A Few Thoughts

[AngEviL]

I need a break of couple days before posting to let all the realizations about the way I behaved, and the advice sink in. But I have to posts since Lakewolf started this thread partly because of the exchanges I had with many posters, and I will put forward my thoughts on this. I saw that people have different styles in giving advice and counter-arguments, and some are "softer" and some "harder". Maybe the combination of both helps, however posts by by Anart and Galahad in many instances, and by others in one or two instances, have been "hard to swallow" so to speak. I did feel that I was seen and made as unholy as the devil when I tried to show my compassion in Lakewolf, but at the same time the quantity and the quality of advice given was overwhelming. SAO's quote from the other thread is relevant to this:

Enjoy the reading AngEvil, and I'm glad that you are able to use the replies given to you constructively. One major benefit of a network is helping one another see things about ourselves that we can't see. It is often uncomfortable and our first reaction is to deny everything because consciously we didn't think we "intended" what others appear to be seeing in us, but our mechanical behaviors are not consciously controlled, so while you may think you intend one thing, a subconscious motivation/program that you're not aware of can easily be guiding and influencing your words and actions. And of course anyone can be wrong in their assessment, but that too is one of the most common tools our predator will use - it will say that because you *can* be wrong, therefore you *are* wrong, and will convince you to make no effort to seriously consider what anyone says if it makes you uncomfortable to hear.

As has been mentioned by others, seeing that the world is run by psychopaths and that humanity has been pathocracized isn't necessarily a shock for everyone, as many people already think that politicians and many others are pretty much evil and the world is an STS hellhole so this is just a more scientific and objective analysis of what many people already suspect to be true anyway. However, doing the esoteric Work to rid ourselves of our programming, subjectivity, and other emotional, psychological, and physical diseases is difficult for everyone. Sacred cows are sacred to our predator for a reason. The meditation, prayer, and breathing program allow us to clear some obstructions that could prevent us from making much progress in the Work, but the Work itself is still done only with our conscious efforts and it is always uncomfortable and many parts of us will resist and only go kicking and screaming, trying every trick in the book to prevent us from being able to remove them.

I hope you see that all that has been said to you was only done with the intention to help you grow and learn and See yourself better, which is tremendously empowering if you use it to do exactly that.

I agree with everything he said and the first step to learning is for one to see himself as he really is, and this is exactly what was being done. One may see what happened in the other thread it as over-reacting, and maybe it was, but on the other hand it can be seen as active involvement in helping one out. But I have to agree with Lakewolf that I did feel "attacked" and that I had a battle of "me vs. all". I do see her point that it could drive new members out, and it was very trying for me. It could be that I’m wrong, and the members of this forum that have been here for a long time would have more weight on this. In my opinion this is about the expression: "the end justifies the means", and how much you believe in it. In my case I feel like it was an extreme form of that expression. I don't mean to say that I am any less grateful to everybody, but I did feel like I was judged too harshly. Everybody has a limit, some more, some less, and some might not be able to take it. And you can't say that if they go away that they were unworthy, because that is one thing I learned, that everybody(except psychopaths) can be saved. But each one of us is different. Here is an example:
[quote author=MC]

1) Psychopaths on this forum should be able to be discerned by their perfection in wording, throwing in an occasional "emotional response".

This is an assumption that seems to reveal a very limited understanding of the forum's material re psychopathy. I also am reading from your posts that you have not read Political Ponerology which is essential for grokking the dynamic of this forum.
[/quote]

Lakewolf said that she is giving a short reply and she put that thought in as few words as possible, and she also said a short time ago that she has trouble typing. You said "very limited understanding" which I think is harsh MC. I think that many similar comments added together could make one feel subhuman and not worthy of any consideration until they read some of the staple books, and reflect on themselves properly.

[quote author=Lakewolf]
I posted what I did to save the IT people time in investigating it.

I find it curious that some posters don't take the time to get to know others when posting. One can only gauge the actions of others over time.

This being a form of communication which does not allow subleties, one can only gauge another's motives over time.

Labeling anyone a predator or a psychopath without knowing the person only serves ego.
.
.
.
I do believe this forum should be open to all, as one cannot judge another's motives without knowledge of that person. This means examining thoughtfully before posting, rather than make the default assumption everyone is STS.

I am also personally appalled by your kneejerk reaction to apply negativity to anyone's motives.

