Les Visible and Smoking Mirrors

nicklebleu said:
In my humble opinion, most people somehow "feel" that what they perceive is not "true" or "real", but they just can't think the issues to their logical end ...
Click to expand...

...and maybe because it is too dificult, they dissociate.
 
Namaste said:
nicklebleu said:
In my humble opinion, most people somehow "feel" that what they perceive is not "true" or "real", but they just can't think the issues to their logical end ...
Click to expand...

...and maybe because it is too dificult, they dissociate.
Click to expand...

Yeah, or too wrapped up in their own dramas of existence. While reading Les' articles, it brings to mind all of those who are not only believing what they read and hear on the MSM, but that so very many of them just don't care. They are too involved with their tv shows, movies, games, each other, how to make a living.....you get my drift. :cry:

It seems that the Matrix has everybody either too busy to care or so off track it doesn't matter that they are looking for the truth, they won't find it where they are looking.

But as Grim says, they need to learn their own lessons. Who are we to stop this from happening?
 
Rather than networking - which is (as the C's say) fourth density STO in nature, [Edit] there seems to be a predominant dynamic [/Edit] here on STS third density earth of one person speaking while many people listen. In school, at church, on tv, or at a political convention, people tend to gather in large groups and submit their attention, minds and wills to one person who is considered an authority on a particular subject. That dynamic is indicative of a heard mentality.

I saw a program on PBS recently that suggested one reason humans had advanced so much further than Chimpanzees was that humans tended to follow instructions blindly rather than trust their own senses in a particular instance. This allowed for large-scale projects like agriculture and building construction.

A group of childern were shown how to open a wooden box with a door by using a simple wire - poke the wire through a hole on top of the box and then then insert the hooked wire in the bottom side where a hidden latch opened the box - where a treat was stored. The same thing was shown to a group of young chimps. Both the children and the chimps opened the box by following the instructions.

The same indentical box - except this time made of transparent material was shown to the childern and the chimps. The transparency of the material revealed that poking the tool through the top of the box was an unecessary step. The box had two parts, the top half separated from the bottom by a plate that was not visible in the wooden box. The transparent box made it evident that the step of poking throught the hole in the top did nothing useful.

The human children continued to perform both steps as instructed originally, but the chimps saw immediately that the first step was not necessary - they just did the practical second step and opened the box by unlatching the
door with the wire through the hole in the bottom side!

Did anybody else see this show? I wish I could remember the title. It seems that PBS propagates a lot of propaganda just like nearly all the other tv media but I though this particular documentary revealed an interesting data point - and relavent to this discussion.
 
Not to get off topic, but to get :offtopic: it seems. Just wanted to share some thoughts and perhaps ask a couple questions.

Mark wrote:
Rather than networking - which is (as the C's say) fourth density STO in nature, but there's the dynamic here on STS third density earth of one person speaking while many people listen. In school, at church, on tv, or at a political convention, people tend to gather in large groups and submit their attention, minds and wills to one person who is considered an authority on a particular subject. That dynamic is indicative of a heard mentality.
Click to expand...

Hi Mark,

Just a few thoughts about what I believe your saying. While I'm not trying to contradict you, isn't it also STO to have some form? A time and place where, as right here, a person is able to take the floor ask questions, give responses? I think the issue is that we end up copying (aping,acting as ordered) an unhealthy person. There are healthy people, leaders even. Perhaps another way to look at it might be pioneers who've came before us and shared their light to bring the concepts and teachings to be further evolved by more people, networking.

Hope I'm not twisting your words, but I'm taking the first part and editing it, to see if maybe I'm misunderstanding you, though I think MAYBE you have some doubt in networking(?). It's working at those churches and things. Here goes: "Rather than networking - which is (as the C's say) fourth density STO in nature, but there's the dynamic here on STS third density earth of one person speaking while many people listen." While this is true, maybe churches, politicians and TV's are using the Networking act to enslave. I just feel that even they're successful at enslavement by the use of networking there is the reality that it can be a tool for freedom as well. A hammer can build a building but could be considered a weapon.

Maybe all I said is something you already implied and I'm taking it as sounding almost hopeless. Apologies if that is the case.
 
Metamorphosis, I don't think you are understanding "networking" which includes equality of receiving as well as giving. There is a big difference between networking, which is circular, and a hierarchy which is pyramidal.
 
I did some digging. The experiment with the puzzle box, apes and children I wrote about in my last post was part of "Ape Genius", it is part of the Nova series. and was first show in February this year.

Relavent part of transcript of the program:

Do we have any mental skills that are uniquely our own?

