Opinions

[Gaby]

Yes, the mirror image of oneself. Elam is on target.

The mirror image that Elan is refering to, is the one about the Narcissus myth. Narcissus got obssessed with his own image. It is a sad sad story.

So, I don't think there is a balance there, only feeding.

 

[Laura]

Men and women are different in their perspectives of life. There is balance and feed.

The man is to pull the woman back in to balance.

The woman is to pull out the man to feed. [She is a maze hunter, vibration too, you feel it!]

So how do man and woman work it out and in, in unison? [A successful relationship]

I'm not sure I understand precisely what you mean by the above. Your metaphors are a bit obscure. Can you please try to explain more clearly. Sometimes I'm rather dense and need a simple explanation.

 

[OCKHAM]

To answer both posts, first, I stand corrected on Elam, and his book, however, his reviews are 50/50. I need to read more of what he is saying. It sounds as though some of his work is good, but it also might tend to keep people from looking in at all, which may be worse.

There are many writers who are psychopaths themselves.

I understand about image [of oneself], personally, I don't spend much time in front of the mirror.

Laura, to explain, wow, ok.

Men and women are different in their perspectives of life. There is balance and feed.
The man is to pull the woman back in to balance.
The woman is to pull out the man to feed. [She is a maze hunter, vibration too, you feel it!]
So how do man and woman work it out and in, in unison? [A successful relationship]

Back in the 80-90's, there was something called Kirlian photography, I am sure you are familiar with it. The measurement of energy assumed between individuals, and recorded as a light image. When two people touched, this energy increased at the point of touch. Auras may also relate to this energy. Without trying to figure out where this energy is coming from, or if it generated somehow, let's go one step at a time.

Would you agree it exists inside humans and possibly a form of it in all living organisms?
If so, let's continue.

We may have this energy, and we may also collect it from other sources outside humans, as in the realm of dark energy that is present, invisible in nature. This outside energy could possibly be part of dark energy and dark matter, as in densities.

If you agree, let's continue, and we'll correlate several ideas.

Now we must cross over into biology, and then astronomy. Embryonic development shows division as in the brain. Newton tells us that for every action, there is an equal reaction, and most often thought of as opposite in force.

The left brain Sequential Analysis: systematic, logical interpretation of information. Interpretation and production of symbolic information: language, mathematics, abstraction and reasoning. Memory stored in a language format.

The right brain holistic functioning: processing multi-sensory input simultaneously to provide a "holistic" picture of one's environment. Holistic functions such as coordinated by the right hemisphere. Memory is stored in auditory, visual and spatial modalities.
[Source: keyword - brain function]

This theory now rests on a few similarities. The fact that man and woman are opposite and these observations are noticed physically. We develop from birth as division. Man and woman exchange energy during intercourse, and studies also show man and woman are capable of a connection, as in a mother to her child far away. These divisions obviously mean something about our nature and the energy that is exchanged. There is also the issue of action, reaction, and force.

To correlate these ideas, energy pushed up against energy will react where one might feed and the other might push, or give, as in resistance, and of course, many facets thereof.

So, before we jump over to astronomy, let touch base.

Would you agree that balance is a synonym of division for nature, and the way nature is made?

If so, let's continue.

Whoops, need to catch up here. Will continue when you're at this level, it is late and you will read this the next day.

 

[arkmod]

The man is to pull the woman back in to balance.

Now, if you study the data, say the wingtv case, that is well documented - what you see? Who was balancing whom? Was Victor pulling Lisa into balance? Or was it Lisa who was pulling Victor into balance?

 

[Ryan]

I think that perhaps the term "opinion", although defining something intrinsically subjective, is not without its uses in conversation. Perhaps like most things of a subjective nature however, it has been twisted into something glorifying the Personality and is intentionally misapplied for the purposes of rhetoric.

