Fifth Way asks: What is Wrong With John?

[Laura]

The genesis of this discussion is found under: Outer Space and Inner Space in a thread begun by John Chang entitled "Time." http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=271

John Chang is not to be confused with "John from Australia" who is the subject of this discussion.

I'm talking about the John from Australia who's posts I like allot and find insightful.

It seems to me you/the SOTT team keep putting him down, which to me doesn't compute in the context of these pages and you work. It even disturbs me to a point that I seem to see something unseen here. Than again I don 't have your experience/data and can't tell for sure.

If it is not asked to much I would kindly like to know why you do that? If in fact you do have additional data and experience I'd very much would appreciate if you could find it in yourself to share it, to enlighten us all in oder for us to be able to acquire that same depth of insight as well. Thank you very much in advanced.

First let me just say that, over the years of running a website, discussion groups, and dealing with many, many people on many levels, we have seen and experienced a lot. Add to that Ark's 30 years as an educator and my 30 years working with individuals who came to me for hypnotherapy, and you could say that we can make pretty fast assessments. The past five years have been particularly rich in this regard due to our research in psychopathy. Parts of this learning can be conveyed intellectually, but not all.

If you will read all of the articles on psychopathy that you can access from the navigation bar here: http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm you will begin to move in a direction that will assist you in avoiding mistakes of assessment.

Among the many diagnostic tools available to the researcher in psychology are analyses of language, both written and verbal. These are tools that are particularly invaluable when dealing with individuals via the medium of the internet, but it is a good idea to learn as much as possible along this line for general purposes as well.

Now, you say about "John from Australia" that you like his posts and find them insightful. Then you say that we "put him down" and you wonder "why do you do that?" There are two problems here: (1) John's declarations and (2) your reception. The first cannot be helped, the second can. Let me try to deal with these issues by way of a few quotes that I hope will convey the necessary information. First, a quote from Lobaczewski's book, Ponerology:

Schizoidia: Schizoidia, or schizoidal psychopathy, was isolated by the very first of the famous creators of modern psychiatry. From the beginning, it was treated as a lighter form of the same hereditary taint which is the cause of susceptibility to schizophrenia. However, this latter connection could neither be confirmed nor denied with the help of statistical analysis, and no biological test was then found which would have been able to solve this dilemma. ...

Literature provides us with descriptions of several varieties of this anomaly, whose existence can be attributed either to changes in the genetic factor or to differences in other individual characteristics of a non-pathological nature. Let us thus sketch these sub-species’ common features.

Carriers of this anomaly are hypersensitive and distrustful, but they pay little attention to the feelings of others, tend to assume extreme positions, and are eager to retaliate for minor offenses.

Sometimes they are eccentric and odd.

Their poor sense of psychological situation and reality leads them to superimpose erroneous, pejorative interpretations upon other people’s intentions.

They easy become involved in activities which are ostensibly moral, but which actually inflict damage upon themselves and others.

Their impoverished psychological worldview makes them typically pessimistic regarding human nature. We frequently find expressions of their characteristic attitudes in their statements and writings: “Human nature is so bad that order in human society can only be maintained by a strong power created by highly qualified individuals in the name of some higher idea.” Let us call this typical expression the “schizoid declaration”... (Here I want to note that the Schizoidal type generally believes that THEY are the carriers of the knowledge of how human society can be "fixed" - and they alone.)

When they become wrapped up in situations of serious stress, however, the schizoid’s failings cause them to collapse easily. The capacity for thought is thereupon characteristically stifled, and frequently the schizoids fall into reactive psychotic states so similar in appearance to schizophrenia that they lead to misdiagnoses.

The common factor in the varieties of this anomaly is a dull pallor of emotions and feeling for the psychological realities. This can be attributed to the incomplete quality of the instinctive substratum, which is working as though on sand. Low emotional pressure enables them to develop proper speculative reasoning, which is useful in non-humanistic spheres of activity. Because of their one-sidedness, they tend to consider themselves intellectually superior to “ordinary” people.

The quantitative frequency of this anomaly varies among races and nations: low among Blacks, the highest among Jews. Estimates of this frequency range from negligible up to 3 %. In Poland it may be estimated as 0.7 % of population. My observations suggest this anomaly is autosomally hereditary.

A schizoid’s ponerological activity should be evaluated in two aspects. On the small scale, such people cause their families trouble, easily turn into tools of intrigue in the hands of clever individuals, and generally do a poor job of raising the younger generation.

Their tendency to see human reality in the doctrinaire and simplistic manner they consider “proper”, transforms their frequently good intentions into bad results. However, their ponerogenic role can take on macro-social proportions if their attitude toward human reality and their tendency to invent great doctrines are put to paper and duplicated in large editions.

In spite of their typical deficits, or even an openly schizoidal declaration, their readers do not realize what the authors’ characters are like; they interpret such works in a manner corresponding to their own nature. The minds of normal people tend toward corrective interpretation thanks to the participation of their own richer, psychological world-view. However, many readers critically reject such works with moral disgust but without being aware of the specific cause.

An analysis of the role played by Karl Marx’s works easily reveals all the above-mentioned types of apperception and the social reactions which engendered separations among people. [...]

During stable times which are ostensibly happy, albeit marked by injustice to individuals and nations, doctrinaire [schizoidal type] people believe they have found a simple solution to fix such a world. Such a historical period is always characterized by a generally impoverished psychological world-view, and so a schizoidally impoverished psychological world-view does not stand out during such times and is accepted as legal tender.

These doctrinaire individuals characteristically manifest a certain contempt with regard to moralists then preaching the need to rediscover lost human values and to develop a richer, more appropriate psychological world-view.

Schizoid characters aim to impose their own conceptual world upon other people or social groups, using relatively controlled pathological egotism and the exceptional tenacity derived from their persistent nature.

They are thus eventually able to overpower another individual’s personality, which causes the latter’s behavior to turn desperately illogical. They may also exert a similar influence upon the group of people they have joined.

They are psychological loners who feel better in some human organization, wherein they become zealots for some ideology, religious bigots, materialists, or adherents of an ideology with satanic features. If their activities consist of direct contact on a small social scale, their acquaintances easily perceive them to be eccentric, which limits their ponerogenic role. However, if they manage to hide their own personality behind the written word, their influence may poison the minds of society in a wide scale and for a long time.

The conviction that Karl Marx is the best example of this is correct as he was the best-known figure of that kind. Frostig, a psychiatrist of the old school, included Engels and others into a category he called “bearded schizoidal fanatics”. The famous utterances attributed to Zionist wise men at the turn of the century start with a schizoidal declaration. The nineteenth century, especially its latter half, appears to have been a time of exceptional activity on the part of schizoidal individuals, often but not always of Jewish descent. After all we have to remember that 97% of all Jews do not manifest this anomaly, and that it also appears among all European nations, albeit to a markedly lesser extent. Our inheritance from this period includes world-images, scientific traditions, and legal concepts flavored with the shoddy ingredients of a schizoidal apprehension of reality.

In spite of the fact that the writings of schizoidal authors contain the above described deficiency, or even an openly formulated schizoidal declaration which constitutes sufficient warning to specialists, the average reader accepts them not as a view of reality warped by this anomaly, but rather as an idea to which he should assume an attitude based on his convictions and his reason. That is the first mistake.

The oversimplified pattern, devoid of psychological color and based on easily available data, exerts an intense influence upon individuals who are insufficiently critical, frequently frustrated as result of downward social adjustment, culturally neglected, or characterized by some psychological deficiencies. Others are provoked to criticism based on their healthy common sense, also they fail to grasp this essential cause of the error....

We can distinguish two distinctly different apperception types among those persons who accept the contents of such works: the critically-corrective and the pathological.

People whose feel for psychological reality is normal tend to incorporate chiefly the more valuable elements of the work. They trivialize the obvious errors and complement the schizoid deficiencies by means of their own richer world-view. This gives rise to a more sensible, measured, and thus creative interpretation, but is not free from the influence of the error frequently adduced above.

Pathological acceptance is manifested by individuals with diverse deviations, whether inherited or acquired, as well as by many people bearing personality malformations or who have been injured by social injustice. ...