We all learn here at a different rate.
[/quote]

I was ignorant and arrogant, and many other awful things, and I still am “sick, and I fight to eliminate it and I couldn't have done it without you. I know nobody intended harm, actually the opposite, everybody wanted me to learn and see myself as quickly as possible, but like Lakewolf said, everybody has a different rate. To some "as quickly as possible" is not an option and they could end up feeling like crap. I knew that I was being helped, I knew that what you told me made sense, but overall I think that the most positive result came from the "softer" posts such as the ones from Away with the Fairys, Deedlet and others. It is true that the ones with the most impact were the numerous ones from Anart and Galahad, but maybe some people would have a negative reaction to them and they COULD BE perceived as an "attack". Isn't that considering to the others, and their current state of mind ? Another example - what you said Anart is wise:
[quote author=anart]
lakewolf, no one has been attacked on your thread, or in this thread. The fact that you think someone has indicates that you are not seeing things as they are. It also suggests that a defense has been triggered in you due to what was said either in reference to you or to another. We've seen this happen time and time and time again here. As soon as someone admonishes the forum for 'attacking' someone - when no attack (in any way, shape or form) occurred - it's obvious the defensive dynamic has been triggered and the person making the accusations is not seeing or thinking clearly.

They are also usually working overtime to protect some facet of their own ego/false personality. The fact that you've started a thread to admonish this forum for all it does wrong indicates you are either completely missing the boat, or you predator is acting up.
[/quote]

and VERY to the point, but in my opinion that can be perceived as an "attack". Maybe they wouldn't at the end of the road, after they do "the work", but you are talking to beginners and they could take it as such. And you can't say "it's their fault for not seeing the truth", as it has been become clear to me that there are many things we don't see about ourselves at the start of the journey. Again I could be wrong and somebody that has been on these forums for a long time and did “the work” can bring more light into this issue. I am very thankful for all the help given to me, and I am just posting my thoughts on this. I don't hold any contempt for anyone, but the opposite as everybody worked so hard to help me. I think that the mode in which the advice is given is as important as the quality and the quantity. I got over the worse and I have a long way ahead.

 

[anart]

I got over the worse and I have a long way ahead.

Then you see that you weren't pushed too hard, or you would not understand that, and you would not be here. You see, it is your programs, predator and false personality that feels attacked, AngEvil, not the Real you. This is the crux of the matter and if you were really handled so terribly, then you would not have benefited. At some point in the future you are likely to understand this very well.

 

[mada85]

Hi Lakewolf: it seems to me that you have a strong idea in you that love is kind. But what of the love that burns so fiercely that it will do whatever it takes to help another to see themselves? Perhaps that kind of love will dispense with flowery language and new-ageisms, and deliver its messages very simply and to the point. This type of message has as its motivation the desire to help the receiver to awaken, even if only a little, and part of that awakening is the uncomfortable seeing, by others and hopefully the receiver, of automatic behavioural responses previously unseen by the person. That kind of message is often seen as arrogant, as attacking, or as lacking compassion, until the receiver has had time to reflect on its content.

I feel we need to be careful in what we say to newcomers.

With this I agree, and have been guilty myself of lack of external consideration for newcomers.

I feel also that I have seen arrogance here.

Do you think it’s possible that what you feel is arrogance could be something else? Perhaps your feeling is simply an automatic behavioural response pattern?

This forum suits me in that I expect my statements to be torn apart, but not everyone is like me.

It’s interesting to me that when your statements really are ‘torn apart’ you have a strong reaction to it, which at this point in time it seems that you cannot see.

Remember that love is patient and kind.

Do you think there is a dichotomy between the two previous statements of yours? For myself, I think there is. On the one hand, you expect your statements to be ‘torn apart’, while on the other hand, you are convinced that ‘love is patient and kind’.

Also remember that love is an action, not just a perception. How we treat others is a good mirror for what we are doing right and what we are doing wrong.

I would like to share with you a passage from In Search of the Miraculous, by P D Ouspensky:

A permanent idea of good and evil can be formed in a man only in connection with a permanent aim and a permanent understanding. If a man understands that he is asleep and if he wishes to awake, then everything that helps him to awake will be good and everything that hinders him, everything that prolongs his sleep, will be evil.

On this forum we understand good and bad in the terms elucidated by Gurdjieff, as quoted by Ouspensky.

How do you understand good and bad?

Do you want to wake up?

 

[Mountain Crown]

AngEvil,

There are important reasons why criticisms are made, especially when it is discerned that someone, unwittingly or not, is trying to solicit emotional responses.

This forum takes the reality of pathology seriously and has learned how to deal with it quite effectively, based on a wealth of knowledge and experience. No one has attacked anyone, and all are aware of painful revelations.

I think there are now some misunderstandings and programs running in you and Lakewolf. This is understandable, but it should be said that for newbies, without the required study, to judge this forum because it’s not “nice enough”, is comparable to a first day deck-hand criticizing how the captain navigates the waters.

It is essential to read Lobaczeski’s Political Ponerology and Fourth Way writings to appreciate where you have walked into.

You said "very limited understanding" which I think is harsh MC

Yes, sometimes the truth can appear to be harsh.

 

[Laura]

People who are looking for warm fuzzy beating around the bush and deflection from the truth usually don't do well here.

 

[Lakewolf]

PART ONE OF RESPONSE

[[/i][/i]

People who are looking for warm fuzzy beating around the bush and deflection from the truth usually don't do well here.

How true.

Let me use Gurdjieff's own words to explain what I have meant.

"As a rule, when people realize that they do not understand a thing they try to find a name for what they do not 'understand,' and when they find a name they say they 'understand.' But to 'find a name' does not mean to 'understand.' Unfortunately, people are usually satisfied with names. A man who knows a great many names, that is, a great many words, is deemed to understand a great deal--again excepting, of course, any sphere of practical activity wherein his ignorance very soon becomes evident."

Using words that newcomers do not yet understand is useless. Instead, point them towards the knowledge they claim to seek, attaching no personal importance to the result.


"…The fourth way is sometimes called the way of the sly man. The 'sly man' knows some secret which the fakir, monk, and yogi do not know. How the 'sly man' learned this secret--it is not known. Perhaps he found it in some old books, perhaps be inherited it, perhaps he bought it, perhaps he stole it from someone. It makes no difference .The 'sly man' knows the secret and with its help outstrips the fakir, the monk, and the yogi. "

Here Gurdjieff makes plain that this way has been known before he taught it. It is important to realize that not all that come here are on the same level.

The level at which a person is at cannot be ascertained from the first post; physical contact would be necessary for this.

 

[Mountain Crown]

Lakewolf,

Using a sweeping generalization, without providing examples, appears as expressing an attitude that is not grounded in reality. How could it be read in any other way?

Even Gurdjieff's words are not exempt for application to specific events.

Have you read the Glossary's account of The Third Force?

 

[Lakewolf]

INTERMEDIATE REPLY


Did you notice the PART ONE on the top of the post?

 

[henry]

Re: PART ONE OF RESPONSE

The level at which a person is at cannot be ascertained from the first post; physical contact would be necessary for this.

Well, your second idea that physical contact would be necessary implies that this forum is unnecessary, unless you mean to qualify it by saying that only if our first contact with someone is a physical meeting could we ascertain their level 'at a glance' so to speak...

We have had pathological individuals who have taken quite awhile to unmask; we have had people who ask for help, like AngEvil, where it is easy to see a certain number of programmes running in their first posting. It was pretty easy to see where AngEvil was coming from because it is something we have seen before. The false self was completely in control, with brief flashes of his cry for help coming out. Then the false personality would rush back in and take over again.

About his own experience, AngEvil wrote:

I saw that people have different styles in giving advice and counter-arguments, and some are "softer" and some "harder". Maybe the combination of both helps, however posts by by Anart and Galahad in many instances, and by others in one or two instances, have been "hard to swallow" so to speak....

... It is true that the ones with the most impact were the numerous ones from Anart and Galahad, but maybe some people would have a negative reaction to them and they COULD BE perceived as an "attack". Isn't that considering to the others, and their current state of mind ? Another example - what you said Anart is wise:

So anart and my posts to him were 'hard to swallow' but had the most impact. Then he goes off to worry about the effect of that kind of post on others. So he is speculating (and deflecting a bit to get the focus off of himself). But it is idle speculation because our posts were not directed to any other person than AngEvil. Other people need other kinds of responses and feedback.

But it seems something in what he says resonates in you. You don't see the specifics of the situation -- which is what MC is referring to by the 'third force'.