I have made plentiful use of the terms "IMO and IMHO" in my time on the Internet, and for me they function as a disclaimer for what I'm saying - a way to let the reader know that what I am saying may be partially or completely wrong - something analogous to "But don't take my word for it". Perhaps it is time to start using phrases that say precisely that, rather than the term "opinion" which seems to be somewhat misapplied and overrated.

Considering what Lobaczewski wrote about the "selection and substitution of meanings" of otherwise common words (in order to construct paramoral or paralogical discourse), perhaps it is a good idea to "quarantine" such words from personal use until such point as they have shed their pathological associations in the general public's consciousness. This will no doubt facilitate clearer communication - an important part of raising awareness.

 

[Gaby]

To answer both posts, first, I stand corrected on Elam, and his book, however, his reviews are 50/50. I need to read more of what he is saying. It sounds as though some of his work is good, but it also might tend to keep people from looking in at all, which may be worse.

There are many writers who are psychopaths themselves.

I think you're refering to another book. The author is Elan Golomb and she is a woman. She has written only one book, the one that helped her patients, her readers and herself to deal with narcissism. She is very inspirational [not an opinion, a fact ;)]

 

[kenlee]

Win / Lose
Light / Dark
Left / Right
Yes / No
In / Out
Life / Death
Love / Hate

I won't go any further just to say, we may have aversion disorder. We may only be looking into the arrow's point, and being forced to choose an alternate path while being blinded. If you look [behind] you, you have a million directions available. If you look forward, you only have two averted away to one side or the other, so the arrow does not pierce you.

As has been mentioned your posts are often mystifying and unclear. Your term 'aversion disorder' is unclear to me. Try to state exactly what you wish to say and answer any questions asked of you in as few words as possible to express exactly what you mean. Try to speak or post mathematically with the minimum amount of words to express the maximum meaning of what you wish to say. That would be my advice to you.

 

[arkmod]

So how do man and woman work it out and in, in unison? [A successful relationship]

The key is here:

http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=27

In particular:

People converging on the same target will eventually encounter each other, thus the Work should come before hunting high and low for the 'meant to be' romance.

 

[kenlee]

I think our opinions come from the 'formatory mind' and most of our thinking is done from this part of us because we are lazy. It takes effort and attention to think "ouside the box" and it seems that 'life' does want us to think. Why? Because it takes energy and attention to think and 'life' wants the attention and energy for itself, to serve it's own mechaninal funtionality.

Anyone who truly thinks for themselves is noted and dealt with by 'life' (the general law). Why? Because the general law wants this attention for itself and it sees individual thinking as a threat to it's inherent mechanization as well as to it's food supply. So the general law sets forth the determining conditions within which there is run a 'general program (the matrix) that notes creative thinkers and automatically takes corrective measures to bring them in line with the inherent mechanization of the system, much like the borg mentality in star trek. It does not want individual thinkers who 'think outside the box.' The general program takes note of such thinkers, it notices them, and it will find the means to sap their energy so they will not have the 'energy of attention' to think for themselves. This general program will always adjust itself, synchronistically, so as to keep the creative thinker emotionally engaged so that they will "think emotionally" rather then think independently.

It may be that this individual thinking comes from the higher part of the intellectual center (for those who are familiar with the ideas of Gurdjieff) and it takes directed attention to direct our thinking processes from this part of our minds. Ouspensky says in his book '--The Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution'

"The intellectual part of the intellectual centre includes in itself a capacity for creation, construction, invention and discovery. It cannot work without attention, but the attention in this part of the centre must be controlled and kept there by will and effort."

But generally we think from the middle part, or the emotional part, of of our centers and it takes little effort to sustain our attention in this part since the emotional part of the center sustains our attention for us.

However, most of the time we don't even think at this level, but rather we think at the lowest level possible for the intellect which is the mechanical part of the intellectual center which doesn't even feel anything at all... it just apes other peoples emotional thinking and mechanically repeats what they say with no thought whatsoever. This, I think, is where we have our most of our opinions.