Schizoidia has thus played an essential role as one of the factors in the genesis of the evil threatening our contemporary world. Practicing psychotherapy upon the world will therefore demand that the results of such evil be eliminated as skillfully as possible. ....

In the ponerogenic process of the pathocratic phenomenon, characteropathic individuals adopt ideologies created by doctrinaire, often schizoidal people, recast them into an active propaganda form, and disseminate it with pathological egotism and paranoid intolerance for any philosophies which may differ from their own. ...

Underneath the rulership of [a pathocracy] we can even discern a period of hyperactivity on the part of schizoidal individuals mesmerized by the vision of their own rule based on contempt for human nature, especially if they are numerous within a given country. ...

In non-semitic nations, schizoidals are somewhat more numerous than essential psychopaths; although highly active in the early phases of the genesis of the phenomenon, they betray an attraction to pathocracy as well as the rational distance of efficient thinking; Thus they are torn between such a system and the society of normal people.

Now, that deals with the "indications" present. But one must never just assume that such indications are actually present without "testing." And so there comes a period where some "scratching" must be done in order to ascertain what the schizoidal language issues actually relate to; are they schizoidal, or simply lack of education or some other problem such as dyslexia? This is what you perceive as "putting John down." There is a definite reason for it. Here, allow me to quote from Gurdjieff on the matter:

"In properly organized groups no faith is required; what is required is simply a little trust and even that only for a little while, for the sooner a man begins to verify all he hears the better it is for him.

"The struggle against the 'false I,' against one's chief feature or chief fault, is the most important part of the work, and it must proceed in deeds, not in words. For this purpose the teacher gives each man definite tasks which require, in order to carry them out, the conquest of his chief feature. When a man carries out these tasks he struggles with himself, works on himself. If he avoids the tasks, tries not to carry them out, it means that either he does not want to or that he cannot work.

"As a rule only very easy tasks are given at the beginning which the teacher does not even call tasks, and he does not say much about them but gives them in the form of hints. If he sees that he is understood and that the tasks are carried out he passes on to more and more difficult ones.

"More difficult tasks, although they are only subjectively difficult, are called 'barriers.'

"The peculiarity of barriers consists in the fact that, having surmounted a serious barrier, a man can no longer return to ordinary sleep, to ordinary life. And if, having passed the first barrier, he feels afraid of those that follow and does not go on, he stops so to speak between two barriers and is unable to move either backwards or forwards. This is the worst thing that can happen to a man. Therefore the teacher is usually very careful in the choice of tasks and barriers, in other words, he takes the risk of giving definite tasks requiring the conquest of inner barriers only to those people who have already shown themselves sufficiently strong on small barriers.

"It often happens that, having stopped before some barrier, usually the smallest and the most simple, people turn against the work, against the teacher, and against other members of the group, and accuse them of the very thing that is becoming revealed to them in themselves.

"Sometimes they repent later and blame themselves, then they again blame others, then they repent once more, and so on. But there is nothing that shows up a man better than his attitude towards the work and the teacher after he has left it. Sometimes such tests are arranged intentionally. A man is placed in such a position that he is obliged to leave and he is fully justified in having a grievance either against the teacher or against some other person. And then he is watched to see how he will behave. A decent man will behave decently even if he thinks that he has been treated unjustly or wrongly. But many people in such circumstances show a side of their nature which otherwise they would never show. And at times it is a necessary means for exposing a man's nature. So long as you are good to a man he is good to you. But what will he be like if you scratch him a little?

"But this is not the chief thing; the chief thing is his own personal attitude, his own valuation of the ideas which he receives or has received, and his keeping or losing this valuation. A man may think for a long time and quite sincerely that he wants to work and even make great efforts, and then he may throw up everything and even definitely go against the work; justify himself, invent various fabrications, deliberately ascribe a wrong meaning to what he has heard, and so on."

"What happens to them for this?" asked one of the audience.

"Nothing—what could happen to them?" said G. "They are their own punishment. And what punishment could be worse?

So, that is one thing. As it happens, I have a folder full of "John of Australia's" reactions to being scratched. These rants consist of declarations of his own superiority, outright statements that he believes he is the "chosen one" who - alone - knows all the answers and can save the world - alternating with contempt for me, for QFG, for our work, and basically showing no capacity to see himself whatsoever. In short, he is not here to learn, but to attempt to infect others with his schizoidal view of the world. As we have repeatedly said to him, "if you want to teach others what you think you know, create a website and get on with it." But it seems that those who cannot DO must resort to bullying.

The bullying of a schizoidal type is almost entirely psychological, taking the form of trivial nit-picking criticism, constant fault-finding combined with a simultaneous refusal to recognise, value or acknowledge anything anyone else does as even remotely positive. Such manipulation also includes feigning victimhood or persecution, especially when called to account for their nonsense.

The objectives of schizoids are Power, Control, Domination and Subjugation. They go after their goals by a number of means including verbal disempowerment of others, attempting to stimulate fear, shame, embarrassment and guilt, humiliation and constant denial that this is what they are doing.

A favorite tactic of the schizoid is to set people against each other. The benefits to the schizoid are that:
a) he/she gains a great deal of gratification (a perverse form of satisfaction) from encouraging and provoking argument, quarrelling and hostility, and then from watching others engage in adversarial interaction and destructive conflict, and b) the ensuing conflict ensures that people's attention is distracted and diverted away from the cause of the conflict.

Schizoids are adept at distorting peoples' perceptions with intent to engender a negative view of their target in the minds of others; this is achieved through undermining, the creation of doubts and suspicions, and the sharing of false concerns, etc. This poisoning of people's minds is difficult to counter because it is often quite subtle. It often takes time and experience for those taken in by the schizoid to see through the mask of deceit and to understand how and why they are being used as pawns.

The schizoid often tries to establish an exclusive relationship (based on apparent trust and confidence) with targeted individuals so that they (the schizoid) are seen as the sole reliable source of information; this may be achieved by portraying the target as irresponsible, unstable, undependable, uncaring, unreliable and untrustworthy, perhaps by the constant highlighting - using distortion and fabrication - of alleged failures, breaches of trust, lack of reliability, etc. The process is reinforced by inclusion of the occasional pieces of juicy allegations about the target's alleged misdemeanours or untrustworthiness in respect of relationships and communication with people. Mostly this is projection. The objective is to manipulate the targeted individual's perceptions and create a dependency so that the target comes to rely exclusively on the schizoid and see the schizoid as the sole source of reliable information whilst distrusting everyone else. Any person who is capable of exposing and breaking the dependency is targeted with venom and will find their name blackened at every opportunity.

When close to being outwitted and exposed, the schizoid feigns victimhood and turns the focus on themselves - this is another example of manipulating people through their emotion of guilt, eg sympathy, feeling sorry, etc. all the while portraying their target as the villain of the piece. When the target tries to explain the game, they are immediately labelled "paranoid".

As I said, I have a folder full of such rants from John of Australia. They are all the result of John being "scratched." What is outstanding about them is the fact that they don't even fit into the category of an individual who has come to a group to learn and to work as Gurdjieff described it. Having been "scratched," John does not slink off and mutter vile imprecations upon us. No, indeed, he comes back again and again with reams of declarations. They are quite simply schizoidal declarations backed up by what Lobaczewski described as an unusual persistence:

Schizoid characters aim to impose their own conceptual world upon other people or social groups, using relatively controlled pathological egotism and the exceptional tenacity derived from their persistent nature. They are thus eventually able to overpower another individual’s personality...

Because we see that John is a disordered individual and there is no point in engaging with him - it is a waste of time - we have repeatedly suggested that he go and do his own thing elsewhere. We have told him repeatedly that if he does not like the food at our table, he ought not to stick around and tell everybody that if he had cooked it, it would be better.

But no, John does not go and cook his own food and serve it. He prefers to "gate crash" and try to take over with his schizoidal manipulations.

Another significant clue: John has repeatedly been banned, his IP blocked from accessing the site, and yet, he repeatedly violates our free will choice to NOT have to deal with his nonsense on a daily basis by finding new proxy servers to access and rant.

Schizoid characters aim to impose their own conceptual world upon other people or social groups, using relatively controlled pathological egotism and the exceptional tenacity derived from their persistent nature. They are thus eventually able to overpower another individual’s personality...

So, nuff said.

 

[vinny]

There are lots of "Johns" in the world.

I'm talking about the John from Australia who's posts I like allot and find insightful.

It seems to me you/the SOTT team keep putting him down, which to me doesn't compute in the context of these pages and you work. It even disturbs me to a point that I seem to see something unseen here. Than again I don 't have your experience/data and can't tell for sure.

If it is not asked to much I would kindly like to know why you do that? If in fact you do have additional data and experience I'd very much would appreciate if you could find it in yourself to share it, to enlighten us all in oder for us to be able to acquire that same depth of insight as well. Thank you very much in advanced.

just a simple query: how does anyone (other than the mods?) and specifically 'Fifth Way' know that this 'John' is 'John from Australia'? Is there a personal connection?

I understand that we are not talking about John Chang, but the other one. However both of the 'John's on that thread where this discussion comes from, have 'Location: unknown' in their user profile.

 

[Fifth Way]

just a simple query: how does anyone (other than the mods?) and specifically 'Fifth Way' know that this 'John' is 'John from Australia'?

Because he used to reveal his location on the old SOTT forum and he has an unmistakable style of writing not using any punctuation at all.

See also the Lizard-thread.

 

[Fifth Way]

Laura:

Thanks for taking the time and the depth to answer my question.

Although I am familiar with the Lobaczewski material it was interesting to read it in this context. The part I was missing was the 'Gurdjieff's scratching'. Knowing now more about your and John's history - what you say seem to make sense.

What attracted me in his posts most where occasional very original and new ideas (at least to me they seemed that way).

I will go back and read over his stuff more critically - as it seems you are telling me, that's what I wasn't doing - and I will keep the message of you post in mind.

Thanks.

 

[martin]

Laura:
Thank you very much for taking the time to explain the why's and how's of your analysis about John.
Very educational! Could you please recommend some books about how to recognize this different types of psychological traits (not only psychopaths but schizoids, and any others we should know) on people and how to deal with them besides "Mask of Sanity" by Cleckley, "Without Conscience" by Hare and "Sociopath Next Door" by Stout?
Thanks again,

Martin

 

[John]

I take no part in your game of tenis, my awareness of self is specifically my own journey and anything I said in convidence is said for reason in convidence as it only a 'testing the water "to see trust"', i never make reference to anything within physical reality if it is not already something I have seen or remember from meditation 'I offer it to see your view no other reason'. but im not in here for game of offense and defense. I hide not who I am that is why I use same name here John.

I really concerned about the direction and amount of judgement and faith in others work and not ones own understandings of that work that people have taken in cass group since created others notice it too, your journey is your journey but be careful not harm others paths. All are chosen in own way each has a destiny to play, but dont let it go to head find those meant to speak as voice which only those meant hear will, those dont understand are not a part of your path so it doesnt mater.

you have so much focus on dramas in your site, so much energy being directed and emotional turmoils peoples responses to it bring, yet in your own transcripts it said that lizzies create these scenerios to feed off, yet here we see years of people worrying focusing on such dramas not looking to awaken there own innerself, people thinking they need to spend a lifetime to find there spiritual self to listen to its voice and find there path, It seems to me because your older you think know more than those younger you think that only way to obtain knowledge is to read 'physical reality'? ironic thou that this way of thinking is contradicted by the faith in the channelings yet there is discreditance of others to justifie your prespective view on what is right is clearly present in the energy, so who is more thinkings like lizzies those who network information who create a predijuce on what is accepted and how one can gain acess to the information in first place, those who charge for the giving of knowledge they recieved freely, those who attack others to justifie themselfs, etc or those who offer the knowledge freely in form which is not predijuce on what is acepted and how one can gain access to the information, who doesnt charge for the giving, who judges only the information but not the person themself, who is open to all ideas and looks for all peoples prespectives and views who speaks in form which is designed for a level of understanding respecting the freewill of those who are not at that level but is clear to those who are ready.

peace my view and prespective is only optional choice, you accept or deny its relevances. I have judged your way of doing things this I will admit to I claim I am here to insure earth is kept in balance this I do not deny it is something I have learned of in my own journey, I do not claim this knowledge is mine it is the universes and credit goes to everything and everybody as we all have it within us.

but as I said begining I dont want get into conventation over this I said my part respond with yours if wish but I will just leave you be energys of this place hinder myself not help I just pray others see this, your work has truths this ive claimed before myself but doesnt mean it all fully correct nor does it mean your choices dont harm others.

 

[Fifth Way]

I am here to insure earth is kept in balance

Do you have other online outlets of your work. Would be intersting to read your overall concept....

I will just leave you be energys of this place hinder myself

...before your gone for good?

 

[Approaching Infinity]

hide not who I am that is why I use same name here John.

Are you saying your real name isn't John? Or that you're so honest that you decided not to use an alias?

peace my view and prespective is only optional choice, you accept or deny its relevances. I have judged your way of doing things this I will admit to I claim I am here to insure earth is kept in balance this I do not deny it is something I have learned of in my own journey, I do not claim this knowledge is mine it is the universes and credit goes to everything and everybody as we all have it within us.

but as I said begining I dont want get into conventation over this I said my part respond with yours if wish but I will just leave you be energys of this place hinder myself not help I just pray others see this, your work has truths this ive claimed before myself but doesnt mean it all fully correct nor does it mean your choices dont harm others.

Paraphrase: My perspective is the only optional perspective. You're either with me or against me. I have judged you because it is my role, as keeper of the only optional worldview, to ensure that other lesser ideas remain subjugated. This knowledge is not only mine, it is the knowledge of the universe (the one and only true knowledge, that is). As I have said, I don't want to have a conversation, just to enlighten all you others. No need to respond, as I've spoken the one true truthful oneness. Your energies only hinder me. You have some of the truth, but I've got the rest. End paraphrase.

Have I interpreted this correctly?

 

[Beau]

Have I interpreted this correctly?

That's how I interpreted it. Someone who won't consider the people who they are communicating isn't all that advanced imho. What's the line, all true esoteric work is concerned with relations with other people. I think John's speak for themselves.

 

[Ruth]

That's how I interpreted it. Someone who won't consider the people who they are communicating isn't all that advanced imho. What's the line, all true esoteric work is concerned with relations with other people. I think John's speak for themselves.

Hi All, I think John may have had some 'problems', (psychological/emotional) perhaps with his relationship with himself?

It's something that he needs to fix before he resumes any sort of communication as he may not be seeing or dealing with something in himself. It's possible that these 'problems' become an easy door of access for STS manipulation. I think its more common than people realise. I don't think its necessarily a deliberate choice on the part of the individual, like the choices of an individual who CHOSES entropy would be.

Cureing or helping people who have these problems weighs heavily on my mind because I think it is a significant portal of attack from 4d sts. And, perhaps I also have these 'built in' weaknesses and that being aware of them is the first step in trying to switching them off. The individual plays an important part in their own discovery, but then, so does the group.

 

[Guest]

I have encountered many people with patterns of expression similar to John's. Some were actually sincere. What these people had in common was that they all had an intense esoteric experience, (most of the time, but not always, chemically induced), which their psychic make-up could not absorb. Most of these people rambled on like this only when the topic of their experience was triggered. Otherwise they were pretty "normal".

From what I understand given my own experience, contact with powerful archtypal energies (even if these are not of a particularly malignant nature) can shock the nervous system into a perpetually overcharged state. The intensity of the experience, and the inability to own it and ground it, often generates a distorted perspective of what might have otherwise been a powerful transformation of self.

I have met people who confronted energies that they could not assimilate into their former lives and their sense of self was perpetually in confusion. They would reference back to the "revelation" and it would never fit into their rigid sense of self, and the clash of that incompatibility would be highly stressful to them. Many practiced selective amnesia, and simply turned away from all matters esoteric (and if they imbibed psychotropics, they usually stopped). Others came out of it with the belief they were "special", but craved that others "recognized" them.

In my view, the sense of being special itself is not wrong. In any serious esoteric growth dynamic, there comes a time when you do come into contact with transcendental or transpersonal energies in one form or another. When you can grow into the experience, it is natural that your life acquires increased meaning, and your sense of identity becomes more significant to you and even takes on an archetypal or mythic dimension.