Your statement above is completely abstract. It is a lifeless rule. Sometimes it is correct; others times it is not. As anart pointed out to AngEvil, if our assessment had been so off, would he have begun to see himself?

Rather than so quickly agreeing with what Laura wrote, maybe you should see if the shoe fits.... and look to see what part of you is resonating with AngEvil's idle speculation?

 

[Beau]

Re: PART ONE OF RESPONSE

Using words that newcomers do not yet understand is useless. Instead, point them towards the knowledge they claim to seek, attaching no personal importance to the result.

We actually DO do that. Have you seen the standard intro to new members? The newcomer has a responsibility themselves to seek out the answers to the things they don't understand, when they are given the appropriate links to the answers.

That being said, meta-commentary on the forum's way of communicating with each other is, as MC noted, too broad to have any signal. You are creating noise on the forum, which has a specific purpose, by criticizing the way we discuss many different aspects of the Work.

If you do not like how we do things, you are very welcome to create your own forum for discussing whatever you are interested in.

 

[Lakewolf]

1) <I expect you to continually take apart what I say and examine my motives. This will lead me to re-examination of my motives, and will provide elucidation for the benefit of all involved
Well to me, you seem a little too mushy-mushy / Love'n light'ish? I don't doubt you have the best of intentions, but maybe you're a bit too emotional when you judge peoples responses>

When I am on this forum, I am objective as possible. I misspoke when I expected you to examine my motives, as this can only be done over time.

Isn’t it an emotional response to consider what I said “mushy-mushy”?

Did I speak the truth when I said it would lead edification for all? Truth is objective, not emotional.

“By their fruits…”


2) I didn’t “storm out of the thread”. I felt it would be useless to continue in it, as phrases as such as “predator’s mind” and “mechanical response” were given to a newcomer who had not had the chance to study anything being given yet.

3) <This is an assumption that seems to reveal a very limited understanding of the forum's material re psychopathy. >

I have studied psychopathy for ten years. I stopped writing a book on “affection therapy” because of it. My spouse, who is a psych nurse, has studied it for longer than I have.

While the forum has very, very good info on the subject, it is by no means comprehensive.
(NOTE: Evaluate the statement immediately above for truth. This is not an emotional response.)

4) <The fact that you've started a thread to admonish this forum for all it does wrong indicates you are either completely missing the boat, or you predator is acting up.>

Did you thouroughly read the post? I was speaking about newcomers only. If you feel admonished, you are having an emotional, not logical response to the thread. I respectfully submit that it is you who are missing the boat in regard to my starting this thread.

That may be that I replied to AngEvil gently as opposed to your direct observation of his posts.

This may have created an “us versus them “ mentality in your mind. I may be wrong, but your response seems as though this is true.

I may be new on this forum, but I am not new to the Work. Just because I am unfamiliar with terms here does not mean that I do not understand the concepts and have not applied them to myself.


5) Remember that love is patient and kind.

Do you think there is a dichotomy between the two previous statements of yours? For myself, I think there is. On the one hand, you expect your statements to be ‘torn apart’, while on the other hand, you are convinced that ‘love is patient and kind’.
See the above statement, “I may be new…”

6) <Lakewolf,

Using a sweeping generalization, without providing examples, appears as expressing an attitude that is not grounded in reality. How could it be read in any other way?

Even Gurdjieff's words are not exempt from specific events.>

This is specific example of what I was saying when I said that I have seen kneejerk reactions.

The poster did not see PART ONE (in caps for emphasis) because my response was scanned, not read.

7) <Your statement above is completely abstract. It is a lifeless rule. Sometimes it is correct; others times it is not. As anart pointed out to AngEvil, if our assessment had been so off, would he have begun to see himself?>

Your assessment of AngEvil was correct. I was merely pointing out that people are individuals (a concrete concept); thus, “one size fits all” does not work, and in itself is an abstract concept. It is important to remember that a good teacher ascertains the level that the student is at, and then attempts to teach.

8) <Rather than so quickly agreeing with what Laura wrote, maybe you should see if the shoe fits.... and look to see what part of you is resonating with AngEvil's idle speculation?

If you knew me at all, you would immediately know that the “love and light” admonition does not fit me in any way.

Therefore, I could agree.