A key clue comes from a new experiment. Back at the University of Texas, Victoria Horner shows a chimp how to operate a puzzle box to get a piece of candy.

First, she taps. Then she slides. Next she pokes.

The chimp copies pretty well and gets the sweet.

DEREK: This game we're going to play is about this special box I brought, alright? There's a gummy bear. It's your turn.

NARRATOR: Children copy the actions, much as the chimps did.

DEREK: Look, you got him. Alright! There's the gummy bear. Good job.

VICTORIA HORNER (Emory University/ University of St. Andrews): The second box that I show the chimpanzees is this one, and it's identical to the opaque box except that it's made out of material which is see-through.

NARRATOR: Only now is it obvious that Horner's tapping and poking don't achieve a thing: the box has a false ceiling.

The chimps cut to the chase. They skip the needless steps. For the apes it's all about the treat.

ANDREW WHITEN: What this study shows is that apes don't just mindlessly ape. They also understand something more about cause and effect.

VICTORIA HORNER: We found something quite surprising. The children were pre-disposed to copy, even when it meant that they were doing something that was really rather silly. So this seems a little like the chimps are outsmarting the kids in this particular study.

DEREK: There he is. You got him out.

NARRATOR: Why do kids imitate slavishly?

VICTORIA HORNER: At the root of the children's behavior is the fact that they viewed me as a grownup, possibly as a teacher.
Click to expand...

Link to transcript: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3504_apegeniu.html

My point in all this is that perhaps humans sometimes get into trouble by blindly following leaders/teachers/authority figures, even if this trait may also be partially responsible for our advances in civilization. Is our stupidity in part "programmed"?
 
Sorry to interrupt again. The words "rather than networking" kind of set me off. From there I started picking apart the paragraph, drawing conclusions as to what was being said from my perspective. While still learning about networking, there is much more to learn in terms of an STO fashion vs. what I've been conditioned with (Pyramid scheme). Apologies for misconstruing this, Mark. Thanks for the tip Laura.
 
Mark said:
I saw a program on PBS recently that suggested one reason humans had advanced so much further than Chimpanzees was that humans tended to follow instructions blindly rather than trust their own senses in a particular instance. This allowed for large-scale projects like agriculture and building construction.

A group of childern were shown how to open a wooden box with a door by using a simple wire - poke the wire through a hole on top of the box and then then insert the hooked wire in the bottom side where a hidden latch opened the box - where a treat was stored. The same thing was shown to a group of young chimps. Both the children and the chimps opened the box by following the instructions.

The same indentical box - except this time made of transparent material was shown to the childern and the chimps. The transparency of the material revealed that poking the tool through the top of the box was an unecessary step. The box had two parts, the top half separated from the bottom by a plate that was not visible in the wooden box. The transparent box made it evident that the step of poking throught the hole in the top did nothing useful.

The human children continued to perform both steps as instructed originally, but the chimps saw immediately that the first step was not necessary - they just did the practical second step and opened the box by unlatching the
door with the wire through the hole in the bottom side!

Did anybody else see this show? I wish I could remember the title. It seems that PBS propagates a lot of propaganda just like nearly all the other tv media but I though this particular documentary revealed an interesting data point - and relavent to this discussion.
Click to expand...

"Of these abnormal being-particularities or functions unbecoming to the essence of any three-brained being , the particularity of their psyche the most terrible for them personally is that which is called ‘suggestibility."

Beelzebub's Tales to his Grandson
 
The concept of imitation has been analyzed by different learning theorists throughout the history of psychology. From Thorndike's connectionism to Pavlov's classical conditioning, and Skinner's operant theory, there have been several accounts of the conditions that produce imitation and the conditions under which imitation itself may facilitate language acquisition and socialization.

I would suggest that for the children in this study, it was probably more of a matter of social conditioning than a cognitive issue. As the researcher mentions, the children may have thought she was a teacher (and at the very least she was an adult) and as such, they would have been less "comfortable" challenging the presented paradigm. If anything, this experiment shows me (once again) the need to be aware that social expectations can affect our intellectual choices, osis, a situation that is used quite unscrupulously by some. ;)

Cognitive imitation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cognitive imitation is a type of imitation and a type of social learning. Cognitive imitation, like the imitation of motor rules (i.e., motor imitation), involves learning and copying specific rules by observation. The principal difference between motor and cognitive imitation is the type of rule (and stimulus) that is learned and copied by the observer. So, whereas in the typical imitation learning experiment subjects must copy novel actions on objects or novel sequences of specific actions (novel motor imitation), in a novel cognitive imitation paradigm subjects have to copy novel rules, independently of specific actions or movement patterns.
Click to expand...

