are at it

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e398/Fiara_fantasy/Star%20Trek/Star%20Trek%20GIFS/122f796f.gif

and we know once *that* happens the world is most definitely going to hell in a handbasket!

I like the way that's being mentioned *much* better- makes way more sense to me. :D

Carmen
22nd June 2012, 08:51
Loved this post. Brought up some good points and made me giggle and that's important!

Excellent! It would be more excellent for me personally- because I'm quintessentially curious about many things- to know which post made you're referring to. :P


Sorry, it was Chinaskis post 125. I was too slow getting it out there!!

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 09:16
Sorry, it was Chinaskis post 125. I was too slow getting it out there!!

*grinning at you* You're going to have to get your game face on- haven't you heard the end of the world is coming in December? You'll need to be more on the ball than *that* to avoid the tidal waves and falling brimstone! Think of these threads as a training ground for deftness and agility- remember the first rule of surviving the zombie apocalypse- cardio fitness! cardio fitness!

:D

Of course, given the first rule, I'm zombie fodder: crap cardio fitness versus rather excellent flexibility means I *could* kick them in the head easily but probably couldn't shamble much faster than they do...

Curt
22nd June 2012, 09:27
Hi Fred,

You're one of the most genuine and free-thinking members of this forum.

Your chilled out insights and personal presence have meant a lot to me personally since I've been on Avalon.

You're not any kind of virus or any kind of anything.

I know you don't need me saying this, but I just wanted to let you know my personal perspective .

I won't speak for others, but I'd be willing to bet a kidney they feel the same way.

:rockon:




I'm going to keep exploring that and the heteronomy can do what it likes, although I do find it telling that part of what it does is keep invading spaces in order to exert its doctrines. Oddly enough, all dictatorships have done exactly the same thing. I don't have an interest in tolerating abusers, this came up in the Pub regarding this subject and unsurprisingly, involved the same individual. Go figure.


O.K. Songs, if giving my honest perspectives on your thread puts me in the "VIRUS" camp, and therefore associates me with the old dictator model, then so be it. I shall hereby leave you to yours dear lady. Be well.

Heteronomously Yours,http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/smile.gif
Fred

Carmen
22nd June 2012, 09:42
I thought it was gunna be more like a sheep drafting race with the Big Fella at the top end directing. You know, 'you go, you stay!! It's all sorted! Or it will be come December! HaHa!

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 10:16
I thought it was gunna be more like a sheep drafting race with the Big Fella at the top end directing. You know, 'you go, you stay!! It's all sorted! Or it will be come December! HaHa!

*points to horns* Well, I'm royally f*ucked anyway, so I don't really think about it. :D I've opted for the 'evolving 'Verse', wherever that is, because this clearly isn't it. :P

Curt
22nd June 2012, 11:01
The Wisdom of Monty Python.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc6HQIrEk7g&feature=fvwrel

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 11:06
if someone *chooses* the heteronomy, then aren't they by definition exercising autonomy?

Argh, I replied to this and lost it! foosticks.

I have to start again. I have decided to express this in interpretive dance mode.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kOgPquMcwpw/TlJj0q4Z7vI/AAAAAAABZ2o/9WKqfynOeSk/s1600/Marmein%2BDancers%2Bin%2Ba%2Bdrama%2Bdance%2Bby%2BNickolas%2BMuray1920s.jpg

Dancer one- "where did that f*ucking reply go?"
Dancer two- "I think it went yonder!"
Dancer three- "nay, I believe the computer ate it, just like a grape- as so...'

mountain_jim
22nd June 2012, 12:10
:ranger:

.....

darn... I've got nothing worthwhile to contribute this morning/evening.

:tea:

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 12:24
That's all fine and good Songs, I now understand. Just do me a favor please...If you're going to lash out at Bob concerning underlying and burning issues, fine. Just next time, take better care to quote Bob, rather than yours truly, O.K.? Thanks,
Fred

I'm glad that we have peace with each other again. :)

Even if I can be a pain in the arse. :P

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 12:28
:ranger:

.....

darn... I've got nothing worthwhile to contribute this morning/evening.

:tea:

tea is good. I could come and nomm your blueberries...

wait. that didn't sound right at all. On so many levels.

Fred Steeves
22nd June 2012, 12:28
Hi Fred,

You're one of the most genuine and free-thinking members of this forum.

Your chilled out insights and personal presence have meant a lot to me personally since I've been on Avalon.

You're not any kind of virus or any kind of anything.

I know you don't need me saying this, but I just wanted to let you know my personal perspective .

I won't speak for others, but I'd be willing to bet a kidney they feel the same way.

:rockon:




I'm going to keep exploring that and the heteronomy can do what it likes, although I do find it telling that part of what it does is keep invading spaces in order to exert its doctrines. Oddly enough, all dictatorships have done exactly the same thing. I don't have an interest in tolerating abusers, this came up in the Pub regarding this subject and unsurprisingly, involved the same individual. Go figure.


O.K. Songs, if giving my honest perspectives on your thread puts me in the "VIRUS" camp, and therefore associates me with the old dictator model, then so be it. I shall hereby leave you to yours dear lady. Be well.

Heteronomously Yours,http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/smile.gif
Fred

Hi Curtis, and thanks buddy, much appreciated. Everything is fine between me and songs, no worries. It was just one of those silly communication breakdowns that can happen sometimes, and I feel bad for putting it out on the thread. I should have pm'd her...

Cheers Mate,
Fred

mountain_jim
22nd June 2012, 12:45
:ranger:

.....

darn... I've got nothing worthwhile to contribute this morning/evening.

:tea:

tea is good. I could come and nomm your blueberries...

wait. that didn't sound right at all. On so many levels.

:eyebrows:

(just quoting this before you think better of it and delete it) :wave:

ps: the bluejays are stressing me out, I hope that netting arrives today, or there will be few berries left to nomm.. :)

edit : and I do recognize the catalysts, and opportunites for 'growth' and the humor in the jay/berry drama I am creating :)

songsfortheotherkind
22nd June 2012, 13:41
if someone *chooses* the heteronomy, then aren't they by definition exercising autonomy? for example, if one selects, as a faith, something many here would consider heteronomous, like Christianity, using good ol' fashion free-will, what would we call that? -- autonomous heteronomy?;) (Borden, may i have a glass of that chilled paradox tea, please?)

My perspective on this is that many engage in automatic behaviours, operating unconsciously within parameters and constructs that they don't actually understand. An illustration of this programming is the willingness to sit at a deserted intersection, with nothing in sight, because the red light is the determiner of when it is and isn't safe to go forward, rather than one's own intelligence and personal responsibility. There are many, many layers to this giving of Self away and one of these is to live a concept that one actually doesn't comprehend.

Having a conversation about a conceptual framework gives rise to the opportunity, at least, for these unconscious concepts to be made conscious, and then *choice* exercised as to whether the individual wants to continue to hold this position or move to one that suits their perspective and intention better. It wasn't until Rosa Parks refused to sit at the back of the bus that the idea that perhaps there was something inherently dodgy about the entrenched concept that blacks were inferior to whites bubbled up into the possibilities to be explored. Thus, within a framework of a culture that has a fluid mind approach to evolution, part of the exploration would be around the questions 'Does this thing mean what we think it means? Does this express what we are communicating when we use this word? Are there more expressive ways of communicating this concept?'.

This means that individuals who aren't in the habit of exploring their own thinking are going to find it challenging to have their concepts poked at, even indirectly. Most respond badly to this, as what happened *after* Rosa Parks didn't sit at the back of the bus. The evolution isn't interested in those that need to fling poo at those who speak outside the paradigms, it already knows what to do with *them*: it's looking for the next iteration.

*edit: I've been writing for over 14 hours and I have to rest, *and* I want to go more deeply into a teased out exploration of the frequency of when an individual *chooses* heteronomy and the implications of that from an autonomy pov. I'm leaving my Self notes so I don't forget.


what if a member begins to share thoughts that appear heteronomous (God, that's an annoying word to spell) to the majority here, but said member does not recognize or believe them to be heteronomous, and in fact believes themselves to be quite autonomous; and furthermore feels that those accusing her/him of heteronomy are themselves acting in a spirit of heteronomy....ok ok i think you guys get the point: objectivity is a myth.

I have always laughed at the thought that *objectivity* is possible, like 'altruism'- it's *all* subjective. :P That perspective makes it much easier for me to navigate the slide and otherrealms, which is what I'm interested in amping. I would like to get far more slidey, because it's my intuition that this leads to unlocking places that I want to explore. Subjectivity releases me from the requirement of having to take on any other Being's perspective, which then moves all things to the realm of Art and Play, co-creation and fun. The other way is unfun and leads to things like the Nazi pogroms.


in a related thought, if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is around to hear it.......................

it may or may not be a bowl of petunias.


at what point does the 'virus' stuff stop and personal responsibility start?

there are two markers for this that might be useful to consider with regards this: one is the internal law of Consciousness that lets an individual know that *some action* is actually not ok, regardless of the rationalisations made in its favour. Murder is something that most Beings of certain intelligence and awareness comprehend as something to be avoided. There is a natural signal, a frequency, that seeks to inform the sentient Being of a universal connection and perception. The other thing is information, triangulation, which is why I'm big on having these discussions despite the firehosing I occasionally get for it.

With these two things in mind, what is true for me is that I have discovered focusing on *my own* path makes the most sense. How can I set the markers for *another's* personal responsibility? I can only work with my own, and step out of the way of the path of others, while holding the 'do no harm' in the space- so perhaps this is where the markers are? This is why the discussions around 'abuse' are so important to me: there are many who dispute the nature and scope of 'abuse' because the autonomy is not the foundational platform from which they investigate their parameters. The exploration of 'abuse' within the foundational concept of autonomous sui generis reveals a whole different world from the current constructs. These are the markers I'm interested in: the current ones allow for all kinds of far reaching and insidious abuse that is a perfect carrier for the virus. Zero interest in that.


at it's best, i think virus recognition and deletion can be enlightening and even life changing; but at it's worst paranoia inspiring , and i imagine if i indulged it too much i might be spending my days questioning everything right down to the color of my socks.

if you are a sensible man, your socks will all be black. This saves much mental confusion, anguish, and the rage at losing one sock.


at it's best, i imagine it can be spiritually liberating and soul refreshing; at it's worst it can sound just as bad as the rest of the fear mongering on the forum. i suppose i exist somewhere between the 2 extremes;

The way I triangulate the virus and its behaviours has nothing to do with fear p0rn because the triangulation is interlaced within other concepts: sui generis, autonomy and absolute are the platforms for investigating the machinations of the virus. It's building a holographic model where all the points interlock; it's a really simple means to discern the difference between a system that supports all expressions of Life that encompass the do no harm principles- and every thing else, which is nothing but a doorway to the re-creation of Empire and all the sh!t that brings. From where I have been mapping things, there's no room for anything that is remotely infected with Empire- there's no playing nice with it, no dressing it in white so it looks humbler, no using different words to describe the same desecrations and machinations. 'A whitewashed grave full of dead men's bones' is still a home for the dead, and I'm happy to let the dead bury their dead, as I was reminded tonight by someone I treasure.

This is one of the baselines when interacting with me: I have an eye on what is going to bring the evolution, not rearrange the deckchairs on the Titanic. If I can dismiss a perspective because it's full of virus, it's not me being a cast iron bitch, it's me doing my kind of hacking- very little is *personal* (unless an individual really wants to make it so and even then, it's still all about the signal and autonomy rather than 'you suck! so there!' which I have no time for, literally or metaphorically.


my position changes daily.

unlike your socks?


hey, am i even on topic here?;) maybe i should be posting this in the pub?

*grins at you* dunno, we can mix it up: it seems some in the main forum think the Pub is dead... and I've realised that the next part of the discussion is better had in the safety of the Pub, so yeah. We're now moving venue. :D



p.s. Songs, this would be a wonderful opportunity for you to highlight my hypocrisy regarding excessively wordy posts. please take it. i've never deserved it more;)

*looks over my book at you* Seriously, Michael, you have *seen* my epic posts- this is lightweight indeed, sir, although definitely a good effort.

*laughing*

Antagenet
23rd June 2012, 01:43
I ask that you please preface your comments with 'this is my personal view' with the understanding that it is absolutely nothing more than that. It will be of great help to holding the signal and space for the autonomy.

Songs you do not live up to what you want to do. You never ask a person, if they meant such and such, you proclaim they are wrong. You insult people and badger them to fit into your strange semantics. You misinterpret many people. You leave no space for anyone else to diverge or divulge themselves.
And when you attack others it's in the most clever way you can find. Ugly language. Disgusting photos. Nothing uplifting. You are one of the most unpleasant people I have ever encountered on any internet forum. You do not hold a space for others to feel safe, appreciated, or even autonomous.

I ask you kindly to get off this forum. Leave Project Avalon forum to the mostly gentle, well meaning searchers who make this place lovely to come to.
You are making it an ugly place of discord.

What are you doing here if you arent human, dont believe in compassion or love?