Ideally, your relationship with the world can become one where your sense of being can circulate with the environment and others. The livingness of nature and the world at large can become a profound and ongoing revelation. Ideally, empathy and compassion for others and acceptance for the foibles and imbalances of self increases. At the same time, psychic sensitivity also increases so that one can readily percieve the "darkness" in others as well as an apparent lack of soul just as poignantly.

To grow into this in a healthy fashion requires a constant rebalancing as inner transformations occur. Often one's self image and world image must be reevluated and then reevaluated again, while individuality must grow without losing its stability, or one can feel like a leaf blown about by forces beyond one's control.

John, to me, sounds strung out on his own revelation, which may be at least to an extent a real or partially real perception, but it has very likely overloaded his nervous system and possibly wounded his psyche. Many others I have met like this became enamoured with self-importance to the point that they took a position that it was their destiny to one day hold power over others, although they went a long way to conceal that view. Some of them started mentioning some kind of "dark master" or "dark groups" of likeminded others.

Others became isolated because they could not relate their revelation, and these were mostly sincere people who experienced more than they could handle. An artist can have a magnificent vision, but if they can only scratch on the canvas and call their scratchings "genius", that "magnificence" goes down the drain. Even if it is originally genuine, it can degrade into complete delusion.

I believe John may be losing himself in his own revelation, and regaining his balance is all the more difficult because of the distortions in the reality view of the greater collective. Many who managed to move through esoteric transformation to one degree or another in the past have warned that such a path is not to be undertaken recklessly, and moreso because once you have reached a certain point, you cannot turn back (at least the way you came).

I myself have been through crises of the psyche, and glanced off of John's apparent state (or at least how his state seems to me). The worst thing you can do is take on a messiah perspective, and the equally worst thing you can do is fall into a despairing self-nihilism. If John was more balanced, he may have been able to translate his personal revelation into a constructive disagreement with the perspective of the C's. He may have been able to present an alternate view or different way of looking at the same truth. In other words, he may have been able to inspire.

As it stands, in my view, he is undergoing a crisis, and even if he fervently believes he is master of his experience, it is more than likely the other way around. I believe he is on the defensive because of that crisis. Personally, I would not like somebody discussing me in these terms, but if I was honest with myself, if I suspended my "convictions" and looked within, a hidden thread of resolution might be available.

Such a crisis can degenerate into malignant psychopathology, or it can resolve itself. If John can understand that the real battle is within, and can enter it in self-reliance, the latter possibility may be realized. If he comes out of it, he may still hold the original revelation, only this time without the former distortions and contradictions. Coming into balance does not mean sacrificing your inner truth, and it doesn't mean that all of the sudden you agree with everybody else. It does mean that your truth rests on a much firmer foundation, and may then be an inspiration to others.

 

[anart]

Laura:
Thank you very much for taking the time to explain the why's and how's of your analysis about John.
Very educational! Could you please recommend some books about how to recognize this different types of psychological traits (not only psychopaths but schizoids, and any others we should know) on people and how to deal with them besides "Mask of Sanity" by Cleckley, "Without Conscience" by Hare and "Sociopath Next Door" by Stout?
Thanks again,

Martin

The work by Andrew Lobaczewski, Ponerology is a good source of information on the many types of psychological traits - hopefully it will be available through Red Pill Press very soon.

 

[Fifth Way]

The work by Andrew Lobaczewski, Ponerology is a good source of information on the many types of psychological traits - hopefully it will be available through Red Pill Press very soon.

In parts it already is in "911 The Ultimate Truth".

 

[Ruth]

In parts it already is in "911 The Ultimate Truth".

Speaking of which, whose door do I knock on to find out what happened to my copy? According to an automatically generated email, the book was supposed to be printed and shipped October 2005. It hasn't arrived yet!

I do hope this isn't going to be like the time I ordered a 2nd hand Victor Ostrovsky book from the US. That took 6 months to get here. Snail mail indeed.

 

[Danny]

AHA! This has nothing to do with this post but I had to say it anyway.I finally figured the "red pill press" name and what it pertains to.(SOMEthings take alot to sink into this thick cranium.)It's the red pill in the "matrix" red pill/blue pill.haha ok right?