But worst of all we can have cross connections or 'crosstalk' between centers where the emotional center drives the thinking processes of the intellect resulting in what is called 'emotional thinking' where we become complete slaves to our feelings. In this case our emotions do the thinking for us.

Our (emotional) reaction machines often identify with the 'yes' OR 'no' . We react to the world around us and our thinking mechanism follows our reactions and we end up thinking in terms of yes OR no. We only see one side of an issue and our opinions are often based on this polarized or binary thinking. In this way we only see the part and mistake it for the whole. We can't think in opposite terms because we are always identified with our reactions of the 'yes' or 'no' of any situation, at any given moment, and consequently our thinking follows our reactions. There is no 'effort' to react to something and therefore we make no effort to think. So, I would say that we need to think in "opposite" terms. Thinking in opposite terms does not feel natural since it feels so 'natural' to react to things since it is so easy.

For example, learning to box does not feel 'natural.' That's because everything in boxing is backwards and opposite. A boxer fights in a 'box.' To move to the right the boxer must push out from his left foot and to move to the left he must push out from his right foot. Everything in boxing is about opposites and backwardness. Everything about it , when initially learning it, does not feel 'natural.' Similarly when an opponent moves in towards the boxer, the boxer then moves in towards the opponent instead of moving away, as would FEEL 'natural.' So, I think, thinking is like that. Brining the 'yes' AND 'no' of our thinking processes together will propel our thinking processes forward, toward new possibilities, or new ways of thinking.

In her book 'Initiation' Elisabeth Haitch speaks of 'The Twelve Sets of Twin Characteristics' which must be mastered in order to be 'initiated' or 'balanced.'

The Twelve Sets of Twin Characteristics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
keeping silent <---> talking
receptivity <---> resistance to influence
obeying <---> ruling
humility <---> self-confidence
lightning-like speed <---> circumspection
to accept everything <---> to be able to differentiate
ability to fight <---> peace
caution <---> courage
to possess nothing <---> to command everything
to have no ties <---> loyalty
contempt for death <---> regard for life
indifference <---> love

The Formatory Apparatus mentioned by Gurdjieff is a good description of how we think in terms of yes OR no:

From http://www.geocities.com/tokyo/1236/formatory9.html

The Formatory Apparatus is another name for the mechanical part of the intellectual centre. It is given a special name because it plays such a large role in our lives. For example, it will attempt to answer when a question is addressed to the whole of us.

It uses words; its medium is words. Its function is to record data and take care of such repetitive automatic tasks as: simple addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and so on; serve as a databank for data such as address, telephone number, pin number, general knowledge, common sayings such as 'Hello, how are you', individual words, and so on. It collects ready-made opinions. It does not think; it can only recite.

It can only see two possibilities, for example, 'yes' or 'no', 'all' or 'nothing', 'bad' or 'good'; it cannot see a spectrum of possibilities, or shades of gray. It can, however, spew out long lists of data and information, which can be mistaken for intelligent discussion or intelligent thought to the uneducated observer. In this respect, the formatory apparatus is much admired in ordinary life, for its ability, for example, to know who won where and when what match/test/game of football/cricket/baseball/sumo/basketball/hockey, and so on. It will also read at random, for example, cereal boxes, labels, advertisements, magazines, newspapers, and so on, with little or no attention.

It is engaged in wrong work, for example, when it answers a question or a discussion addressed to the whole intellectual centre, or to the whole of us.

The mechanical parts of centres tend to operate in a less coordinated way than the emotional and intellectual parts of centres. For example, you can walk and chew gum and exchange opinions on the latest test match at the same time; however, these activities are relatively unrelated except by accident. It is another matter when you bring all your centres together to focus on solving a difficult problem, for example, of designing the furnishings in a room, or a theatrical production, to produce a particular and specific psychological effect.

P. D. Ouspensky also said that when you hear the phrase (or related phrases, presumably) 'It is said that...', that this indicates formatory apparatus is operating. To me, this seems to be true when the statement is not supported by any further examples, observations, or discussion.