Dont answer. Im not reading any more of your posts. Its all just twisted BS to worship yourself.

songsfortheotherkind
23rd June 2012, 02:34
:ranger:

.....

darn... I've got nothing worthwhile to contribute this morning/evening.

:tea:

tea is good. I could come and nomm your blueberries...

wait. that didn't sound right at all. On so many levels.

:eyebrows:

(just quoting this before you think better of it and delete it) :wave:

Dear sir, if I'd been inclined to make my Self look more dignified I would have deleted it *before* posting it. :D

Says she, sitting at the computer screen at 12:30 pm, clad in her jammies and eating icecream for breakfast.

I am the *epitome* of dignification, this is certain. I apparently have an Image to uphold here now!

http://darkswordminiatures.com/mainwebsite_html/gallery/images/p_2007_ogress_closeup.jpg

Should I invest in a new outfit, you think?

*burps*

mountain_jim
23rd June 2012, 04:16
And I have an image to enter dreamtime with now, Lady S. :)

music
23rd June 2012, 05:11
Autonomy is the natural state that is inherently ours, but which we have been hoodwinked into relinquishing. Autonomy is a natural by-product of awareness. When we are aware (ie when we act from the intelligence of the heart, rather than from the trickery of the monkey mind) we do not require another to supervise our behaviour, or to vet our actions. A truly aware person can do no wrong, because awareness gives connection to the all, so our every act is one of love, and framed so as to be of maximal benifit to all. This is the very definition of community.

Something for us to strive for, anyway.

Our current state is so far removed from that of true communal awareness, it is not funny. We should be aware that the agenda to keep us divided uses our own ego/mind/intellect against us. Autonomy is not something that can be intellectualised into existance - either we are an autonomous collective of truly aware expressions of the all, or we are a divided automoton beating itself into insensibility.

One can not think oneself into a state of awareness.

spiritguide
23rd June 2012, 11:06
The autonomous behavior of the chameleon is naturally a defense against hetoronomy. It's frequency of vibration changes constantly to that of it's environment and it's stillness makes it invisible to the movement of air, thence no sound. Hack the mind of a chameleon and learn it's ways then you can realize autonomous living. A chameleon is what it is, not what others want it to be. It is only seen when it wants to be. IMHO A shaman/medicine man knows chameleon and practices it often.

songsfortheotherkind
23rd June 2012, 13:44
Autonomy is the natural state that is inherently ours, but which we have been hoodwinked into relinquishing.

The following post, and all writing of mine, is made completely from the perspective of my singularity autonomy. This is the framework from which I write.

I do not personally consider that autonomy is a naturally inherent state. It certainly is an option for an individual *and* this option is not one that is necessarily recognised *by* the individual. I see free will and autonomy as two different things; all Beings continually exercise their free will even if the way they exercise this is by enslaving themselves. Autonomy- by definition of the word itself and in the exercise of it- requires a personal responsibility and self awareness that not many actually aspire to. There is a great deal of *talk* about it, and a great deal of grand sounding language, and very little of this translates into adopting a path and practice of autonomy that becomes deeply embodied. It can't even be a topic of actual discussion in most cases, without the deep entraining towards heteronomy rising up in one way or another, so I don't experience it as a *natural* state that is simply waiting some kind of triggering; there is much more consciousness involved than that. Which is why I discuss it so much; to me it's not at all a concept readily comprehended and can use as much triangulation as possible.


Autonomy is a natural by-product of awareness.

Is it? If this were true, would there not be a plethora more truly autonomous Beings on the planet? Awareness of what, in your experience, creates this embodied knowing of autonomy? These may seem like obvious or rude questions and yet if these things were so clear cut and automatic there would be far less heteronomy in the dominant culture than there is. To me, this indicates that the subject may actually *not* be so simple and therefore a more robust and clear language developed that actually transmits the concepts that are intended instead of creating a blur that actually doesn't express much at all, particularly to those unfamiliar with the concepts in the first place. I'm interested in developing a language that actually holds the signal for these platforms, so to this end I'm asking the questions that I have. I am interested in your singularity perspective.


When we are aware (ie when we act from the intelligence of the heart, rather than from the trickery of the monkey mind) we do not require another to supervise our behaviour, or to vet our actions.

I absolutely agree that as a truly autonomous Being, I need no external authority whatsoever. I do not speak from 'we' because in autonomy language 'we' is heteronomy. I don't assume I have a clue what is and isn't true for others, regardless of how they perceive that. I wasn't sure at first what you meant by intelligence of the heart, until I considered the next sentence-


A truly aware person can do no wrong, because awareness gives connection to the all, so our every act is one of love, and framed so as to be of maximal benifit to all. This is the very definition of community.

This is a massive assumption and globalisation. Am I correct in thinking that *for you* this is your experience? It most certainly is not mine, on many levels and for many reasons. I do not consider at all that it is in any way possible for my every act to be one of love unless I am referencing the love that I have for my Self and my relationship with the evolution Consciousness, which many frequently interpret as a massive *lack* of 'love' towards them because I'm not getting tangled up in their emotional, psychological or social agendas. And this is on the part of those who would be outraged if it was suggested to them that perhaps they aren't as 'aware' as they like to think they are.

Those that know me know that I am dismissive of the way the word 'love' is used in the dominant paradigm, which loves its shoes, the latest film, this fantastic car and that gorgeous actress, as well as everything else. It's a fuzzy word, one that has as many meanings as there are Beings. What, exactly, are you meaning when you say 'love'? How does an autonomous Being arrange their actions to be of the 'maximal benefit' to the community, when the members of said community, in their own infinitely possible, subjective interpretations of 'community', 'love' and 'maximal benefit', may have *vastly* different ideas about these things? What then?

This is *not* empty consideration on my part: I've lived as part of three intentional communities at different times and watched with interest as the members tore each other and the community to pieces over *personality* issues disguised as many different and often lofty things. Each of them could point to the others as 'failing' the spirit of the community in one way or another, and what they were actually talking about was their own agenda and the particular brand of heteronomy they were wishing to impose on everyone else. It was hideously fascinating, watching this process over and over again and I realised that until the subjective nature of language- and thus its limitations- was recognised, and effort made to create a useful and stable operating platform of concepts and language, every endeavour was doomed because of the subjective and emotionally driven nature of the individuals. I'm interested in a platform that doesn't rely on feelings to operate well; it's so easy for individuals to fall into the bazillion judgement traps that they carry internally when it comes to dealing with one another that something beyond this needs to be created so that the inbuilt blinds spots and tar pits are avoided. 'Love' is one of these.

It's interesting that some individuals have assumed that because I keep pointing to the inherent limpness of the word 'love' as a descriptor for anything useful I must be an uncaring, heartless Being, and these associations have only served to highlight further the problematic nature of the word, because what these individuals are frequently speaking of isn't *love* but a willingness to observe social mores and rules. It's all very entangled and unhelpful.


Our current state is so far removed from that of true communal awareness, it is not funny. We should be aware that the agenda to keep us divided uses our own ego/mind/intellect against us. Autonomy is not something that can be intellectualised into existance - either we are an autonomous collective of truly aware expressions of the all, or we are a divided automoton beating itself into insensibility.

This appears to be your opinion, globalised. Is there some way you can reframe it in autonomous *I* language, that points to your own experience and doesn't lay that experience over all other Beings as some kind of truth? This is the one of the foundations of autonomy- an utter absence of the need to ascribe one's personal and subjective experience and solutions on to everyone else. I have many personal differences with the globalised perspective that you have put forth, and I'd like to wait until you have reframed it so that I can engage in a more useful exploration of this with you.


One can not think oneself into a state of awareness.

One cannot *have* a sufficient state of Self awareness to engage autonomy without sufficient ability *to* think about the subject. I worked in a home for disabled children and made the horrific discovery one day of one of the boys in the process of chewing off the fingers of one of the autistic girls, a girl with the face of an angel who was able to feel enough physically that the pain was causing her distress, as evidenced by her increased rocking back and forth, but unable to process the situation any further and so she neither pulled her hand back or made any sound as he chewed. She lost two fingers because she could not express her Self in any way. Clearly, not being able to think in certain ways did not help her autonomy, because that needed to be upheld and defended by *others*- so not all Beings can exercise it, which means what they have is not autonomy but something that is utterly dependent on the attitudes and level of awareness of *others* in their external world.

It's not so simple as it originally appears, exploring these concepts. So, given what I have just said, what in your perspective does autonomy look like now?

songsfortheotherkind
23rd June 2012, 14:39
The autonomous behavior of the chameleon is naturally a defense against hetoronomy. It's frequency of vibration changes constantly to that of it's environment and it's stillness makes it invisible to the movement of air, thence no sound. Hack the mind of a chameleon and learn it's ways then you can realize autonomous living. A chameleon is what it is, not what others want it to be. It is only seen when it wants to be. IMHO A shaman/medicine man knows chameleon and practices it often.

Hmm. So, a creature that entirely responds to the conditions and demands of its external environment in order to reduce as far as possible the threat of harm. This includes having to remain utterly still for extended periods of time, constantly changing its appearance to respond to the conditions around it and to do nothing to give itself away so that it can remain physically alive.

Don't rock the boat in any way is the way of autonomy? Do nothing to disturb the heteronomy in any way so as to remain alive? There is a varied degree of blending- or not- that serves the particular interests of every individual at a given time, and sometimes these involve anything *but* blending in and disguising one's Self; I know that personally I spent many years being a chameleon and very near lost my Self in the process. For me personally, this approach does not support or serve my autonomy and path: part of my path has been in being willing to be seen, to communicate, to say 'no' to the heteronomy even while copping some serious flak for doing so and to specifically find and communicate my own unique signal and Art in amongst a world that has conformity, obedience to social constructs, homogeny and external authority as its operating platform.

I fully respect that this may be something that you personally have found useful. I have no interest in pretending to be something I am not just so others won't have any issue with me.

songsfortheotherkind
23rd June 2012, 15:16
Up next (once I've actually slept!)- some finely tuned subjective explorations around the concept and practice of autonomy. This will be fun. :)

*pauses to consider*

Well, it will be fun for me because I like that kind of thing. :D

spiritguide
23rd June 2012, 17:32
A chemeleon is not something it is not. Thank you for the reply. The crow in me says have a happy time hacking the mindscaping.

PurpleLama
23rd June 2012, 17:44
A chemeleon is not something it is not. Thank you for the reply. The crow in me says have a happy time hacking the mindscaping.


The crow in me agrees, but Ol' Man Coyote just laughs and laughs and laughs.

Not everything means what we think it do.

A good psychic will hardly say anything at all what they know, a wizard's duty is to be inscrutable.

PurpleLama
23rd June 2012, 17:52
I can hack a computer with great knowledge and finesse, or I could hack the thing with a machete. See? Clarity of/and awareness, especially of self/other, is the only thing that will show which one we are up to at the moment, and up against.



The above statement was rendered with absolute atonomy. Slightly drunken autonomy, but autonomy, nonetheless.

music
23rd June 2012, 23:41
I do not personally consider that autonomy is a naturally inherent state. It certainly is an option for an individual *and* this option is not one that is necessarily recognised *by* the individual. I see free will and autonomy as two different things; all Beings continually exercise their free will even if the way they exercise this is by enslaving themselves. Autonomy- by definition of the word itself and in the exercise of it- requires a personal responsibility and self awareness that not many actually aspire to. There is a great deal of *talk* about it, and a great deal of grand sounding language, and very little of this translates into adopting a path and practice of autonomy that becomes deeply embodied. It can't even be a topic of actual discussion in most cases, without the deep entraining towards heteronomy rising up in one way or another, so I don't experience it as a *natural* state that is simply waiting some kind of triggering; there is much more consciousness involved than that. Which is why I discuss it so much; to me it's not at all a concept readily comprehended and can use as much triangulation as possible.

Too much thinking does nothing but allow for the ascendance and primacy of the ego. This is a characteristic of a fear-based reality. Autonomy is a characteristic of a Love-based reality. The choice is our own, which reality we subscribe to. We are all free to choose the fear and the slavery of the monkey-mind paradigm, but "I" choose Love.




Autonomy is a natural by-product of awareness.
Is it? If this were true, would there not be a plethora more truly autonomous Beings on the planet?

There are few truly aware beings on the planet at this time. Often we may confuse smoke and mirrors, or verbosity and vanity, with awareness.




When we are aware (ie when we act from the intelligence of the heart, rather than from the trickery of the monkey mind) we do not require another to supervise our behaviour, or to vet our actions.
I absolutely agree that as a truly autonomous Being, I need no external authority whatsoever. I do not speak from 'we' because in autonomy language 'we' is heteronomy.

"We" is inclusive language, "I" and "you" is exclusive language. We use inclusive language to remind us that we are disparate parts of the whole. Unity consciousness, as oppossed to seperation consciousness. We need to be careful where the semantic trickery of the ego leads us, because the seperation/fear paradigm is an external construction to oppress us. Put another way, to think we are all "singularitites" is a very NWO friendly concept. As is wasting time with semantics.

Distraction, distraction, distraction.

Blessings, enjoy your journey.

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 00:08
A chemeleon is not something it is not. Thank you for the reply. The crow in me says have a happy time hacking the mindscaping.

You are absolutely right- a chameleon is *not* something it is not: an individual *adopting* the tactics of a chameleon- the chameleon having an utterly different purpose and intention than the sentient individual- is very much at times pretending to be something it is not; it is *not* a chameleon, it is using the *methods* of a chameleon in service to a more complex purpose and intention, in which case my comment here


There is a varied degree of blending- or not- that serves the particular interests of every individual at a given time, and sometimes these involve anything *but* blending in and disguising one's Self

is still utterly relevant. The chameleon does what is does because that's what it does; the sentient Being has many other choices available to them and part of what I am interested in is * profound consciousness in the choices I make* because I know how the heteronomy and virus have been programmed to run automatically. I have found that there is a profound degree of assumption and unconsciousness that runs below the surface of the dominant paradigm and it is this that allows the virus heteronomy to flourish. Keeping one's Self hidden may truly serve the needs, purpose and intention of *one* individual and be absolutely counter-intuitive to the next; the only way that either individual will know that they are operating from an *authentic and autonomous place* is if they have had the courage to consider that, first, there are alternative possibilities and secondly, if these in any way apply. Personally I have a comprehensive system whereby this takes place very quickly, based on the parameters and platforms that I operate from; for others the process is not as simple and can feel incredibly challenging and blurry. I am not saying *anything* here about your own process, which I am not privy to in any way- I am talking in a wide spectrum sense here. The 'incredibly challenging and blurry' is one of the disincentives to do this process- the dominant paradigm entrains individuals to seek novelty often in adrenaline charging ways and actively discourages *personal* novelty and exploration; individuals in general would rather take a holiday and laze around, or engage in an adrenaline charging activity, or potter around in their comfort zone rather than to engage in something they know is going to challenge their zone uncomfortably and deeply. Even the so called 'self help' and consciousness gurus have a cadence and pattern that seeks to soothe the individual and keep their novelty allergy at bay, so that the individual can feel like they are 'challenging' themselves and the guru doesn't lose a follower because the path is too scary. I fully comprehend the usefulness of this in terms of the evolution Consciousness because I'm utterly aware that the best laid plans of all gurus in terms of control are going to come undone at some point or another, so I don't get entangled in the issue itself; what *I* am personally interested in is playing in an entirely different realm. That's what I'm doing here.

None of my reply is made as a personal focus towards you. I appreciate your comments as being an interesting place of further exploration of the wide screen implications as they occur to me. :)

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 00:11
I can hack a computer with great knowledge and finesse, or I could hack the thing with a machete. See? Clarity of/and awareness, especially of self/other, is the only thing that will show which one we are up to at the moment, and up against.


The above statement was rendered with absolute atonomy. Slightly drunken autonomy, but autonomy, nonetheless.

I have always appreciated and have come to feel very Shiny and internally vibrate-y at your expression of your autonomy. :)

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 00:15
*waves farewell*


Blessings, enjoy your journey.

christian
24th June 2012, 03:30
Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 03:51
The language of autonomy, the language of heteronomy; language as a tool, language as a weapon. This, for those that may be interested, is why I bother with 'semantics'; without a form by which ideas can be expressed and explored, without a construct of feedback there is no possibility of enriching and evolving the signal of the Whole. The constant bum rap that verbal expression gets is undeserved in my perspective, because it isn't the verbal expression that is the problem, it is the unconscious embedded signals of programmed purpose and intention within the verbal expression and words that is the problem.

Verbal/written expression is one of the choices within a rich palette of feedback mechanisms that are built into all expressions of manifestation within everything *outside* Source; within Source the beginning of this feedback mechanism is choice- before choice there is simply infinite possibility existing simultaneously, there is no feedback available and thus no evolution is possible. An infinite sea of endless possibilities and none taken until choice happens. Choice is the plucking of that particular string out of the infinite strings that *could* have been plucked. This particular string vibrates its note through the All, which includes the manifested realms, and this vibration creates an interaction with the Whole, feedback within the system that *wasn't there before the string was plucked*.

All feedback mechanisms are language that is specific to that organism or group of organisms. It arises from the function, the purpose and intention of the organism or system and the degree of complexity of the purpose and intention of the organism or system is the degree of complexity within the language/feedback system these develop. The mechanism involved in sending a message to one other individual is far different from the kind of complex infrastructure necessary to co-ordinate a global postage system; the connected language and communication systems that arise from this function, purpose and intention are going to contain specific words and concepts that are relevant to that environment and those elements that are connected to it but will find few that understand these *outside* that system. All specific systems are the same- the language/feedback system of the orchid that is dependent on one particular wasp breed for its survival is a very, very specialised and specific language- it won't work on other wasps, and the language the wasp speaks is also specific because the orchid is the only plant the wasp interacts with. Without this finely tuned and extremely specialised language, both organisms die. This is a very tightly closed system and from the perspective of the evolution Consciousness it's not going to be a long lived one because the parameters are far too narrow- one thing out of place and both organisms fail.

Chaos- also known as randomness- exists within all systems as a function of testing, refining and evolving the system. (This is why I personally do not experience the virus as something 'wrong', I experience it as something to observe, learn by and evolve beyond). The degree of complexity that arises within a system requires a corresponding degree of ability and scope within the language/feedback mechanisms it uses; part of the challenge of evolving systems is to parallel the evolution of the communication mechanisms with the increasing complexity within the system itself. An example of this can be found in the progression of communication systems on the planet: small tribes only occasionally encountering one another and thus having little reason to develop a common platform (often resulting in territorial conflicts or passing each other by with little more than a nod and keeping a wary eye on one another; more frequent contact resulting in the development of such things as the intertribal sign language used by certain Native American communities, or the smoke signal language that allowed members of a tribe to communicate in a unique language with one another over long distances (and resulted in some members of other tribes, with their own purpose and intention, to learn the language of another tribe's smoke signals); increased intertribal contact requiring the creation of treaties or boundaries and a system of agreements around particular territorial arrangements- which requires the skills of bi-lingual or polyglot members of each tribe; expansion into new territories with a desire to keep in touch with family left behind results in things like the pony express, which is problematic and results in the telegraph and the development of a new language- Morse code- based in part on older languages such as drum language and smoke signals; more complex systems develop that require more complex responses and languages, until we arrive at the current global system of interglobal and instant communications in a variety of interfaces, all with their own specific and situational subcontexts and languages. To ignore this natural development process- as an entirely different element from the consideration of the *purpose and intention* that such systems might be turned to- is akin to ignoring the body's need to sustain its own processes; in both cases, unwanted outcomes eventually arise.

As I see it, the world is currently in a mess in part because it hasn't learned how to effectively communicate across a wide range of platforms- there hasn't been an effective base platform created in an open source kind of way. What do I mean by open source? In the computer world there are two major streams of programming development: one is the closed system, proprietary approach taken by Microsoft and Apple (although interestingly Microsoft has begun to shift this because the company has essentially realised it's lost the war)- the proprietary approach to their source code has meant that their products have been locked down and cannot be tweaked- or 'hacked', which is NOT 'cracking', the black hat, mayhem causing activities designed to create chaos and disorder- the creators of major viruses, trojans and worms are crackers, not hackers, which is a much more ubiquitous term; so the proprietary software cannot be altered or changed in any way. This means hackers cannot get in and fix any bugs- and in the case of Microsoft, there are MANY bugs- and thus the platform was only useful for those who didn't want a more fluid and responsive system that could be tweaked to suit the specific requirements of the user. Proprietary software is an expression of the heteronomy- it provides a 'one size fits all badly' service that restricts the user to a narrow band of experience and interface- you get what you get and you either like it or lump it, because there is no room for change.

Open source is a platform that has been created worldwide in a giant co-operative co-creation that has efficiency, elegance and usability as some of the baseline parameters. What open source does is keep all the code out in the open and able to be changed as suits the individual- it is a dynamic system that can respond to the degree of competence of *the individual*, rather than being rigidly locked into the parameters and thinking of someone else, which is what proprietary anything does: proprietary religions, systems, thinking, social constructs- all are *external authorities* attempting to exert their particular brand of heteronomy onto the individual. Software hackers just happen to be a particularly non-compliant bunch, who don't see why something needs to be done stupidly just because someone with less vision and ability says so, and so they just go and create more robust and fluid systems which eventually bring monopolies- like Microsoft- to their knees. Microsoft dominated while the masses were mostly unfamiliar with the language and protocols, individuals who were content to point and click; now there are many many more individuals who, having grown up with the systems, are far more selective and discriminating in the freedom with which they wish to engage their technology. More and more users are turning to the open source freedom of Linux based operating systems, Dell- the previous bastion of Microsoft's proprietary control of operating systems- has recently indicated that it is installing Linux based systems on their machines in the developing markets of India and Russia. Education of the individual and an evolution of understanding has resulted in the looming extinction of the software monopoly that Microsoft enjoyed. I see this as a reflection of the demise that all heteronomies are doomed to- as the individual becomes familiar with the new language and feedback, the system is changed and either evolution happens or the particular platform dies .

In part, what I am doing is exploring the open source approach to social systems hacking- *hacking* as it refers to improving, making more functional, robust and capable of being a stable platform that can support a wide framework of individual requirements- I am interested in creating something that works for the widest range of expressions. I am fully aware that there will be many who want nothing more than 'point and click' in most functions, either physically or otherwise- point and click philosophies, thinking and behaviour are the way the majority wish to live. I'm aware of that. So is the evolution. What I am discussing is something that is not the point and click anything, but rather a willingness to consciously co-create the experience of the physical reality I engage in, and discovering those that wish to do the same.

For those who are interested in a more robust consideration of the principles I'm talking of here, this is an excellent place to start- http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/index.html#catbmain

So perhaps now there can be more of an understanding of what I'm discussing and less of the personal attacks regarding my language and perspective. :)

I'm engaged in open sourcing social constructs and their connected platforms. Where the signal now appears to be at is a process of distillation of the best of these systems into a new base platform, because all complex systems regularly undergo this defragging process- it's the way that the evolution Consciousness engages in its own energy efficiency auditing. It's observed on the planetary level in the regular cycles of extinction and emergence of new and more complex life forms- part of the current auditing is an interest in avoiding a complete reboot of the sentient Beings and their systems. This is in connection with some complex interweaving of a whole raft of interconnected elements, the consideration of which I'm writing about in other places. In this particular post I'm concentrating on the communication systems , in particular the development of a high level of awareness around language and the way it's used; what I observe in the general population is that they're running about with the power of creation at their fingertips and they mostly use it to fling poo at one another, or to feed the heteronomy. There are very relevant connections in why so many spiritual and religious traditions say that the word brought all the physical realms into Being- and here 'word' does not have to be restricted to spoken because that's just *one* way to do it. Given the way I think and what I have researched, immersed my Self in as a result of this, it seems to me that taking language and feedback systems as part of the whole system, not as the dirty bathwater that needs to be thrown out, is part of the increasing of the complex signal. All complex systems are going to develop correspondingly complex and nuanced communication systems as part of their feedback mechanisms; what I am aiming for is one that is more harmonious with my personal preferences and pleasure in communication, which in part involves telepathic and energetic engagement.

I utterly constrict my telepathic receiving here at this point in time and have done so since early childhood. So many individuals ask 'why can't we activate our abilities?' and I find the answer totally obvious- there's enough noise generated out there as it is to cause real harm to natural receivers, telepaths and sensitives- it would become almost impossible for any such Beings to live here were those who cannot think cohesively to suddenly be able to broadcast their mental chaos on all bandwidths; even as restricted as what it is, I still have to run major shields against the white noise while being in any group of size. I for one am grateful that the abilities are not yet evident en masse: it would not result in a less chaotic world, as I see it. And I think about things in a fairly interconnected way, so I'm not being uninformed when I say this.

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 04:03
Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

"end of story" FOR YOU. Important distinction. There are many, many tools involved in this and many subjective experiences that do not align with this perspective. Once again, to make a *global assertion* is to blanket one's own particular brand of heteronomy over all others with the unspoken assertion that, if an individual doesn't particularly agree with it there is something wrong with their experience, not the platform that the speaker is operating from. This is an extension of exactly the same mentality that permitted the Western culture invaders from decimating the native communities because the invaders were utterly convinced of the correctness of all elements of their perspectives and were more than happy to enforce these on others. I have no interest in heteronomy because I do not like its fruits.

Does your message change if you switch to autonomous language that contains no suggestion whatsoever that any other individual needs or has to see things your way?

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 04:32
To put things in as peaceful and clear way as I can:

another bob, you have demonstrated your intense dislike of me as an individual on more than one occasion and most recently in the here and now thread; those involved know how that went. In my response to you I indicated that given your willingness to make our different ways of Being as reason to malign me as an individual, I would take your appearance in any thread I start as


the only reason you would turn up in any thread I create in the future would be to bring dissonance

and you are showing up yet again. There can be no positive purpose in this. As ulli exercised his autonomy and asked me to leave the here and now thread, which I was more than happy to do, I am now exercising my autonomy and asking you to refrain from interacting with my threads. Your continued presence is odd, given your public statements about leaving me to it. Please do not leave any comments about your perspective in response to this request, because you have already made your opinions about me well known. This is me peacefully and non-controversially exercising my autonomous choice as to who I wish to hang out and engage with- there is no positive and co-creative reason for you to be here and I do not experience you as an individual that has positive purpose and intention towards me. Please just leave quietly. Thank you.

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 05:36
from http://barbarasclub.com/blog/

How to Throw an Idea Party

SOUNDS GREAT, DOESN’T IT?
(even when you’re not sure what an Idea Party is?)

Here’s how you do it.

1. Find Good People

Each time that you meet someone you’d like to know better, give that person your name and phone number and invite them to your Idea Party, even if you don’t yet have a date or location. Hopefully, you’ll collect a few names and phone numbers. Call everyone. The first person you speak with can be your buddy. She’ll help you pick the date and location, and call people she knows. Don’t hesitate to ask your friends, family, and coworkers to come to your Idea Party. Just say, “I’m having an Idea Party. Want to come?” and you’ll get surprisingly positive results. You can have as many as 15 or 20 people at this party, and the more varied their backgrounds, the better. NEVER PERSUADE ANYONE TO COME. You only want people who want to be there. That usually screens out the “show-me” types, who don’t make the best brainstormers.

This is in part what I'm doing- concurrent exploration, brainstorming, defragging and analysis. :) Then I add the otherrealms into the mix...

music
24th June 2012, 05:40
You know, from my perspective, and offered since you decided to ignore my last post to you, this whole intellectual miasma and concurrent semantical BS, marks you in my book as either a witting or unwitting tool of the fear/separation paradigm: ie this whole thread is exactly the kind of ego-based distraction and fluff of nothingness that furthers the NWO agenda.

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 07:07
You know, from my perspective, and offered since you decided to ignore my last post to you, this whole intellectual miasma and concurrent semantical BS, marks you in my book as either a witting or unwitting tool of the fear/separation paradigm: ie this whole thread is exactly the kind of ego-based distraction and fluff of nothingness that furthers the NWO agenda.

Um- firstly, I didn't 'decide' to ignore anything- as I just posted in the Pub, 'uh- now, where am I up to?'. I do try and go back through the threads and catch up, sometimes I get caught up in a reply that leads to other thought paintings which leads to more mental cascades; I have a large number of children and a life outside the forum, so if I do miss something, those with less than hostile intent and no inclination to assume negative intent where none was intended generally just poke me and remind me that I've missed something. Given your opinion of me, it's clear that you are not among that supportive group.

Edit: it would appear that I did in fact respond to your post. http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?46461-So-how-much-transformation-is-actually-wanted-really&p=510938&viewfull=1#post510938 Given that the gist of your post was to suggest that my writing was NWO agenda serving, I felt that your 'blessings' comment was a nod to our differences and a well wishing on my way. It would seem that the blessings and invitation to enjoy my journey were actually not sincere at all.

Your subjective opinion is noted, as is your inability to frame such in autonomous and subjective language. Your purpose in writing appears be nothing more than to take the opportunity to make personally offensive remarks about me as a Being, as well as suggesting I am a tool of the NWO, rather than discuss the material I present with a view to demonstrating where, for instance, my perspective is a tool of the fear/separation paradigm when I am discussing the development of tools to dissolve the current level of conflicts between various philosophies and perspectives. This element of the discussion appears to be outside your area of expertise, so the preferred response seems to be slam the writer with personality based insults.

Thank you for self selecting out of the conversation. It's interesting how many critics of me are now pointing the suggestion that I am 'furthering the NWO agenda', when I am discussing autonomy as opposed to heteronomy- ironic, no? Apparently on the forum the new way to say "I don't like what you're saying! You smell! So there!' is to suggest that the individual in question is a servant of the NWO, so there's no reason to address the content of their posts. A very effective way to maintain the status quo and exert a subtle form of control- "if we don't like what you say, we're going to brand you as The Enemy". Typical control mechanisms of all heteronomous systems, and as individuals become more educated in the tactics they'll be able to identify the same more readily.

Now that your personally assigned job of burning the witch is done, I hope you can consider the matter settled for your Self and we can simply move on past one another, agreeing to see, experience and express things very differently. I have no problem with that.

Salut.

music
24th June 2012, 08:07
Thanks for another helping of white noise, but I have tuned you out now because you are unable to counter any but the most mundane of challenges to your viewpoint with any degree of substance. Blessings to you are sincere, as I would offer to any sentient being, regardless of my disagreement or otherwise.

Borden
24th June 2012, 09:07
Some of these responses are absolutely hilarious. Someone comes along who articulates ideas a little different from those on the ready-made, packaged 'alternative' hymn sheet ... and she gets called all sorts of bizarre things by the terminally hypocritical.

There's something about Songsy that uncovers a very squirmy kind of behaviour in those who would otherwise dine out on being universally loving. I find it delightful to watch actually, heh heh.

Sebastion
24th June 2012, 12:10
I was wondering Christian when it became okay for someone to waltz into the Avalon forum and use it as their own private "art" gallery? This particular form is problem-reaction-solution oriented and is as devisive to the forum as it gets. I agree 100% with Anotherbob's assessment.






Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

Delight
24th June 2012, 14:27
hello,
I have found this thread getting under my skin. the challenge in the threadline to ask "how much transformation do I actually want, really" strikes at my heart. I feel I want all the transformation necessary to live in a new but ancient way. It may be a myth but I'd love to transform to live in a way that we all "know" the value of life as it is expressed. I would like to live in a way where we get energy direct from Source. I'd like to live in Tom Campbell's evolving coherent love format....defeating entropy for the good of consciousness. It would be what I feel would benefit me.

Yes, that way is couched in my own mind as the way "I " want to live becasue that appeals to me. Is that also the case for all the "others"..... does anyone want to transform against some stated way they want to live?
I have no desire to transform so that I would live the way someone else wants me to live. Since the "living" is the what I want, if transformation means living some way I do not want, I desire NOT to transform.

I can give an example. There is no appeal to me in what is called "Transhuman" where we take on bionic parts and even could have living forever by surgically reinstalling parts. i do not even want to live"longer" if it means transplants. What I want is that I learn how to inner change what is not working well with new understanding. I want to live as an evolving creature with abilities inside out.

Another example. I do not care for the idea of virtual reality. I have acquaintances who have avatars and get on line and share all sorts of adventures and other things that to me make no sense. So if transformation is to get to the ability for this pursuit...no thanks for me. if I am living, I want it to be embedded in the "old world" that I see outside the window. Maybe I am limited in capacity? But I have this strong preference to what I know. yes, it is true, i just want what i like now to just get more what I like.

I live in a town haunted by the ancient legacy of cruelty to the original people and the furthering of Appalachian poverty consciousness. IF transformation is about being the kind of person able to help heal ancient trauma, YES to that. I will dig in to that one. I would enjoy as life the the ability to create a new relationship among, within and between all the "people" (of every kind) who live near "me". There are many I can't even see...but I want us to be friends.

I really want the "one spirit" grokking kind of transformation but not make it happen by edict. I feel I desire a transformation that is flowing naturally and agreeable to all as consciousness unfolds. If "power" meant that I could make everyone do what I want them to do, even if it seemed like a "good reason"...something like ignoring the means to get to some end, no I am not wanting that one.

I know this is wordy...I am wordy in writing.
This whole thread bowls over with words.
But the question is really valuable. Thanks for the question. Maggie

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 15:10
The hidden languages of entrapment.

There are many committed and sincere individuals in the 'freedom' movement who have spent decades trying to work their way through the entanglements and contortions of legalese. It took many years for these seekers to realise that there was a hidden and encoded language layered beneath the seemingly obvious meanings of the words. "Do you understand these charges against you?" has nothing to do with 'understand' in relation to comprehension- in legalese, 'understand' means 'stand under', a legal term meaning that the individual not only agrees to and accepts the charges against them, but that the individual also accepts the jurisdiction of the court as having authority over them. This is a *profoundly* different meaning to the one the ordinary individual believes is being used when they say 'yes' to the question. In terms of the controlling mechanisms of the current paradigm, the entire miasm is filled with such 'weasel words', words that are designed to bespell or enslave an individual into a situation that, in terms of technicality, they have actually agreed to. It is an entanglement that, if one takes it on face value and seeks to answer in its own territories, is doomed to failure- the freeman and sovereign movement is filled with examples of those who tried to turn the law's weasel words on itself only to find themselves incarcerated for their efforts and frequently having lost everything in the process.

I spent two and a half years, averaging 50 hours a week, delving into the weasel words of the law. I made connections with many individuals who were deep into the world, and the private world of the other law that operates below the 'public' arena and that does not use acts and statues as its operating platform; in partnership with my friend and colleague we were responsible for private equity documents that ended up coming back to us as 'you should see this, this is amazing!' because others didn't know we'd created it. I know my stuff in that realm. I know how deep it goes and I kept looking for a much deeper signal.

I began to learn the hidden legalese for 'human being'. It was so disturbing that on two occasions I had to walk away from the studies because of the distress what I was learning was causing me. I found reference after reference to 'cattle, property, chattel, collateral' and in several very old books found much uglier references; I was inspired to go looking through the law definitions in my own country and search for what was being used here in Australia. Here is one example I found:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/patga1966307/s4.html#commonwealth_therapeutic_goods_laws

4 Definitions

(1) In this Act, unless the context or subject matter otherwise indicates or requires:
"Advisory Committee" means the Poisons Advisory Committee constituted by section 6.
"Analyst" means an analyst appointed or taken to be appointed under section 37A.
"Animal" means any animal (other than a human being), whether vertebrate or invertebrate, and includes but is not limited to:

(a) mammals, birds, bees, reptiles, amphibians, fish, crustaceans and molluscs, and

(b) the semen, ova or embryo of an animal (other than a human being) or any other substance or thing directly relevant to the reproduction of an animal (other than a human being).

For any individual remotely familiar with the position animals have in terms of the law, this was a profound revelation. I began to trace the interlinking connections between the various definitions contained in different laws and over a few months a pattern began to emerge, one in which human beings , by their own willing acceptance of the external authorities, had *in terms of the law* given away their autonomy and sui generis rights and agreed to be things rather than Beings in return for being taken care of. I moved this information around in many different ways, for quite some time, and began to look in other directions for remedies. What I kept coming across were repeated references to a state of Being that put an individual completely *outside* the paradigm's laws and dictates. It was in this realm that I came across the term 'sui generis', which is a legal term that is known to the upper courts. The upper courts recognise the living, autonomous Being as being *outside* their jurisdiction. There are many, many reasons for this and many cross-referencing laws, statues and equity principles, and one of the foundational concepts is that the law recognises that it is not a living thing- modern courts are *corporations* and have been since ecclesiastical courts were replaced, although in the strictest sense even ecclesiastical courts were corporate and recognised this on a deep level. There have been contortions after contortions with the baseline view held as the operating platform- the average individual constantly gives away their spiritual autonomy in return for an illusion of being taken care of by an external authority. I began to investigate the concept of sui generis and came across other interconnected terms- autonomy, absolute- that indicated a way of Being that had at its roots a profoundly spiritual perspective and foundation. Essentially, the entirety of the law is created upon a knowing that individuals do not want real autonomy- and every time an individual engages with the controlling authorities it is from this position- as a no-thing, as one who has been declared property and under dominion- that all actions spring. The individual is always the trustee, never the beneficiary- and the trustees *always* pay- have you noticed that inmates in prison are called trustees?- there are all these multilayered traps that exist because the individual allows the entrapment.

There are many, many ways that this allowance happens. There are many rationalisations and explanations for it. The rationalisations and explanations do nothing to free the individual from their situation and as actual transformation is what I am interested in, I was looking for what actually *works* in terms of answering the entanglements of the system. I kept coming across the same references again and again. These became entwined with concepts and platforms that I had been born with but had never been able to discuss because of the extremely triggered responses that I encountered until I began to speak about the sui generis, the autonomy and the interlinking of these and the undoing of the construments that have been pointed at society for a very, very long time. These entanglements are not just legal- they are on every level of existence: spiritual, physical, mental, psychological and biological. They are utterly insidious and the undoing of them has *nothing to do with laws, or reforming laws, or revolutions, or arresting bankers, or shouting slogans, or voting in a different prison guard*- the remedy is in truly knowing and living into being a sui generis, autonomous and absolute Being. This has many aspects and the law has partly been created as a *detection device* regarding those that claim to 'know who they are'; there are many youtube videos that demonstrate the dubious nature of going into a court and claiming one's Self as 'sovereign'- if it were the answer, this would work, but it frequently does not. The interesting question around that is 'why not'?