And a university researcher writes this:

The simplest form of imitation is mere behavioral copying without realization of the benefit of the behavior. This is perhaps what guppies and octopi do, and what primates do much of the time as well. The premier copier is no doubt the chimpanzee. Juveniles in the Arnhem Zoo would amuse themselves by walking single file behind a female named Krom, which means "crooked," all with the same pathetic carriage: They also walked around supporting themselves on both wrists - instead of on their knuckles as any self- respecting knucklewalker is supposed to do - resulting in awkward locomotion similar to that of an adult male in the group whose fingers had been mangled in a fight.

Captive chimpanzees, furthermore, learn from watching people how to use tools such as hammers, screwdrivers, and brooms. That they do not always grasp the utility of the tool was noted by pioneering field-worker Robert Garner as long ago as 1896. Given a saw, his chimpanzee "applied the back of it, because the teeth were too rough, but he gave it the motion . . . He would put the back of it across a stick and saw with the energy of a man on a big salary."

It is widely assumed that primates excel at imitation - so much so that we call it aping. Usually we mean more than mere copying. Experts on primate behavior are not in agreement about the more advanced kinds of imitation, however. In its most complete form the imitator adopts the model's perspective and recognizes both the model's goal and his method of bringing this goal closer. Are monkeys or apes aware of the problems others face? Do they understand others' solutions, and can they then apply this knowledge to the same problems? Whereas there is little or no evidence that monkeys do so, some scientists believe apes to be different.

The various technologies of wild chimpanzees, such as nut-cracking with stones or termite fishing with twigs, require fine manual skills that take years to acquire (and adult chimpanzees are said to be far better at them than naive humans). Young chimpanzees seem to watch closely and learn from adults. There are even stories of mothers' correcting their offspring's mistakes, which would amount to active teaching. Unfortunately, these observations are made under uncontrolled conditions, and field-workers have a rather fragment picture of their subjects' learning histories. Experimental psychologists who have carefully tested captive chimpanzees are not convinced that such high-level processes take place. They do agree that chimpanzees pick up information from watching others (such as the location where rewards are to be obtained, and the kind of tools that produce them), and that this helps them find a solution; yet they believe that ultimately problems are solved by each individual in pendently.

The difference between chimpanzees and macaques emerging from these experiments has been corroborated by Povinelli in a telling study of role-taking. A chimpanzee was taught to select one of four handles. If she pulled the correct one, both she and a human at the other end of the apparatus would obtain food. The human but not the chimpanzee could see which handle was baited, and the human would point at this handle to assist the chimpanzee. It was a happy arrangement, and the chimpanzee soon learned to act according to the hints of her partner. After a large number of trials the roles were suddenly reversed, with the human now pulling the handles and the chimpanzee seeing the hidden food. Three of the four chimpanzees understood what was expected of them, having grasped the nature of the informant role from mere watching: they began helping their partner select the right lever. Yet when rhesus monkeys were allowed to work with human informants, none of them responded with the same sort of immediate understanding when the tables were turned: they first had to learn the new contingencies. It may be that chimpanzees can picture themselves in someone else's position and adopt this individual's role, whereas monkeys cannot.

.....Attachment, emotional identification, and innate responses, combined with potent learning abilities, provide a firm enough basis for elaborate caring behavior, which may sometimes be hard to distinguish from human expressions of sympathy. The latter differ, however, in that we recognize the other's experiences as belonging to the other, which is the only way we can feel genuine concern. A mother who shuts her eyes and grimaces when the doctor is about to stick a needle in her child's arm is anticipating the emotional disturbance of her child, hence of herself, while knowing full well that it is the child, not she, who will feel the pain. Identifying with and caring about another without losing one's own identity is the crux of human sympathy. As we have seen, this requires certain cognitive abilities, the most important one being a well-developed sense of self and the ability to assume another individual's perspective.

Two examples of simian sympathy illustrate the advantage of this ability. They describe succorant behavior of greater complexity and solicitude than found outside the human-ape branch of the primate tree.
Click to expand...

_http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/dept/d10/asb/origins/dewaal/imitation.html

Just my two cents
 
Metamorphosis wrote:

[Sorry to interrupt again. The words "rather than networking" kind of set me off. From there I started picking apart the paragraph, drawing conclusions as to what was being said from my perspective. While still learning about networking, there is much more to learn in terms of an STO fashion vs. what I've been conditioned with (Pyramid scheme). Apologies for misconstruing this, Mark. Thanks for the tip Laura.
Click to expand...