When we hear or read a new idea, or receive new knowledge, and respond with the phrase 'I already know that' and lose interest, this is usually a symptom that the formatory apparatus is operating in us.

Orage (a student of Gurdjieff's) speaks of how the friction can be used between the 'yes' and 'no' to open new possibilities:

From http://www.gurdjieff.org/orage5.htm

The only real understanding that can ever be acquired depends upon a certain substance which can only be formed in a particular manner. This substance depends upon three factors: the presence of understandings of a like nature which become relatively positive and negative, and the new piece of knowledge which is the neutralizing force. The result of the three is a new understanding.

One set of previous understandings says yes and another set denies, and there is a certain friction created; the result of this clash is perceived as a new understanding (which may be either according to knowledge or according to essence and thus be either temporary or permanent, and that is decided by whether the individual makes effort when the clash occurs).

If effort is not made, the new understanding is perceived only according to the specific gravity of the words and this is at random and thus mixed with uncorresponding items; but when effort is made, each direction of the clash is appreciated consciously (through the effort) and the final result will be directed. So it is that people can not be told anything of value but must first get the necessary substance and then make effort to achieve understanding.

Because external events which unwind us do not fit into a recognizable order, we have the illusion of freedom. This is why we do not learn from experience. According to the Law of Association, all things seek their level in the scale of being. Ordinarily, experiences are automatically distributed according to former associations; but when effort is made, they can go to their correct places in the centers.

~ - ~
The harmonious development of man: an "all-round" man according to the original definition, is one who is equally at home in all three centers, a man who is really in occupation of his house; that is, all three stories of it. To produce such men is the purpose of the Gurdjieff teaching, which rules out the three forms of monstrous genius.

Ouspensky in his book 'In Search Of The Miraculous' quotes Gurdjieff on the subject of dualities:

Dualities ("Seal of Solomon")

from Ouspensky's "In Search of the Miraculous," pp. 280-82:

"The understanding of symbols can be approached in the following way: In studying the world of phenomena a man first of all sees in everything the manifestation of two principles, one opposed to the other, which in conjunction or in opposition, give one result or another, that is, reflect the essential nature of the principles which have created them. This manifestation of the great laws of duality and trinity man sees simultaneously in the cosmos and in himself. But in relation to the cosmos he is merely a spectator and moreover one who sees only the surface of phenomena which are moving in various directions though seeming to him to move in one direction. But in relation to himself his understanding of the laws of duality and trinity can express itself in a practical form, namely, having understood these laws in himself, he can, so to speak, confine the manifestation of the laws of duality and trinity to the permanent line of struggle with himself on the way to self-knowledge. In this way he will introduce the line of will first into the circle of time and afterwards into the cycle of eternity, the accomplishing of which will create in him the great symbol known by the name of the Seal of Solomon.
...

"Man, in the normal state natural to him, is taken as a duality. He consists entirely of dualities or 'pairs of opposites.' All man's sensations, impressions, feelings, thoughts, are divided into positive and negative, useful and harmful, necessary and unnecessary, good and bad, pleasant and unpleasant. The work of centers proceeds under the sign of this division. Thoughts oppose feelings. Moving impulses oppose instinctive craving for quiet. This is the duality in which proceed all the perceptions, all the reactions, the whole life of man. Any man who observes himself, however little, can see this duality in himself.

"But this duality would seem to alternate; what is victor today is the vanquished tomorrow; what guides us today becomes secondary and subordinate tomorrow. And everything is equally mechanical, equally independent of will, and leads equally to no aim of any kind. The understanding of duality in oneself begins with the realization of mechanicalness and the realization of the difference between what is mechanical and what is conscious. This understanding must be preceded by the destruction of the self-deceit in which a man lives who considers even his most mechanical actions to be volitional and conscious and himself to be single and whole.