The truly autonomous Being, the Being who *utterly and completely groks that they ARE their own authority, their own jurisdiction, their own alpha and omega points, the captain of their vessel, their own conscience, the Creator of their own life's path- such a Being never *argues* their autonomy. There's utterly nothing to debate. They'll engage to a certain point *and* they will never 'defend'- there is a world of difference between holding a discussion and defence or argument, both of which are deeply embedded in legalese and have powerfully disempowering meanings, if one investigates them from the legal perspective. A Sui Generis Being is one who is utterly, totally unique, not animal, not chattel, not property- they are a law and authority to themselves, with a jurisdiction that begins and ends with themselves- and the law can tell these Beings from the general. The terms 'general' and 'special' are also deeply embedded law words that absolutely govern the way an individual is perceived and treated, *and* if the individual does not know who they really are then they remain in the 'general population', which is fundamentally translated as 'property'.

I have been striving to triangulate in many ways the importance of the true autonomy as activates this undoing mechanism. It's impossible to discuss without having a solid foundation and I've been endeavouring to create the platforms for moving into those discussions because I thought there was in interest in this, I thought that evolution was a subject of interest. I now recognise that establishing such a platform is currently impossible and so I'm going to write how I have come to see things and how they interlock in my mind without attempting to engage the discussion as much. I am deeply interested and absorbed by the connections I've been shown, on many different platforms, and how they all interlock. The key has always been fundamentally spiritual *and* it has utterly nothing to do with any form of philosophy, religion, spiritual 'wisdom', gurus, dogmas or external authorities of any kind. This is what I'll focus on exploring.

spiritguide
24th June 2012, 15:11
If this thread is about consensus about anything it has yet to come up with a facilitator that is autonomous (objective) to explore such a thing as consensus. The "Idea party" is the basis of an effective group (team) in a part of a quality control program. Control and rules are needed less it turns into chaos. Synchronicity is needed and without it no advancement is possible for the better of the whole. Group dynamics is a science that has been worked on for eons and we are still fighting over the basic principles of love and respect. Just imagine if all the individual cells of out 3D bodies did not work in harmony the amount of dis-ease we would incur. Without harmony there is no quality to the whole. Are we all conditioned to becoming proficient at brush fires and not noticing the forest burning down around us? The illusions are different at all levels discern this. IMHO (experiential autonomy)

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 15:18
hello,
I have found this thread getting under my skin. the challenge in the threadline to ask "how much transformation do I actually want, really" strikes at my heart. I feel I want all the transformation necessary to live in a new but ancient way. It may be a myth but I'd love to transform to live in a way that we all "know" the value of life as it is expressed. I would like to live in a way where we get energy direct from Source. I'd like to live in Tom Campbell's evolving coherent love format....defeating entropy for the good of consciousness. It would be what I feel would benefit me.

Yes, that way is couched in my own mind as the way "I " want to live becasue that appeals to me. Is that also the case for all the "others"..... does anyone want to transform against some stated way they want to live?
I have no desire to transform so that I would live the way someone else wants me to live. Since the "living" is the what I want, if transformation means living some way I do not want, I desire NOT to transform.

I can give an example. There is no appeal to me in what is called "Transhuman" where we take on bionic parts and even could have living forever by surgically reinstalling parts. i do not even want to live"longer" if it means transplants. What I want is that I learn how to inner change what is not working well with new understanding. I want to live as an evolving creature with abilities inside out.

Another example. I do not care for the idea of virtual reality. I have acquaintances who have avatars and get on line and share all sorts of adventures and other things that to me make no sense. So if transformation is to get to the ability for this pursuit...no thanks for me. if I am living, I want it to be embedded in the "old world" that I see outside the window. Maybe I am limited in capacity? But I have this strong preference to what I know. yes, it is true, i just want what i like now to just get more what I like.

I live in a town haunted by the ancient legacy of cruelty to the original people and the furthering of Appalachian poverty consciousness. IF transformation is about being the kind of person able to help heal ancient trauma, YES to that. I will dig in to that one. I would enjoy as life the the ability to create a new relationship among, within and between all the "people" (of every kind) who live near "me". There are many I can't even see...but I want us to be friends.

I really want the "one spirit" grokking kind of transformation but not make it happen by edict. I feel I desire a transformation that is flowing naturally and agreeable to all as consciousness unfolds. If "power" meant that I could make everyone do what I want them to do, even if it seemed like a "good reason"...something like ignoring the means to get to some end, no I am not wanting that one.

I know this is wordy...I am wordy in writing.
This whole thread bowls over with words.
But the question is really valuable. Thanks for the question. Maggie

If I am sensing your post right, I got the sense of an individual who wishes to craft her transformation and evolution her own unique way. The word painting you created of how that looks and is for you is beautiful. Thanks for sharing your expression of Self and your vision. :)

songsfortheotherkind
24th June 2012, 15:49
If this thread is about consensus about anything it has yet to come up with a facilitator that is autonomous (objective) to explore such a thing as consensus.

This thread is not about consensus. It is about autonomy in comparison to heteronomy. Consensus is not a requirement or element of autonomy. Your definition of autonomy as being objective is an interesting one- how have you connected autonomy (which is self law, self rule, own authority etc) with objectivity? Self *anything* is, in my understanding of the term, subjective. What I have been striving to explore in part is the development of a platform that encompasses the infinite possibilities of individual autonomy- hence my purpose and intent of exploring autonomy, using subjective perspectives and heteronomy as hologram points and contrasts for this. This was my original intention in posting the definitions of both words as a baseline.

Given this perspective, what is your view on both the dictionary definition and your own subjective experience of autonomy? What does autonomy as you practice it look like? How does a society populated by Beings who practice autonomy behave, interact with one another? These are the things I'm opening up for exploration.


The "Idea party" is the basis of an effective group (team) in a part of a quality control program. Control and rules are needed less it turns into chaos.

I included a link to the website that this quote came from because it is utterly relevant to the concept I was putting forth. Barbara Sher is a woman that does not in any way hold to concepts of rules, controls or quality control programs. That is not at all what I was talking about; these elements actually stifle and strangle brainstorming sessions which is what the term 'idea party' is describing. Controls and rules may be desired by some, and are utter anathema to others, as my link to the essay The Cathedral and the Bazaar demonstrates, as well as the points I made in that post. There have been many times in history where there was plenty of control and plenty of rules- things did not go well on any level. I am not an advocate of either, personally, and I understand that you are talking about your personal perspective here. So my question is, what is the approach when dealing with a bunch of supercreatives for whom control and rules stifle and strangle the creative function? The education system is an excellent example of this on every level and it has utterly failed to come up with any solution to that dichotomy. How do you see things functioning for all concerned?


Synchronicity is needed

are you here suggesting that control and rules promotes or creates synchronicity? I don't understand the connection you're making here.


Group dynamics is a science that has been worked on for eons and we are still fighting over the basic principles of love and respect.

I'm not sure about the eons of group dynamics as a science and I agree about the inability to agree on the basic principles of love and respect. My perspective of this is that the insistence on some kind of consensus and homogeny around those terms is part of the constant conflict: I personally do not see any such requirement for consensus because the foundational platform *I* am working from does not require love or respect at all in order to operate. Love and respect are for the individual to explore and engage in; there are other parameters and concepts that can create a platform whereby all individual perspectives can be held in the space *without conflict*.


Just imagine if all the individual cells of out 3D bodies did not work in harmony the amount of dis-ease we would incur. Without harmony there is no quality to the whole.

Harmony is a sliding scale that is entirely situational, not an automatic given or assumption. Having a language that can hold the space for various expressions of harmony means that there is no load on any situation; I do not personally experience the reality that 'without harmony there is no quality to the whole', unless one is describing the holding of space for vastly divergent concepts as harmony. Harmony in itself is a subjective word, and what one individual may experience as harmonious the next may experience as jangling and dissonant. What then?


Are we all conditioned to becoming proficient at brush fires and not noticing the forest burning down around us? The illusions are different at all levels discern this. IMHO (experiential autonomy)

I have lived through several major bushfires and all I can say is, there is no way to put out a forest fire, there is only the hope of containment and redirection. That is actually what I'm attempting to do: I am watching a different sort of fire and wanting to create useful conversations about that- I cannot save the entire forest and I can do the best I can with what I can.

Thank you for expressing your Self.

spiritguide
24th June 2012, 17:02
Look beyond the written word, as dictionaries have editors legal or otherwise. Who defined before dictionaries? Was not concensus a reason for publishing or was it a form of control? Truth is experience felt, not necessarily heard or read at all times. In your dialog you discuss English law, what of Natural law (universal), does it not supercede english law? Who is the custodian of natural law? The US Constitution is a concensus of American law that holds itself subserviant to Natural law as outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

My oath to freedom (autonomy) is not just the written word but the spirit behind those words.

ljwheat
24th June 2012, 18:03
I was wondering Christian when it became okay for someone to waltz into the Avalon forum and use it as their own private "art" gallery? This particular form is problem-reaction-solution oriented and is as devisive to the forum as it gets. I agree 100% with Anotherbob's assessment.



Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

Collective narcissism (or group narcissism) is a type of narcissism where an individual has an inflated self-love of his or her own ingroup, where an “ingroup” is a group in which an individual is personally involved. While the classic definition of narcissism focuses on the individual, collective narcissism asserts that one can have a similar excessively high opinion of a group, and that a group can function as a narcissistic entity. Collective narcissism is related to ethnocentrism; however, ethnocentrism primarily focuses on self-centeredness at an ethnic or cultural level, while collective narcissism is extended to any type of ingroup beyond just cultures and ethnicities.
Conversational narcissism is a term used by sociologist Charles Derber in his book, The Pursuit of Attention: Power and Ego in Everyday Life.
Derber observed that the social support system in America is relatively weak, and this leads people to compete mightily for attention. In social situations, they tend to steer the conversation away from others and toward themselves. "Conversational narcissism is the key manifestation of the dominant attention-getting psychology in America," he wrote. "It occurs in informal conversations among friends, family and coworkers. The profusion of popular literature about listening and the etiquette of managing those who talk constantly about themselves suggests its pervasiveness in everyday life."

What Derber describes as "conversational narcissism" often occurs subtly rather than overtly because it is prudent to avoid being judged an egotist.
Derber distinguishes the "shift-response" from the "support-response


This and many other treads this one has started, cloning its self in its true essence is fishing, bait an hook. In some circles, its referred to as energy vampirism, by page 3 or 4 the thread usually die’s out once a topic reaches a reasonable resolution in the sense of useful and beneficial to all attending parties. Not so in this case. Like a religion, the preacher leads the congregation close to, but never to the sighted goal in the beginning. Feeding off its followers in a very loving, nurturing way but never to the door that leads to full understanding and the end to the sermon or the eventual down fall of the church. The title on the Markey or subject matter never is the focus that’s just the mask hiding the energy vampire beneath.

When this is revealed and parishioners walk away the church or vampire die’s. rough analogy but non the less over 5 billion are stuck in this problem-reaction-solution programming.

This is a art form yes, and has many mask’s to hide behind, with only one goal. Your energy -- with out it. It die’s. and so would this thread of pure energy now running into page 9 with no possible end in sight. Wonder why? Programming at it finest. “Bazinga”

The label is the hook, (problem) the line (reaction) and sinker is (solution) --- the goal your energy and attention. The sinker solution is to heavy to ever give up what your heart already has and knows.

A perpetual marry go round and no brass ring in sight, except for the preacher that is. Topic is only the hook or open door one walks threw, close the door and it always go’s away, till the preacher opens another door for you to walk threw, "come one- come all-" see the many wonders that lie behind this door I hold open for you. They never ever go near the open door in your heart, the light of that sword is there death.

John xxx

Borden
24th June 2012, 19:09
Abusive drivel has pushed me over the edge of my sympathy for the hopelessly stupid and into the recognition that the hopelessly stupid want to stay that way and nothing can be done for them.

People in this thread, while hiding behind self-serving, fatuous and vile fantasies of 'love' and 'enlightenment', have shown themselves for what they actually are. Witnessing it has been like lifting up a rock. Real love is something that a droning vessel for judgment, mind-virus and hand-me-down abuse could never grasp or experience. Love is not the asinine mimicry of third rate new age flakery that conceals a bitter, measly little heart ... it is not shouting 'blessings' at someone while scowling and thronging to burn a witch ... IT IS A BIT BLOODY MORE THAN THAT.

You people think you can come in here and insult this woman because she is trying to put forth a different language than yours. Your language is not yours. It is created for you and you serve it - it does not serve you.

Is there ANYBODY HERE who can see the grotesque irony of people blithering about love and blessings while attacking Songsy in the way they have and with the language they have? What is it ... is it because she's out here on her own and an easy target? Is it because you know her language doesn't extend to the sort of petty brutishness so many live by? Or is it just that there's safety in numbers, and that the zombie hordes are confident to chuck the platitudes of their thinly veiled religion - yes, RELIGION - at her?

Hey, where's the infinite compassion and love? Where's the 'we're all one'? Where's the 'everything we do and say is from spirit?' Hypocritical rubbish. My God ... if you're going to talk like that then walk the bloody walk as well.

If someone starts a thread that you don't like, then why don't you stay the hell out of it? If someone starts a thread and seems to be putting forth an idea that you're not into, then what do you have to gain by trying to shoot it down? Especially when that person has taken great pains to express her belief that you have every right to see things your own way! It's frankly unbelievable. It's pitiful, and I keep half thinking I'm actually seeing some Monty Python scene re-enacted.

On this page alone I've seen Songsy abused beyond belief. I've seen people call her a tool of the NWO, a proponent of 'problem-reaction-solution', an 'energy vampire', and various other things that disgust me. There have been people arguing a differing viewpoint and doing so in a civilised way, and that's the whole point of debate. But there has also been wretched abuse, and it varies from the more intelligent and crafty kind to the squawking idiot variety.

If no-one else cares about this, and if no-one else steps up to say what needs to be said here ... then here is not worth being. Because you can be damned sure that if someone pushing the more expected fodder were to be attacked like this ... you'd be up in arms.

This is supposed to be an ALTERNATIVE forum.

onawah
24th June 2012, 19:39
You are not alone Borden, nor is Songs, but I have arrived at the conclusion that ignoring this kind of thing is best, otherwise you may just be adding fuel to the fire.
Taking it personally is also a choice, and you can choose otherwise, which I think will give you more peace.
I think Songs is choosing that, and nothing like this tempest in a teapot is going to stop her from sharing her perspective.

I will just add that I think some people have allowed themselves to be prejudiced by Goth images from the Pub of blood-besmeared Jokers, etc., not understanding the context in which these kinds of images are used, and so from closed-mindedness, have mistaken Songs' perspective for sociopathology, and that has triggered a sort of field day mentality when it comes to taking potshots at Songs.
Characteristic of the very pathological kind of behavior that it is decrying, of course...
There is always the "ignore" option on the forum which is quite effective for deflecting the idiocy
And the more intelligent critics will likely not return to heap more abuse unless they continue to be challenged.

Borden
24th June 2012, 20:02
Thank you Onawah, and yes, I do agree with you. But I have been ignoring it, until enough is enough. I certainly don't want to add fuel to any fire, but neither am I going to just sit by while someone's being abused.

It's not about taking it personally, by the way. It's not even me they've been abusing, it's someone else. But I do know what you mean. And thank you for being someone else with the guts to say something.

ThePythonicCow
24th June 2012, 20:10
In some circles, its referred to as energy vampirism
That's what I'm calling it too.

songsfortheotherkind and Borden are on a week's vacation.

Dorjezigzag
24th June 2012, 21:52
In some circles, its referred to as energy vampirism
That's what I'm calling it too.

songsfortheotherkind and Borden are on a week's vacation.

Energy Vampirism makes me think of the Catholicism of Anne Rice and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints of Stephanie Meyer.

Have people really appreciated the energy that songs has given into her posts, they are her posts not cut and paste from some celebrity sheep herder. I feel that a reminder is needed of the definition of heteronomy and I want people to consider if heteronomy has been applied here with the punishment that has been inflicted on songs and indeed Borden.

heteronomy
1. the state or condition of being ruled, governed, or under the sway of another, as in a military occupation.
2. the state or condition of being under the influence or domination, in a moral, spiritual, or similar sense, of another person, entity, force, etc. Cf. autonomy. — heteronomous, adj.
See also: Government
the condition of being under the moral control of something or someone external; inability to be self-willing. — heteronymous, adj.
See also: Will
the condition of being under the rule or domination of another.
See also: Politics

ThePythonicCow
24th June 2012, 22:26
There is a fundamental difference between voluntary participation in an organized group (or a moderated forum, as in this case), and involuntary enslavement under the rule or domination of another.

Dorjezigzag
24th June 2012, 22:40
But surely people should be free to be autonomous within that group that they have autonomously chosen to be part of.

I may disagree but I will respect the autonomy of someone to express themselves in what they believe.

If someone takes action that prevents someone expresing their autonomy than one can argue that they have become part of the heteronomy.

The influence or domination, in a moral, spiritual, or similar sense, of another person, entity

another bob
24th June 2012, 22:46
But surely people should be free to be autonomous within that group that they have autonomously chosen to be part of.

Up to the point where a tipping point is reached and the group is negatively impacted. The needs of the many vs those of the few . . .

ThePythonicCow
24th June 2012, 22:48
If someone takes action that prevents someone expresing their autonomy than one can argue that they have become part of the heteronomy.

Yes, the forum moderation is an outside influence on those who choose, of their own free will, to participate in the forum.

Dorjezigzag
24th June 2012, 23:01
But surely people should be free to be autonomous within that group that they have autonomously chosen to be part of.

Up to the point where a tipping point is reached and the group is negatively impacted. The needs of the many vs those of the few . . .

In Nazi germany the many wanted a witch hunt against the jews, homosexuals and gipsys, only a few did anything to prevent the abuse.

The group loved Hitler and crucified Jesus.

To be popular does not Necessarily mean to be trueful.

You think facing the truth is easy?

another bob
24th June 2012, 23:06
But surely people should be free to be autonomous within that group that they have autonomously chosen to be part of.

Up to the point where a tipping point is reached and the group is negatively impacted. The needs of the many vs those of the few . . .

In Nazi germany the many wanted a witch hunt against the jews, homosexuals and gipsys, only a few did anything to prevent the abuse.

The group loved Hitler and crucified Jesus.

To be popular does not mean to be trueful.

You think facing the truth is easy?


Wasn't there a post a while back about how many times Hitler was invoked in forum squabbles like this? Maybe that was at another forum, but the statistics were amazing!

Anchor
24th June 2012, 23:26
In some circles, its referred to as energy vampirism
That's what I'm calling it too.

songsfortheotherkind and Borden are on a week's vacation.

I think codifying energy vampirism into the forum guidelines may be quite tricky.

Fred Steeves
24th June 2012, 23:26
I see this as one of those situations where everyone involved shares in the blame, which just happens by chance to be how they all are. I have my footprint stamped into this thread as well, and looking around at the carnage scattered about, I'm not seeing many innocent faces. It takes two to Tango so to speak.

In the meantime, while two of the major participants are not here to speak for themselves, I would respectfully request dropping the matter until their return. http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/yes4.gif

I'm just sayin,
Fred

Anchor
24th June 2012, 23:27
Wasn't there a post a while back about how many times Hitler was invoked in forum squabbles like this? Maybe that was at another forum, but the statistics were amazing!

Its called Godwin's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law).

Dorjezigzag
24th June 2012, 23:34
But surely people should be free to be autonomous within that group that they have autonomously chosen to be part of.

Up to the point where a tipping point is reached and the group is negatively impacted. The needs of the many vs those of the few . . .

In Nazi germany the many wanted a witch hunt against the jews, homosexuals and gipsys, only a few did anything to prevent the abuse.

The group loved Hitler and crucified Jesus.

To be popular does not mean to be trueful.

You think facing the truth is easy?


Wasn't there a post a while back about how many times Hitler was invoked in forum squabbles like this? Maybe that was at another forum, but the statistics were amazing!

I am not in a squabble but you have been attacking songs.
If you look through the posts I have not been involved in a squable at all, I made one post, I ignored the attacks made against songs because she has the autonomy to deal with this abuse. I am now passing comment because she is no longer able to do so. It is not the most intelligent thing to do because I know this will not make me popular, but it is something I strongly believe in so I will express my autonomy.

The reason why Hitler is cited so many times because he is an extreme example that most people are aware of someone who was popular but whose actions had an adverse effect on many peoples autonomy. I could have cited Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Bush, Blair etc etc. populists who play to the group but often take action against peoples autonomy.

Hitler should be quoted because he is an example of someone who imposed a lie, he is the extreme example of heteronomy. lest we forget.

onawah
24th June 2012, 23:35
Up to the point where a tipping point is reached and the group is negatively impacted. The needs of the many vs those of the few . .

How was the entire group negatively impacted?
Is the need of the many to have all agree with the most prevailing viewpoint?
It seems to me there would have been no problem if certain parties had not decided to attack Songs on her own threads for expressing her very thoughtful and well expressed viewpoint.
She did not engage in name calling or other negative tactics on her threads, unlike her attackers, nor did Borden until he was very provoked.

Anchor
24th June 2012, 23:44
To those who are angry about this, I strongly recommend just waiting this one out.

Moderation of a nuclear reactor involves inserting rods to calm a reaction.

That is exactly what is going on here.

In a weeks time the control rods will be removed.

No rights, no wrongs, just too much energy on the loose that were deemed (by Paul) to be approaching the limits of the containment vessel.

another bob
24th June 2012, 23:46
I am not in a squabble but you have been attacking songs.

Perhaps you could point out specifically where in this thread the alleged attack took place? I recall making one post some time back elaborating my views on transformation, which Songs then critiqued. My response to that was to note how wonderful it was to participate in a forum that could accomodate such divergent views, and left it at that.

:yo:

another bob
24th June 2012, 23:51
She did not engage in name calling or other negative tactics on her threads, unlike her attackers, nor did Borden until he was very provoked.

It's always fascinated me how different people can read the same materials and yet draw totally opposite conclusions.

Anchor
25th June 2012, 00:09
It's always fascinated me how different people can read the same materials and yet draw totally opposite conclusions.

Really?

That seems to be the nub of the problem with most forums.

I have been "on-line" since well before the internet was invented on a soldered together pile of junk with an acoustic coupled modem and even back then in the heady days of the BBS it was ever thus.

Dorjezigzag
25th June 2012, 00:13
By the way I have no anger about this. I am purely concerned with intent.


Perhaps you could point out specifically where in this thread the alleged attack took place?

Yes I will, your words from this thread are in quotations


What continues to amaze me is how much (unnecessary) conflict is generated when concepts are mistaken for reality


My interpretation is that your intent is to say that songs mistakes concepts for realities, if you read her posts you will see that she is quite aware of the limits of language, that is why she writes so much.


He's the virus!"

No, she's the virus!"

"No, they're the virus!"

"No, you're the virus!"

"But really, them's the virus!"

"No, the virus is the virus!"

"No, the only virus is you!"

"No, I'm no virus!"

"Yes you are."

"Not!"

"Am too!"

"I know you are, but what am I?"

"You're the virus!"

"No, you!

"No, you!"

To me this is an obvious attempt at riduculing songs means of expression, you are making fun of her. I would like to see the statistics at how many people ridicule another in order to try and challenge an argument of which they are unable on a serious intellectual level.

virus theory in my opinion has a valid place in the consideration of autonomy. I suggest you research the works of William Burroughs who believed that language is a virus


On the other hand, the habitual narcissism of the self-enamored personality cannot bear the light of such scrutiny, and will resist any change, sensing that such a transformation would supplant it from its power position, and so in fearful reactivity typically retreats and clings to familiar conditioned strategies of contrived reality that inevitably trace back to a socio-pathological root.

Furthermore, it serves little purpose to point this out to such a personality, since they will only respond to messages which confirm their particular complex, defensively rejecting all others as threats and insults. The mind so afflicted in its own elevation and survival, by its very nature, precludes any empathetic impulse or compassionate response-ability.

This is the mad child who constitutes the vast majority of the population here in this realm, and so if we are truly keen on authentic human progress, we need to start with our own self-absorbed craziness, the knot at our own hearts, rather than speculating about global transformation and fabricating evolutionary fantasies predicated on names and notions spawned from the very mind for which true empathy and compassion is yet a distant stranger. Ultimately, it must be seen that effective transformation can only be built on a foundation of real compassion, which is what true love is all about

I don't see you have much compassion for songs!

another bob
25th June 2012, 00:25
By the way I have no anger about this. I am purely concerned with intent.


Perhaps you could point out specifically where in this thread the alleged attack took place?


What continues to amaze me is how much (unnecessary) conflict is generated when concepts are mistaken for reality


My interpretation is that your intent is to say that songs mistakes concepts for realities, if you read her posts you will see that she is quite aware of the limits of language, that is why she writes so much.

Well, interpretations are interesting critters, eh. In fact, I was making a rhetorical comment, which was directed to all participants and readers.




He's the virus!"

No, she's the virus!"

"No, they're the virus!" ..[

To me this is an obvious attempt at riduculing songs means of expression, you are making fun of her.

Yes, I had forgotten that one. It was an attempt at pointing out the silliness of accusations of being virus-infected that Songs was leveling at any who disagreed with her pov.



On the other hand, the habitual narcissism of the self-enamored personality cannot bear the light of such scrutiny, and will resist any change, sensing that such a transformation would supplant it from its power position, and so in fearful reactivity typically retreats and clings to familiar conditioned strategies of contrived reality that inevitably trace back to a socio-pathological root.

Furthermore, it serves little purpose to point this out to such a personality, since they will only respond to messages which confirm their particular complex, defensively rejecting all others as threats and insults. The mind so afflicted in its own elevation and survival, by its very nature, precludes any empathetic impulse or compassionate response-ability.

This is the mad child who constitutes the vast majority of the population here in this realm, and so if we are truly keen on authentic human progress, we need to start with our own self-absorbed craziness, the knot at our own hearts, rather than speculating about global transformation and fabricating evolutionary fantasies predicated on names and notions spawned from the very mind for which true empathy and compassion is yet a distant stranger. Ultimately, it must be seen that effective transformation can only be built on a foundation of real compassion, which is what true love is all about

I don't see you have much compassion for songs!


Compassion does not mean to stay silent when BS is being slung. In my own path, the critiques that have hit home, even though they may have stung, were eventually seen as gifts.

Now, if you wish to pursue this further, we should take your complaint into private messages, imo, so as to give the forum a break from further distress.

:yo:

Dorjezigzag
25th June 2012, 01:02
Hi Anotherbob,

As i told you I am not in a squable with you, my concern is with songs. I would rather have not presented you with that evidence but you asked me to and now you tell me that I should not do it any more and Pm you. Seems to me that you are a man that likes to be in control, what is that word again........hmmmmm heteronomy.

I think you know that I have had the utmost respect for your posts, but with songs in my opinion you have lacked respect and compassion.

Just so you know I actually debated songs on a seperate thread when she was writing about heteronomy, I asked her who exactly are the heteronomy so I can understand your prejudice?

With this thread I got where she was coming from and felt bad about my comment to her which as always she brushed it off and dealt with in a dignified manner.

Yes words are just symbols they are not the actual thing they represent, but thats all we have on this forum. I believe Songs is well aware of that, and she is just trying to give something of her self, her autonomy. She gave so much and I just feel she has been misunderstood as I origanally did



Compassion does not mean to stay silent when BS is being slung

Now you are actually saying that songs is slinging BS, that is your opinion, in my opinion her thread was one of the most beneficial posts that has ever been on Avalon.

Delight
25th June 2012, 01:17
By the way I have no anger about this. I am purely concerned with intent.


Perhaps you could point out specifically where in this thread the alleged attack took place?


What continues to amaze me is how much (unnecessary) conflict is generated when concepts are mistaken for reality


My interpretation is that your intent is to say that songs mistakes concepts for realities, if you read her posts you will see that she is quite aware of the limits of language, that is why she writes so much.

Well, interpretations are interesting critters, eh. In fact, I was making a rhetorical comment, which was directed to all participants and readers.




He's the virus!"

No, she's the virus!"

"No, they're the virus!" ..[

To me this is an obvious attempt at riduculing songs means of expression, you are making fun of her.

Yes, I had forgotten that one. It was an attempt at pointing out the silliness of accusations of being virus-infected that Songs was leveling at any who disagreed with her pov.



On the other hand, the habitual narcissism of the self-enamored personality cannot bear the light of such scrutiny, and will resist any change, sensing that such a transformation would supplant it from its power position, and so in fearful reactivity typically retreats and clings to familiar conditioned strategies of contrived reality that inevitably trace back to a socio-pathological root.

Furthermore, it serves little purpose to point this out to such a personality, since they will only respond to messages which confirm their particular complex, defensively rejecting all others as threats and insults. The mind so afflicted in its own elevation and survival, by its very nature, precludes any empathetic impulse or compassionate response-ability.

This is the mad child who constitutes the vast majority of the population here in this realm, and so if we are truly keen on authentic human progress, we need to start with our own self-absorbed craziness, the knot at our own hearts, rather than speculating about global transformation and fabricating evolutionary fantasies predicated on names and notions spawned from the very mind for which true empathy and compassion is yet a distant stranger. Ultimately, it must be seen that effective transformation can only be built on a foundation of real compassion, which is what true love is all about

I don't see you have much compassion for songs!


Compassion does not mean to stay silent when BS is being slung. In my own path, the critiques that have hit home, even though they may have stung, were eventually seen as gifts.

Now, if you wish to pursue this further, we should take your complaint into private messages, imo, so as to give the forum a break from further distress.

:yo:

I just want to go on record here that I am a reader of lots of the forum and I think there were personal issues at play. If one finger is pointing out, remember the cliche of the 4 fingers pointing somewhere else. I do not know why Paul agrees there is energy vampirism in the thread(s). But one thing I absolutely am positive in: energy vampirism is only possible in a relationship of agreement. I also think that garden variety "vampirism" is ego that has been injured and seeks to "win". It can get very demanding of attention. It can become very covert too and stir a pot till the pot boils. Sometimes an ego can use oh so reasonable sensibility and make it look like the other ego is the crazy one that must be "sanctioned". It is a shame that after several people said very mean spirited things in various places, Songs and Borden were sanctioned.

It looks to me as though the forum "lost" in this episode. I feel a loss of confidence that people with strong opinions are welcome to explore them in this venue. Others who may not actually post a response may feel a loss too. If there are any others who feel this was a mistake, I hope they speak out versus walk away.

I would like to see a public apology from Paul to Borden and Songs for being singled out as "problems". In my opinion the reaction to the public statements made are too much over too little because too many people here who are not on vacation are too ready to impose THEIR agendas.

I would have stopped reading this thread immediately if I had no interest. If there is the hint of a drain of energy....just say no thanks and vote with one's delete button. Maggie

ThePythonicCow
25th June 2012, 01:45
I think codifying energy vampirism into the forum guidelines may be quite tricky.
Yeah ... that would be tricky :).

ThePythonicCow
25th June 2012, 02:10
It looks to me as though the forum "lost" in this episode. I feel a loss of confidence that people with strong opinions are welcome to explore them in this venue.
It wasn't the strong opinions that concerned us (the moderation team.) If anything, I suspect that many of songsfortheotherkind's opinion's find considerable agreement with various moderator's, myself included. This forum is home to many strong, sometimes conflicting, opinions.

It's difficult (if not impossible) to explain to all, such that all will nod in agreement, the motives for such moderation action.

Most of us, myself no doubt included, can find it easy to overlook the energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents, of someone else's arguments, when that someone else is making a case with which we substantially agree.

onawah
25th June 2012, 02:53
It's difficult (if not impossible) to explain to all, such that all will nod in agreement, the motives for such moderation action.

I for one, would certainly appreciate it if you would at least take a stab at it.

Anchor
25th June 2012, 03:07
I think codifying energy vampirism into the forum guidelines may be quite tricky.
Yeah ... that would be tricky :).

Yes, well I was making a point.

I think the reason given for the holiday could do with being amended/elaborated.

As it stands it could be seen as farcical by some interpretations - especially from a PR point of view, viz a viz how others in the community would see these actions and the reasons for them.

I do actually care about these things you know!

another bob
25th June 2012, 03:46
Now you are actually saying that songs is slinging BS, that is your opinion, in my opinion her thread was one of the most beneficial posts that has ever been on Avalon.

Yes, we all have opinions.

ThePythonicCow
25th June 2012, 03:46
Yes, well I was making a point.

I think the reason given for the holiday could do with being amended/elaborated.

As it stands it could be seen as farcical by some interpretations - especially from a PR point of view, viz a viz how others in the community would see these actions and the reasons for them.

I do actually care about these things you know!

Yes, I know you care about these things.

As I stated in another post just above:




It's difficult (if not impossible) to explain to all, such that all will nod in agreement, the motives for such moderation action.

So far as I can tell, those who see what the mods were seeing understand, and those who choose to protest the heteronomy will.

I could dissect in detail past posts, but I don't see the point in doing so. I've honestly stated, as best as I could, what motivated this action by the forum moderation team, and some other forum members have spelled out in more detail and more eloquently the concerns they observed.

The moderation team acted with the consent of all moderators present, and we stated what we did and why. Some members object. We (the mods) read the objections, doing our reasonable human best to remain open to insights and evidence that we missed. Such it is.

another bob
25th June 2012, 03:50
I just want to go on record here that I am a reader of lots of the forum and I think there were personal issues at play.

It's all personal, until it isn't.

I have a longer history with Songs than either of you, and I comment with as much integrity as I am able in that regard, while also aware that I have work yet to do.

Thanks for your comments, though now I am withdrawing from this discussion.

:yo:

ThePythonicCow
25th June 2012, 03:51
I for one, would certainly appreciate it if you would at least take a stab at it.
I just did, in the post prior to yours, Post #204 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?46461-So-how-much-transformation-is-actually-wanted-really&p=511515&viewfull=1#post511515):



energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents
I will not go post by post, line by line, justifying this.

Anchor
25th June 2012, 04:02
Paul,

thanks. You know on some forums discussion on the moderators actions is actually a banning offense.

This place is special for a lot of reasons.

One of them is that you will step up to the plate and address concerns openly - and I can promise you it is very much appreciated.

John..

jp11
25th June 2012, 04:17
I for one, would certainly appreciate it if you would at least take a stab at it.
I just did, in the post prior to yours, Post #204 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?46461-So-how-much-transformation-is-actually-wanted-really&p=511515&viewfull=1#post511515):



energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents
I will not go post by post, line by line, justifying this.

It's been quite a while since I've posted...and I feel it's important for me to say something here.

Paul and all the mods, please know that I have deep respect for what you do, giving of your time and energy, and I know it is not something I would do. That said, what you have written Paul is so very subjective.
energy draining, abusive rhetorical devices and undercurrents

If one is so energy drained, then it is their choice to leave. To my way of thinking that is the sensible thing to do. Are we now responsible for another's lack of common sence to put their own well being first...rather that pretend to be protecting or speaking up for the others that can't or wont?

I can almost see why Borden was put on vacation, but good god! what the hell did songs say at that point...nothing...but she's gone too!

ThePythonicCow
25th June 2012, 04:48
Yes, jp11, it's subjective. It would be easier to moderate the forum on strictly objective criteria that would be evident to all and generally agreed to by most. But I am convinced that would end up allowing more harm to the forum.

Yes, members can choose to leave if they feel an unwelcome energy drain, or any other unwelcome affect from being here. But that observation really only justifies an absence of moderation ... "Why moderate ... members can choose for themselves?"

Forums are not just collections of individuals, making their own separate decisions. They also have structure and norms at the collective level.

ljwheat
25th June 2012, 05:30
In Veit Nahm 50 years ago I remember a group of guy’s that were like the Mod’s here at Avalon. There job was to see the unsuspecting trip wire, or land mine unseen by the unsuspecting GI that would set off or trip over while we stayed focused on the job at hand-- we felt much safer with these unsung hero’s around. And besides everything is recorded here and reviewing the trails and previous trip lines and land mines and how they went off and who set them up are all recorded. My entire spoken record is right under my name on my personal page find all threads started, plus this and every single post or thank you I typed on these keys.

All those running red lights, forgot all about the red light camera at each and every intersection. And I’m glad they are in place. I’m sure most of you wouldn’t have the time or fortitude to go back over a couple hundred hours of threads over one red light ticket. Frankly I would not want that job, and having to explain all this every time to everyone is mind numbing to me. IMO the mod’s are the unsung hero’s here.

John

mountain_jim
25th June 2012, 13:12
While I appreciate the reactor/control rod analogy, let me introduce another.

Basketball game, double-foul, referees are influenced by the yelling of the home (overall forum) crowd and only call (and punish) the foul on the team with less (or lesser?) partisans in the stands.

In spite of good arguments by the home team, it looked and felt like a (personal) foul to me during the 'game', as it occurred.

When I recently decided to dip my toe in the waters of the shared personal space community threads, I chose the one I did because it was much smaller to catch up with, thus seemed more easily entered, plus I liked tha virtual 'pub' allegory and the creative writing at the door.

I was unaware of any backstory or issues or even 'teams' really, until this thread's 'game'.

I hope to still be welcome in the 'home arenas' of all 'teams', and by all 'players' here, for I do find great value for my own walk on my spiritual path in the relayed experiences, understanding of Life, and points-of-view expressed by all here, and particularly so for the 'players' most involved in this particular 'game'.

This is my critique.

spiritguide
25th June 2012, 14:42
Communications............Do we love the respect, or do we respect the love? Is it dialog or diatribe? Quite clearly in any case when a bullet is shot at you in a time of conflict it is diatribe. IMHO

:peace:

Mad Hatter
25th June 2012, 15:57
Mad Hatter dons his fascinated cap.

So it did come down to a fart in a spacesuit after all... :painkiller: but as I suspected might happen, the smell was not emanating from those genuinley participating in the conversation who had the intelllectual capacity to grasp the concepts being discussed and contribute accordingly but rather from those having their pet paradigm challenged and being unable to respond in the manner of a free thinking open minded adult, have resorted to the tactics born of being well and truly mired in Matrix type thinking.

Hey lets play shoot the messenger...truly original...NOT

*to all the coppertops involved and you know who you are, have another blue pill on me*

It does seem a shame when for those of us whom happen to delight in discussion that often times incurs more lengthy well thought out posts the opportunity is killed by a call for complying to the wishes of the lowest common denominator. In a shallow gene pool not such a wise idea but hey heteronomous demockery (mob rule by any other name) reigns supreme.

Well actually it's not killed it's just been Pauled for a bit...:p

Is it not curious that this forum seems to take a certain amount of pride in being one of the better alternative communities. What is that about? Alternative only so long as you don't go outside what has been pre-defined as safely alternative.

Hmm... perhaps the whole discussion of sui generis/sovereignty/self responibility is making TPTB uncomfortable and they have put their foot down. Think I'm joking? Just check out the contribution vs view ratio of the Pub thread...think about it...

Yes we all have opinions but why do some insist on ignoring the oft repeated good advice to leave what does not resonate with them alone. If you enter a thread like this, is it not acceptable for those participating to expect that you are actually up for some robust discussion of the idea(s) being proposed?

Is it acceptable for those regularly participating, to have to put up with interlopers who have not read the whole thread, thus having no grip on where the discussion is up to and why, go ahead and denigrate the participants with personal attacks?

"Oh, I think it's BS." M'kay. So to you it's BS to others it's mushroom food and when politely thanked for your input how about you just leave. Really laughable are those that say this is my final word on the subject and then come back with an oxymoron in the from of 'another' final word. Bingo heteronomy personified...talk about a power trip!!

Oh well, since I no longer have the oppotunity to enjoy my particular brand of interaction in this particular space with these particular people I'll maybe take the opportunity to investigate the musings of those who claim some knowledge of 'energy vampirism' and see if what they say has any basis in fact. Surely asking for proof of such matters won't cause any grief...surely they'll be up for robust discussion on the subject matter in which they claim some expertise.

As for 'energy vampirism' who thought that one up? Did it not occur to them that this entire forum could be considered an energy vampire. How many thousands of hours of have been input by all those keyboard warriors and to what effect? sheesh.

Cheers and in closing to quote another oft misunderstood and on occasion unfairly maligned past member of Avalon...

'I am responsible for wot I say not wot you understand' so there.

christian
25th June 2012, 17:18
Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

"end of story" FOR YOU. Important distinction.

Does your message change if you switch to autonomous language that contains no suggestion whatsoever that any other individual needs or has to see things your way?

That was of course tongue-in-cheek. When is "end of story" ever a real definite end? On more subtle levels is always more going on, there are so many facets, in parallel universes, other timelines. The only real 'end' of anything, that I can somehow fathom, is this cosmos and all-that-is having fulfilled its purpose. Whatever that is and whatever comes 'after' that point.

I find your OP really interesting and inspiring by the way, it makes on reflect on an important issue.


I was wondering Christian when it became okay for someone to waltz into the Avalon forum and use it as their own private "art" gallery? This particular form is problem-reaction-solution oriented and is as devisive to the forum as it gets. I agree 100% with Anotherbob's assessment.


Without having read through all of this thread but just the OP and some more, I figure to solve the issue about whether one lives in an autonomous or heteronomous system, independently or dependently, is to consciously discover and express, that the 'other' and the 'self' are one. End of story.

Hi Sebastian, I really don't know what you're referring to, but I'd like to. Please forgive me, that I don't just research it, but I'm very busy these days and am only on Avalon to write this reply.

Antagenet
25th June 2012, 17:58
Mad Hatter dons his fascinated cap.

Yes we all have opinions but why do some insist on ignoring the oft repeated good advice to leave what does not resonate with them alone. If you enter a thread like this, is it not acceptable for those participating to expect that you are actually up for some robust discussion of the idea(s) being proposed?

Hello Mad Hatter and Forum Members,

I agree with you about sifting though ideas and resonate with some and leave others alone. I was in fact fascinated and very willing to discuss Autonomy/Heteronomy since I have been a visible rebel from most norms for my whole life. That is why I became involved in this thread.

What I object to is not Songs ideas, but the responses she gave to many of us as we began participating. She set herself up
as the expert questioner when what she was doing was appropriating our imput and judging us instead of asking IS THIS WHAT YOU MEAN?
She began to evaluate our experience and that is antithetical to autonomy.

So it was not that she had "threatening" ideas, on the contrary, they were good and worth pursuing.
It was her emotional tone of arrogance that made me shrink away from further intellectual engagement.
Take the time to read this whole thread, dear members, before you judge or name call the mods.

I applaud Paul and the moderators for having the insight to see through her clever words, to sense the lack
of compassion that she had for many of us, and to remove her. On other threads Song even admitted
that she "doesn't do love" and "doesnt understand compassion."

On other forums, people who insult others and start conflict are often named "Trolls" or "Goverment agitators"
They usually post often and wordy diatribes, I suppose because they are paid to do so.
Im not saying Song is, but she could be. Just my intuition. I don't really know.

I dont know enough about Borden to make a comment.

All is well, The mods here are brave folks.

Delight
25th June 2012, 19:40
How much transformation of the way we deal with the combustion inherent in ego butt heads?

Maybe there could be some icons posted to alert the forum and inflamed beings involved before the outbreak of war?

Maybe we can compile a large number just for variiety?

http://tommyzor.com/images/flamewar.jpg

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/mobius_battle.png

http://highway55.library.yale.edu/PHOTONEGIMG/screen/S375/s3757143.jpg

Fred Steeves
25th June 2012, 20:33
So then, is it just me who feels it's not so cool to be publicly talking about, and criticizing people, when they still can't speak for themselves for six more days?

Maybe so. Oh well.

Curt
25th June 2012, 20:42
Yes, Fred. I agree. Waiting until they are present to speak for themselves would seem to be a very fair and reasonable approach.


So then, is it just me who feels it's not so cool to be publicly talking about, and criticizing people, when thet still can't speak for themselves for six more days?

Maybe so. Oh well.

Dorjezigzag
25th June 2012, 21:38
So then, is it just me who feels it's not so cool to be publicly talking about, and criticizing people, when thet still can't speak for themselves for six more days?

Maybe so. Oh well.

Only 6 more days I think we need to get these ready before they come back
http://icons.iconarchive.com/icons/greg-barnes/vampire-hunter/256/Hammer-Stake-icon.png

and I have found a new avatar for Borden
http://images.halloweencostumeideas.com/kids-vampire-wig.jpg

Seems to me that a transformation did take place on this thread from a autonomous individual into a heteronomously labeled vampire. Let us consider the vampire as a metaphor.


It may feel as if we're in the midst of a major vampire moment, but the idea of vampire as artistic metaphor is as deathless as the creatures themselves. The figure of the vampire—a human transformed by a bite into something that looks human but is not, who feeds off the blood of others to survive and has the power to both kill and bestow eternal life—is one of our most powerful and durable myths. Vampires appear in most cultures and across centuries, as both male and female, and with various abilities and weaknesses. In ancient folklore, vampires symbolized death and disease. Their signature physical traits probably came from reports by people who saw decomposing corpses, which sometimes bleed from the nose and mouth and feature teeth and fingernails that look long because the gums and nail beds have receded. Artists and writers have been reworking the myth ever since. Depending on whom you ask, vampire stories can be read as symbols of venereal disease, capitalism, immigration, industrialization, colonialism, AIDS, homosexuality, mental illness, anti-Semitism, technology or class warfare. "The vampire myth's power is that we can use it as a metaphor and a language to talk about the problems of our world," says William Patrick Day, author of "Vampire Legends in Contemporary American Culture." The question, then, is not why we are thinking about vampires now, but how we are thinking about them—and what our vampires say about us.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/12/05/a-bit-long-in-the-tooth.html

Sebastion
25th June 2012, 22:28
Well, I did post earlier on this thread that the "program" was going to be dividing the forum. Thanks for providing the evidence....






So then, is it just me who feels it's not so cool to be publicly talking about, and criticizing people, when thet still can't speak for themselves for six more days?

Maybe so. Oh well.

Only 6 more days I think we need to get these ready before they come back
http://icons.iconarchive.com/icons/greg-barnes/vampire-hunter/256/Hammer-Stake-icon.png

and I have found a new avatar for Borden
http://images.halloweencostumeideas.com/kids-vampire-wig.jpg

Seems to me that a transformation did take place on this thread from a autonomous individual into a heteronomously labeled vampire. Let us consider the vampire as a metaphor.


It may feel as if we're in the midst of a major vampire moment, but the idea of vampire as artistic metaphor is as deathless as the creatures themselves. The figure of the vampire—a human transformed by a bite into something that looks human but is not, who feeds off the blood of others to survive and has the power to both kill and bestow eternal life—is one of our most powerful and durable myths. Vampires appear in most cultures and across centuries, as both male and female, and with various abilities and weaknesses. In ancient folklore, vampires symbolized death and disease. Their signature physical traits probably came from reports by people who saw decomposing corpses, which sometimes bleed from the nose and mouth and feature teeth and fingernails that look long because the gums and nail beds have receded. Artists and writers have been reworking the myth ever since. Depending on whom you ask, vampire stories can be read as symbols of venereal disease, capitalism, immigration, industrialization, colonialism, AIDS, homosexuality, mental illness, anti-Semitism, technology or class warfare. "The vampire myth's power is that we can use it as a metaphor and a language to talk about the problems of our world," says William Patrick Day, author of "Vampire Legends in Contemporary American Culture." The question, then, is not why we are thinking about vampires now, but how we are thinking about them—and what our vampires say about us.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/12/05/a-bit-long-in-the-tooth.html

Dorjezigzag
25th June 2012, 22:47
I am not divided are you?
I have no side, no agenda, do you?

If songs and Borden come back and say something I don't agree with, I will tell them if I think it will add to the discussion. Likewise if another Bob or Fred say something I agree with i will tell them, I have done plenty of times before

I think no different of Fred, anotherBob, songs , Borden, infact anyone on this thread. I always take each post as it comes.

I actually think Paul does a really good job as well, I just disagree on this issue

I am actually just trying make light of the situation and perhaps encouraging people to think that when we apply labels it often says more about them than the recipient.

I think you will see in the end that this brings people closer together


Well, I did post earlier on this thread that the "program" was going to be dividing the forum. Thanks for providing the evidence....

Sebastion
25th June 2012, 23:17
Dorje

I see by your join date that you weren't a member of this forum during the charles/atticus days. Learned a lot as a result of that fiasco.

No, I am not divided but have seen what can happen to a forum when situations like the existing one rises up. I do not envy the mods, even remotely in this situation and will do my dead level best to see that my posts, if any, do not add fuel to any "fires".

I would back up what Fred said and leave this situation alone until all parties are present. You will not see me doing any pot stirring in the meantime or hopefully, ever.

Dorjezigzag
26th June 2012, 00:16
Well you and Fred were certainly stirring the pot earlier in the thread, which Fred has apologised about but I do not see that you have, infact you still are refering to 'the program' in relation to songs and blaming her for dividing the forum.

I am presenting songs and Bordens case as I see it and I have the autonomy to do that. Perhaps I am wrong for doing that, they can tell me when they return if i am.

There was a thread on lord Sidious for months where people were presenting his case while he was not here, Fred seemed OK with that, why not this?


Comparing Songs to atticus?
I have actually had the atticus experience, some on this forum may be aware of my discussions with atticus.

I do not see the connection

I have followed avalon since the beggining I have just not had the time to be a member until recently

I've pretty much said all I want to about this so I doubt I will write much more untill they return, not because Fred says so but because of my own free will.


Dorje

I see by your join date that you weren't a member of this forum during the charles/atticus days. Learned a lot as a result of that fiasco.

No, I am not divided but have seen what can happen to a forum when situations like the existing one rises up. I do not envy the mods, even remotely in this situation and will do my dead level best to see that my posts, if any, do not add fuel to any "fires".

I would back up what Fred said and leave this situation alone until all parties are present. You will not see me doing any pot stirring in the meantime or hopefully, ever.

21CC
11th July 2012, 22:41
Just had to spout off about Cataneda since I was disillusioned once upon a time. maggie


Casual research spurred by another thread revealed interesting bibliographies, people, and events that are inextricably tied to so many on the PA forum! Castaneda is mentioned in a citation to an" insider/outsider problem " essay by Russell T. McCutcheon, as it relates to mystical experiences, while acknowledging the fictional nature of his work.

DeDukshyn
11th July 2012, 23:25
Dorje

I see by your join date that you weren't a member of this forum during the charles/atticus days. Learned a lot as a result of that fiasco.

No, I am not divided but have seen what can happen to a forum when situations like the existing one rises up. I do not envy the mods, even remotely in this situation and will do my dead level best to see that my posts, if any, do not add fuel to any "fires".

I would back up what Fred said and leave this situation alone until all parties are present. You will not see me doing any pot stirring in the meantime or hopefully, ever.



I think much fear can be processed if we stop seeing and labelling our fellow brothers and sisters as things as "programs" and "vampires" (if even used in sarcasm as a form of implicated attack) -- speaking to both you and Dorj. Losing our humanity is the greatest victim of all (as clearly witnessed in this thread notably, but on others as well) and both these views contribute when we apply them as labels onto people or their views / experiences.

Do none of you recall the childish games you used to play? They haven't changed much at all, but now we just say "this means this" and "that means that" and apply more labels -- that is a program too, it is the "reason making machine" in us ... It truly is time for humanity as a whole to grow up. My 2 cents, speaking as objectively as possible - and not specifically to you Sebastion (in case you apply a pre-programmed automated projection to the former - often those who preach are the worst afflicted - hence the felt worthiness the feel the need to preach on the subject - makes sense - or do we listen to those with no experience on a given topic? In your case it appears to be the former? And better so).

Let this thread be a testament. Take care all.

songsfortheotherkind
15th January 2013, 07:38
You know, I never did see this reply. Thanks for that perspective. :)