No problem, the great thing about this forum is that members are vigilant against noise. I post partially because members can show where my thinking is "mechanical".


Johnno cited Guirdjieff:

"Of these abnormal being-particularities or functions unbecoming to the essence of any three-brained being , the particularity of their psyche the most terrible for them personally is that which is called ‘suggestibility."

Beelzebub's Tales to his Grandson
Click to expand...

Interesting quote... If I am not mistaken people who can be brought into the deeper stages of hypnosis - those who can be said to be more "suggestable" are often more intelligent than average as well.
 
[quote author=Mark]
If I am not mistaken people who can be brought into the deeper stages of hypnosis - those who can be said to be more "suggestable" are often more intelligent than average as well.
[/quote]

Hi Mark,

May I ask where you got the above information?
 
Bobo08 said:
May I ask where you got the above information?
Click to expand...

I've read that this is true in several books about hypnosis and heard "experts" make the claim as well. Googling "intelligent people can be more easily hypnotized" without the quotes will show that this is a common assumption. While this may not be true (it wouldn't be the first time experts on a subject were later proven wrong) I would have to go with the preponderence of the data, for now at least. Are all the assumptions in the citation below true? I don't know.

Example from internet:

tomnicoli.com said:
Who can be hypnotized?
• The prerequisite for a person to be able to be hypnotized is willingness.
• Everybody is in a hypnotic state at some point of each day.
• There are three core elements necessary for hypnosis. These three factors ensure that a person is willing and open to suggestion and responsiveness.
o One must Believe it will work.
o One must genuinely Desire that it will work.
o One must Expect that it will work.
• A person can be in a state of hypnosis while running, or dancing, or even driving.
• Most people can be hypnotized.
• There is a common misconception that those with 'a strong will’ cannot be hypnotized.
• Intelligent people can be hypnotized faster because they can more easily access their imagination, and are better at following instructions than someone with a low IQ.• It is helpful for potential subjects of hypnosis to know what hypnosis is NOT, to comprehend what it IS, and to realize the potential for positive and empowering effects.
Who Cannot be Hypnotized? What Can’t Hypnosis Do?
• A person unwilling to be hypnotized
• A person who is too drunk.
• A person with extremely low intelligence, typically scoring an IQ level lower than 70.
• Hypnosis will not modify a person’s acceptance of new ideas or behaviors that conflict with their personal values.
• Extensive research in physiological response shows that people under hypnosis are not lying.
• Hypnosis cannot be used to control someone else's mind, or their actions.
Click to expand...

Link: _http://www.tomnicoli.com/media/Who_Can_or_Cannot_be_Hypnotized.pdf

I guess I should add that emphasis on subjects like hypnosis can distract from real Work, but y'all know that already.
 
Another great blog post by Les. It could be subtitled "and God picks up a 2x4" :scared:
http://lesvisible.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Talking about the False Light and the True Light.
Les Visible


Relatively speaking, it doesn’t take long for the truth to get lost once a new religion has come out of the showroom, or off the runway at the cosmic fashion show. Of course, relatively speaking the truth doesn’t generally get seen at all even when it’s there in person speaking to you.



In the Bible there is indication at several points that Jesus (The Christ) spoke in two ‘fashions’, one to the multitudes and one to the disciples. It appears that there are at least two sorts of people on the planet, those who will not be able to penetrate into the deeper mysteries and those who will. “Many are called but few are chosen.” One might immediately begin to argue over who gets to decide something like this. Let’s get this out of the way right now… it won’t be me.



For some it will have to be enough to follow the rules set down for behavior in hope that this will lead to a falling away of the veils… over time. For others, the presence of the truth will effect a more immediate falling away. It’s to be assumed that they had already done the ground work at an earlier time. Life’s a spiral staircase and we are all ahead of someone and behind someone else which is why I’ve often said that one shouldn’t piss over the railing.



For those unable to see the truth, no amount of talking and pointing …or charades is going to work. Most likely it will make them angry or confused. It wouldn’t be wrong to say that truth can be, and is, relative and absolute at the same time. This is why there’s no end to the arguments over whether the truth is relative or absolute. This is why contradictions bound. They aren’t contradictions really but… in the realm of the mind, which assigns itself the task of analyzing these things and which… operates in duality, there’s no chance of useful comprehension. Only when the mind is stilled can comprehension dawn. We’ve heard this said so many ways but it doesn’t really take because it’s the mind which is engaged in the process of hearing about the mind needing to be stilled.