"When self-deceit is destroyed and a man begins to see the difference between the mechanical and the conscious in himself, there begins a struggle for the relation of consciousness in life and for the subordination of the mechanical to the conscious. For this purpose a man begins with endeavors to set a definite decision, coming from conscious motives, against mechanical processes proceeding according to the laws of duality. The creation of a permanent third principle is for man the transformation of the duality into the trinity.

"Strengthening this decision and bringing it constantly and infallibly into all those events where formerly accidental neutralizing 'shocks' used to act and give accidental results, gives a permanent line of results in time and is the transformation of trinity into quaternity. The next stage, the transformation of quaternity into quinternity and the construction of the pentagram has not one but many different meanings even in relation to man. And of these is learned, first of all, one, which is the most beyond doubt, relating to the work of centers.

"The development of the human machine and the enrichment of being begins with a new and unaccustomed functioning of this machine. We know that a man has five centers: the thinking, the emotional, the moving, the instinctive, and the sex. The predominant development of any one center at the expense of the others produces an extremely one-sided type of man, incapable of further development. But if a man brings the work of the five centers within him into harmonious accord, he then 'locks the pentagram within him' and becomes a finished type of the physically perfect man. The full and proper functioning of five centers brings them into union with the higher centers which introduce the missing principle and put man into direct and permanent connection with objective consciousness and objective knowledge.

"And then man becomes the six pointed star, that is, by becoming locked within a circle of life independent and complete in itself, he becomes isolated from foreign influences or accidental shocks; he embodies in himself the Seal of Solomon."

 

[OCKHAM]

Wonderful, and very well received Kenlee, and quite inspiring. I find these statements relative to our conversation.

Consciousness is an electrical phenomenon which arises from a state of being which we can feel.

In our usual opinion there are two forms of electricity, positive and negative; but there is also a third form; namely, the field within which the positive and negative forms are related to each other. Any manifestation of positive and negative electricity implies a fulcrum; that is, a point of resistance over which they balance.

And when I read this, my eyes got big, and you probably know why. I have not read Ouspensky's book, so how does is that our core ideas have matched?!? This book will be consumed.

We know that a man has five centers: the thinking, the emotional, the moving, the instinctive, and the sex.

Man and woman, Ouspensky.

Action and reaction has its elemental derivative, and third part, we refer to as [the force].

Arkmod, I will attempt to answer your first question, but after we have come almost completely out of this forest, for now is not the time to apply it. The other post from the glossary also applies here, although it is not enough to explain why balance exists, other than they are opposite in nature. This also focuses in on the relationship, which we have not arrived yet, but were headed in that direction.

Here are some pre-written thoughts awaiting the maze master.

Energy between living beings is constantly being changed by our inherent forces [as in mysterious intrinsic properties in cells] that we carry with us, and energy is being sent out and received across great distances. There are current studies that show people connect, and of course, disconnect, as obvious from aversion and psychological properties. We even feel this energy quite often, and there are many examples of this.

Man and woman make life; their division is significant and must have a type of balance to function, not only mentally, but physically. The fact that goose bumps are hair follicles that have muscles that force the point of hair's contact to the skin at the plane of surface area, to eject upwards as a funnel, almost as though the body is perceptive to energy received abruptly.

The energy seems to be designed by the body, and it is, but did it originate from the body. It was an outside force or thought that arrived. It is often thought of as a reaction, and said it originates in the brain. If that were totally true, you should be able to create goose bumps on demand. I think you see my point about energy and are beginning to see how important balance is, so let's jump to quantum land, and Ark can cross check.

 

[arkmod]

Arkmod, I will attempt to answer your first question, but after we have come almost completely out of this forest, for now is not the time to apply it.

Before you address my first question, I will give you another piece of data to ponder about.

When I saw your post, I got quite upset and were preparing a rather harsh reply. Yet, before I posted it, I asked Laura to read your post first. She read it and "balanced me" by saying" "He is probably confused, let me ask him (that means you) to explain it better what is in his mind." So, I did not post. And it was good. It is another example of how man and woman can balance each other (in different areas and under different circumstances), not that balancing is a prerogative of man.

 

[OCKHAM]

Arkmod, I averted you horribly, because I didn't want to lose my focus. I over focused. Bless her heart for saving me, and I wholeheartedly apolgize for that [aversion disorder] behavior. See, this is important.

Correct response: I want to try and answer that question for you Arkmod, may I have a bit of time to digest things?

Ok, discerners, I'm listening better today, my headaches are beginning to decrease. Balancing works in wondrous ways.

As far as women and men are concerned in this balancing wonder, man should discern all the emotions like a map to present to the woman when she returns from the forest from the hunt. The man receives the love from here and knowledge to correlate it for her, and supply her the proper emotions as food, which she will engulf.

The woman is the king of man. She rules the world as men are stronger and should do physical work, but men can also obtain knowledge, they just need not walk over the woman to get to it. The man needs to understand the black sun, and the woman should feed it to him as balance.

The woman needs food in the form of a man who is emotional stable.

The man needs balance in the form of a woman who is intellectual stable.

Do you agree this may represent a more suited paradigm?

 

[Mark]

Arkmod, I averted you horribly, because I didn't want to lose my focus. I over focused. Bless her heart for saving me, and I wholeheartedly apolgize for that [aversion disorder] behavior. See, this is important.

Correct response: I want to try and answer that question for you Arkmod, may I have a bit of time to digest things?

Ok, discerners, I'm listening better today, my headaches are beginning to decrease. Balancing works in wondrous ways.

As far as women and men are concerned in this balancing wonder, man should discern all the emotions like a map to present to the woman when she returns from the forest from the hunt. The man receives the love from here and knowledge to correlate it for her, and supply her the proper emotions as food, which she will engulf.

The woman is the king of man. She rules the world as men are stronger and should do physical work, but men can also obtain knowledge, they just need not walk over the woman to get to it. The man needs to understand the black sun, and the woman should feed it to him as balance.

The woman needs food in the form of a man who is emotional stable.

The man needs balance in the form of a woman who is intellectual stable.

Do you agree this may represent a more suited paradigm?

So men should do physical work yet women go out into some kind of forest for a hunt? Woman is king? King? So who's the queen then?

I can't make any sense of your posts about this stuff. 'Word salad' comes to mind right about now.

 

[OCKHAM]

Word salad is good for the diet sometimes, I guess. Please read the entire thread if needed.

I decided to add this so we can get back to a starting point if needed.

I am sure you have heard of late Douglas Adams. Douglas powered up his inner core with imagination, and I love that about him. In that respect, we are the same.

What amazes me about him is this. He was one of the best liars I know, and the only one I love. Douglas claimed to be an atheist because he wanted to sell what he had, and he knew his market well. If he had not been an atheist, he could not have accomplished his fame as well. I am now the opposite of Douglas, for I believe in God as a combination of energy, thought, and force, and not artificially, as he claimed. The problem with Douglas was if you are as imaginative as he was, you know God exists, and end up having to make a decision. He made his based on his marketability.

Yet, he let this statement slip out in 1998.

"Without a god, life is only a matter of opinion."

You can read it here, where he talks about the 3 ages of sand off the cuff.
http://www(dot)biota.org/people/douglasadams/

 

[Gaby]

Douglas powered up his inner core with imagination, and I love that about him. In that respect, we are the same.

Sometimes imagination can produce word salads. Like in the following example from the book "In search of the Miraculous", where Gurdjieff says:

He cannot stop the flow of his thoughts, he cannot control his imagination, his emotions, his attention. He lives in a subjective world of 'I love,' 'I do not love,' 'I like,' 'I do not like,' 'I want,' 'I do not want,' that is, of what he thinks he likes, of what he thinks he does not like, of what he thinks he wants, of what he thinks he does not want. He does not see the real world. The real world is hidden from him by the wall of imagination. He lives in sleep. He is asleep. What is called 'clear consciousness' is sleep and a far more dangerous sleep than sleep at night in bed.