Perhaps some of you should take this advice, and consider what the poster said…and if any mechanical reactions are elicited by it.

Can you perfectly apply what you have learned to yourselves


9) <We actually DO do that. Have you seen the standard intro to new members? The newcomer has a responsibility themselves to seek out the answers to the things they don't understand, when they are given the appropriate links to the answers.

That being said, meta-commentary on the forum's way of communicating with each other is, as MC noted, too broad to have any signal. You are creating noise on the forum, which has a specific purpose, by criticizing the way we discuss many different aspects of the Work.

If you do not like how we do things, you are very welcome to create your own forum for discussing whatever you are interested in.>

I know the forum has a specific purpose. Ostensibly, it is to teach the Work. I am not creating noise; I am giving you something to think about.

I started this thread specifically to discuss the treatment of newcomers.

It is not the way you discuss the Work that I am criticizing; it is the presentation to the newcomers about the material, before you have allowed them to assimilate them.

How am I creating noise? You yourselves point out things that people may be doing. Am I inaccurate in the things I am perceiving?

I have not even been able to finish POST TWO.

 

[Lakewolf]

I am late for work I have to do.

Talk to you later.

 

[anart]

Am I inaccurate in the things I am perceiving?

Yes. You are. This has been pointed out to you in many different ways in this thread and by many different people. Do you understand? Are you capable of understanding the simple fact that you are inaccurate in what you are perceiving?

You also have demonstrated a consistent tendency to twist what has been said by others to suit your own purposes, and this is most disconcerting.

 

[Beau]

I started this thread specifically to discuss the treatment of newcomers

I assume you are speaking about yourself. Others can speak up about how they felt they were treated upon entering the forum. In your case, the responses you received were because of what you had written. I guess now you are attempting to create a scenario where every newcomer is met with the same kind of "greeting" that you received. This is clearly not the case, and it is manipulative of you to imply that. It's manipulative to say that how you were treated were the result of anything but what you wrote. This is why meta-commentary is so poor of a subject, because it is used by people to distract from the focus on themselves. It is a deflection. What you should be focusing on is WHY you received the responses you did, and what is it that you have written that would garner such responses. Instead you are attempting to shift blame for how you reacted to those responses to the forum itself. That is manipulative and against forum guidelines. Perhaps your perceptions are just wrong, or perhaps you are conscious of your manipulation. Either way, your continued participation here will require a drastic change in behavior. We do not tolerate such actions for very long.

 

[anart]

Well, until the thread in which she reacted so strongly and then started this thread (as referenced earlier), lakewolf has been treated extremely gently by this forum - so if she is talking about herself, then her perceptions are off.

In fact, she was very complimentary of this forum and the material here, until she was scratched just a very tiny bit in that thread - thus her reaction and the other face of lakewolf appears.

It is reminiscent of what Lobaczewski wrote about paranoid character disorders:

Paranoid character disorders: It is characteristic of paranoid behavior for people to be capable of relatively correct reasoning and discussion as long as the conversation involves minor differences of opinion. This stops abruptly when the partner’s arguments begin to undermine their overvalued ideas, crush their long-held stereotypes of reasoning, or force them to accept a conclusion they had subconsciously rejected before.

Such a stimulus unleashes upon the partner a torrent of pseudo-logical, largely paramoralistic, often insulting utterances which always contain some degree of suggestion.

Utterances like these inspire aversion among cultivated and logical people, but they enslave less critical minds, e.g. people with other kinds of psychological deficiencies, who were earlier the objects of the egotistical influence of individuals with character disorders, and in particular a large part of the young.

A [working class person] may perceive this to be a kind of victory over higher-class people and thus take the paranoid person’s side. However, this is not the normal reaction among the common people, where perception of psychological reality occurs no less often than among intellectuals.

In sum then, the response of accepting paranoid argumentation is qualitatively more frequent in reverse proportion to the civilization level of the community in question, although it never approaches the majority.

Nevertheless, paranoid individuals become aware of their enslaving influence through experience and attempt to take advantage thereof in a pathologically egotistic manner.

Again, I am not stating that lakewolf is pathological - I am merely pointing out that her behavior in this thread is indicative of a pattern of thought that is pathologically influenced - and this could be the result of her unwillingness to really examine her own thought processes and programs, thus they are ruling the day - the more she defends them, the stronger the effect. fwiw.