Dogmatic and fundamentalist types are not going to subscribe to anything but the letter of the law. Mystics are not going to be satisfied with anything but the spirit of the law. Dogmatic types will often burn mystics at the stake if mystics are not careful about casting their pearls. In these times and in all times similar, when confusion and material flash is preeminent …there is a hardening at the same time that the ground is breaking for a new presentation of the light. For those who understand the meaning of alchemical states such a thing is to be expected.



The stages of alchemical transformation transliterate easily into the Yogic methodology just as it does into every legitimate process whether it be Stations of the Cross or the sephiroths on the Tree of Life. Mercury, sulfur and salt are also sattva, rajas and tamas. It’s sort of like saying, “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” People who are open to understanding understand this, even if they don’t get how and why. By the same token; God by any other name is still God. Vishnu and Allah and Yahweh are the same in essence. The personality and operation of that God as understood in any person’s anthropomorphic projection is actually the devil but… you probably don’t want to tell them that.



“Onward Christian Soldiers” and whatever is at the Top’s of the Pop's for the Wahhabis… whatever tune the Israeli settlers are singing when they are beating old Palestinian women to death, have nothing to do with the one in whose name they have chosen to act out their ignorance. It is things like this that convince the intellectuals that there is no God. There is indeed no God like that.



This is not to say that God will not kick your ass as he is generally engaged in at the moment; actually just warming up for, now. But this effect is only for the purpose of ‘awakening’. Wrath is a vibration that doesn’t necessarily apply itself to everyone in the same way. It’s more of a trying and a testing… a tempering, if you will. The more easily one is tempered the less stress is involved. I’ve quoted Mikhael Aivanhov before. “When God first comes to wake you he gently shakes your shoulder. If that does not work he shakes you harder. If that does not work, he picks up a two by four.”



No one should assume that the people who screwed everything up with the help of the masses …who were chasing the crumbs from the table of their supposed betters are going to fix the situation. Don’t be fooled into thinking that everything is going to go back to the way it was because… things never go back to the way they were and they never were the way they were imagined to have been in the first place.



There is something breaking through the hard ground of collective denial and it will not be denied. The false light that has lit the ghostland of Dreamville is soon to be revealed as darkness and the true light will for many be an unwelcome guest… just as it has always been. The ordinary mind seeks comfort above all else. It‘s how civilization reacts to pain. The comfort of the flesh is a suffocation upon the spirit and the spirit is infinitely stronger so you figure it out.



Most people don’t get that the soul decides when it’s had enough in a particular envelope and wants to move on. The ordinary mind fears death without realizing that the enduring portion of themselves chooses it. It doesn’t matter if you think this all comes about through the magic of numbers or what appears to be random fate or if you think divine agency orchestrates every detail because… like the point about relative and absolute truth, they all apply at a certain point except for the random part which only looks random when you don’t have all the information.



People playing mind games in the false light with chaos theory and all the other intellectual circle jerks that they use to amplify their ego in the ongoing dance of the false self where billions of dancers think the spotlight is shining on them are never going to understand what’s really happening because there is always more… far, far more than the mind can comprehend. But you can’t tell them anything and that is why things are happening as they are and why God is picking up a two by four.



It’s fine to ask where I get off saying these things but it would be a false presumption for anyone to assume that I think I know anything. I don’t. Everyone will just have to wait and see how their personal view of the cosmos works out for them. As Lao Tzu said, “What is, is ‘the was’ of what will be.”



You are in the time that was always projected in the mind as arriving some time and some time is now. You’ve got a front row seat to the show of people showing what’s real to them, what’s important to them, what they think has value. Destiny is on the doorstep and people will grab on to the cell bars and scream as the liberator pries their fingers from the bars. Some will crawl under rocks and look to hide in caves but there is no hiding place where this light will not enter. Embracing it would seem to be the wiser choice but it’s not to be expected in any collective sense; ergo, the two by four.



This window doesn’t open very often, not like it is opening now. By some calculations this only happens every twenty five thousand years. Take the leap or be prepared to head for the wardrobe department for a whole lot of costumes for the next series of lives.
Click to expand...
 
Hi!

I've come across some older blogs from Les Visible the other day which you have been publishing on SOTT as well. I always enjoyed his writings. However, I haven't noticed his articles being posted on SOTT for a while. Well, maybe you have and it could be that I missed it, but I'm usually a daily reader of SOTT. In case you stopped publishing is work, is there any particular reason for it or are his blogs just not that great anymore? Just wondering....thank you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom