Organic Portals: Human variation

[luc]

Chalmers writes something very interesting (in "Conscious Mind") - it's not about his Zombies per se, but what he noticed are differences in intuition among philosophers.

He says there are 3 basic views of consciousness among philosophers, type A, B and C. Type A are the "die-hard" materialists à la Dennett. The issue at hand here is the so-called "hard problem of consciousness", i.e. the question why in a materialist world there should be experience. It doesn't make sense, because we could imagine a world of human automatons (zombies) that would work just as well without conscious experience in a materialist world. It is simply unnecessary. For some philosophers (like Chalmers) this is a puzzling question; Others (the die-hard materialists) simply cannot see the problem! So:

Chalmers, p. 166

Type-A views come in numerous varieties - eliminativism, behaviorism, various versions of reductive functionalism - but they have certain things in common. A type-A theorist will hold that (1) physical and functional duplicates that lack the sort of experience that we have are inconceivable; (2) Mary learns nothing about the world when she first sees red ... and (3) everything there is to be explained about consciousness can be explained by explaining the performance of various functions.

He goes on (p. 167)

The central choice is the choice between type A and the rest. For myself, reductive functionalism and eliminativism seem so clearly false that I find it hard to fathom how anyone could accept a type-A view. To me, it seems that one could only accept such a view if one believed that there was no significant problem about consciousness in the first place. Nevertheless, experience indicates that almost one-third of the population are willing to accept a type-A position and do not budge. This indicates the Great Divide mentioned in the preface: the divide between views that take consciousness seriously and those that do not.
.... Both these views [type B & C] acknoledge the depth of the problem of consciousness where type-A views do not.

Ultimately, argument can take us only so far in settling this issue. If someone insists that explaining access and reportability explains everything, that Mary discovers nothing about the world when she first has a red experience, and that a functional isomorph differeing in conscious experience is inconceivable, then I can only conclude that when it comes to experience we are on different planes. Perhaps our inner lives differ dramatically. Perhaps one of us is "cognitively closed" to the insights of the other. Mor likely, one of us is confused or is in the grip of a dogma. In any case, once the dialectic reaches this point, it is a bridge that argument cannot cross. Rather, we have reached a brute clash of intuitions [...]

So maybe this has to do with OPs: an OP's inner life is so different, their experience so impoverished, that they simply cannot see the gap between a so-called materialist world and the richness of our inner experience - because they don't have it. For them the world is "flat", "automatic", and "unmysterious".

Chalmers tries to find explanations for this "intuition gap" in his papers "Is the Hard Problem of Consciousness Universal?" and "The Meta-Problem of Consciousness" - one question he asks is why the hard problem of consciousness wasn't really seen in the history of philosophy before the 19th century?

His answer is that before then, people simply have taken dualist views for granted, and therefore the problem didn't even arise.

But I think it might go deeper than that. We know that the OP is also an authoritarian follower. So in times past, when the authorities said "there is a soul" or that "there is the body, but there is also the mind", they simply obeyed and came up with childish and primitive ideas about these things for themselves. However, once the wind changed and materialist views became somewhat acceptable in certain circles in the 19th century (the 1860ies in particular), some OPs felt "free" to express their impoverished worldview; others were appalled, but often bullied into accepting materialism, but of course they needed to bring that together with their experience - and so the "hard problem of consciousness" came to be.

However, we also know that psychopaths and some other pathologicals might be a special sort of OP that lack the "authoritarian follower" feature. They might have a similar internal make-up as the authoritarian OPs, but they are anti-social and do whatever they feel like. So it's interesting that some philosophers in the past apparently did argue for something like die-hard materialism. Chalmers names Democritus, Hobbes, and perhaps Epicurus and La Mettrie. At least for Hobbes this is no surprise - this guy delivered the mother of all schizoidal declarations!

Well, just some speculation here.

 

[Andrian]

Thank you for your insights Luc, it seems that in the grand scheme the humanity has been led to a certain path by the 4d STS through their 3d followers and minions first through the monotheistic religions and later through science that presents a materialistic worldview where the consciousness is a mere byproduct of the mind.

The new priests to lead the OP's and the souls with a potential for growth being the die-hard materialistic scientists, that are and were most probably OP's with a deplorable understanding of the human condition in this density and a poor understanding of the extremely important role consciousness is playing in the grander scheme of all existence.

And at present we can witness where these materialistic high priests along with other individuals alike have led our current society, that is, to a materialistic, hedonistic, superficial inner state and way of life easily manipulated and controlled by the 3d PTB and 4d STS.

No wonder that the C's have mentioned recently that the programming of most of the population has been completed. Therefore as a consequence currently we are finding ourselves in this current situation.

Just a few thoughts.

 

[Saman]

Thank you for your insights Luc, it seems that in the grand scheme the humanity has been led to a certain path by the 4d STS through their 3d followers and minions first through the monotheistic religions and later through science that presents a materialistic worldview where the consciousness is a mere byproduct of the mind.

The new priests to lead the OP's and the souls with a potential for growth being the die-hard materialistic scientists, that are and were most probably OP's with a deplorable understanding of the human condition in this density and a poor understanding of the extremely important role consciousness is playing in the grander scheme of all existence.

Not sure if it is the case "most probably"; I was thinking as another possibility, perhaps some of them are not OPs but the "roots" of 4D STS future selfs that worship the physical universe, and hence having choosed to be 'the chosen' priests that propagate this materialistic perception of consciousness and the universe as part of control systems non-linear "game theory" for the control of the consciousness of the potentially individuated souled masses below.

 

[Alma.Innovadora]

A: Do you ever hurt for another?

Q: (V) I think they are talking about empathy. These soulless humans simply don't care what happens to another person. If another person is in pain or misery, they don't know how to care.

A: The only pain they experience is "withdrawal" of "food" or comfort, or what they want. They are also masters of twisting perception of others so as to seem to be empathetic. But, in general, such actions are simply to retain control.

A: Quite closely. In an individual of the organic variety, the so-called higher chakras are "produced in effect" by stealing that energy from souled beings. This is what gives them the ability to emulate souled beings. The souled being is, in effect, perceiving a mirror of their own soul when they ascribe "soul qualities" to such beings.

(L) I don't think that this was the actual conclusion. Yes, it is true that if your knowledge increases then you have an idea what's going on. And most especially, if your mind is strong enough not to be susceptible to these mind control waves, you can certainly put an end to that nonsense. But, that doesn't mean that you would not be physically abducted if those 4th density dudes or the government decided to do it because that has nothing to do with battling mind control waves. I mean if they really want to get to you they'll send somebody into you life who is an OP and they'll come to you thorough that person.

The other extraordinary part that has caught my attention recently is that precisely because they emulate beings with souls and give us back exactly what we want to see, they also reflect what we need as a mirror in order to move forward. They tell you exactly what we did not want to see and accept, from the ego in ourselves, as for example when we also respond with a blackmail product of our emotional maladjustment:

Q: "I've been helping you for so long and this is how you repay me?"
A: "I didn't ask you for help, you only committed yourself to help me in everything".

When the energy given, does not return.

When the devil starts to come out in the details in a simple heated discussion. Sometimes they don't even say "help me", they usually do it when they realize that you are taking the help away from them at the root, when you start to have control. I have noticed how they start to behave more empathetic than they have ever really been, just to keep the drain going.

Q: (L) My next question is: I've been being a bit mouthy on the website. I just can't seem to keep my mouth shut when I see so many lies and so much fraud, and the potential for so many people being hurt. I know that things are going to be the way they are being, and that we will 'do what we will do,' but it just isn't in me to keep silent when I see what I see. What are the chances that any of my activities are going to even be helpful?

A: While it may not appear to make a difference, sometimes actions accelerate growth.

Q: (C) Do they mean personal growth or everyone's collective growth? (B) In the form of intensified lessons? (L) Yeah (laughter).

A: Personal growth. And it can lead to lessons, but also to a star for passing the test.

There are times when what one says to others seems more like something we need to say to ourselves and the dynamics of the moment seem to serve as a catalyst to put our thinking to work by virtue of looking out for our own destiny. Even the slightest objective thought can unleash hell.

Keep in mind that having emotions can tremendously skew and fog intellect. Imagine not having any emotional issues at all - ever - to interfere with the working of the brain? Such an individual could very easily out think you in a minute. For example, note what Lobaczewski says about the effect of the psychopath on a normal human being:

Essential psychopathy has exceptionally intense effects in this manner. Something mysterious gnaws into the personality of an individual at the mercy of such a person and is then fought like a demon. His emotions become chilled, his sense of psychological reality is stifled. This leads to de-criterialization of thought and a feeling of helplessness, culminating in depressive reactions which can be so severe that psychiatrists sometimes misdiagnose them as a manic-depressive psychosis.

Remember that intellect is a function of the brain, a physical organ. A psychopath or an Organic Portal can have very fine brains indeed, ones that work better than yours or mine ever will. And for the psychopath, there is no emotional interferance at all - nothing to get in the way of pure, computerized thought processes that will beat out the souled individual every time.

That is the fuzzy conclusion I have recently reached and I try to give it a better order to be able to reflect on it since I tend to be in one extreme or the other when it comes to emotions when interacting with people. I have even reached a degree of indifference, that emotions do not get in the way, but it is not the solution. It may serve to contemplate a little for a certain time, but that is like running away and sacrificing empathy.

I think a lot about what Cass and Cesar said because diffusely these are thoughts that have been on my mind for a long time, but not in the same way, it's like now that I read them, ah! That's what I was trying to see, having thoughts on the tip of my brain (laughs):

Cass - "The blocks will reflect what they are not capable of giving".
Cass - "If a person can't be truthful, they will experience people in their personal life who are not truthful with them".
Cass - "If a person devalues the efforts of another, they will find their own efforts devalued.
Cass - "If you need to unblock a certain area of your life, make the effort to give what you want or need yourself.
Cesar - "I was wrong to think I could change the masses by example."
Cesar - "Human beings are fickle and self-centered for the most part."
Cesar - "In the end you must be true to your own nature and fear nothing."

I closely complement them to this lesson I came to years ago "don't ask of others what you cannot give".

Now as I read again about OPs that emulate the soul, it is as if they speak of the constant and wearing interaction with people we always engage with on an emotional level, precisely because of that, because we see in them something they don't really have, the wishful thinking to find your equal. What they reflect is not exactly what we want to see in that mirror, because they are not like us and what we need, we can only get it by breaking that mirror and it extends to all levels of our life. And all our interaction with them is selfishly based on finding validity in their actions in order to feel good.

These types of people I have interacted with, in effect, have a high potential to be successful, they have a high intellectual potential, a mind to hold an amazing amount of information and so they please, they attract attention and their circles are usually wide and idolize them. They are good at appearing to be the best people in the world, but incredibly they have no empathy and their consciousness seems to be related and more selective to their predatory state and manipulation of others. That big information they harbor is exactly the demonstration of what has been said about non-applied knowledge, it is just an accumulation of data. Some may have high intellectual potential but cannot relate in any way the inner experience and its interaction with the world. They just repeat phrases just like the person who thinks they are smart for putting interesting phrases on their Facebook. They don't know what that means in terms of applying it in life beyond pure mechanical interaction. And in the creative field, something similar and strange happens. And it is here where it comes what most strikes my attention, alone they can not stand or go far either, but they are more tuned to relate to the right people and lack of emotions like them not to get in the way of their goals, unless they do not give their part in acceptable proportions and conditions. "One hand washes the other hand" and they are good at it.

I don't forget the words one person said to me, soulful or soulless, depressed or struggling or whatever, I just know that I still have lessons to draw from that experience, "What happens is that I have a secret personality and I must relate to people who suit me for my personal purposes".

Apparently when they denote that you are getting closer to the truth, that you are backing them into a corner, something they must say to keep you trusting, they say what you want to hear. No matter how cruel it is, for an empathic person unwilling enough to say enough, they will only care that they told the truth and will deny the rest in order to preserve the illusion. But where illusion predominates, one cannot be true to oneself. Two frequencies impossible to interact with, very conflicting, at least that has been my interaction.

We all want healthy relationships, with people of the same "human value" as us, although paradoxically, the "human value" we have is what we are going to interact with (laughs). That's why you have to know how to recognize it in yourself first, you have to identify those emotions that you have to burn, to unblock.

There is a phrase that says: "The bad always sticks". A liar, OPs, psychopath or narcissist knows what they are going for, they don't go with false expectations, but they know yours, they know your potential and they will use it against you and to their advantage. That's why they do well when they team up. They don't waste their time with illusions, they only care whether you are useful to them or not.

 

[Ruth]

There is a phrase that says: "The bad always sticks". A liar, OPs, psychopath or narcissist knows what they are going for, they don't go with false expectations, but they know yours, they know your potential and they will use it against you and to their advantage. That's why they do well when they team up. They don't waste their time with illusions, they only care whether you are useful to them or not.

I don't class OPs as "bad", rather I see them as neutral - just like the so called more 'advanced souled' people on the planet. They can be either bad or good depending on their inclinations. Rather I see an OP as a bridge between 2nd and 3rd density, with those more 'advanced souls' being bridges between 3rd and 4th densities.

It's simply a question of numbers. If 1/2 the worlds population are OPs, this represents too many people to be "bad".

 

[Sybil]

Another thing that I have noticed in my mental review, which I then experimented with in relation to a couple of individuals that I was curious about and it seems to be a solid "test", is "the ability to learn from a particular situation and then transfer that learning to another situation that is similar in INTERNAL dynamics, but completely different in external form."

Would it be possible to elaborate on this, please? Can you give me an example? Thank you.

 

[Risen]

When the energy given, does not return

To me this is the most telling sign that I need to distance myself from a person, organic portal or not.

 

[Alma.Innovadora]

I don't class OPs as "bad", rather I see them as neutral - just like the so called more 'advanced souled' people on the planet. They can be either bad or good depending on their inclinations. Rather I see an OP as a bridge between 2nd and 3rd density, with those more 'advanced souls' being bridges between 3rd and 4th densities.

It's simply a question of numbers. If 1/2 the worlds population are OPs, this represents too many people to be "bad".

Usually these phrases are attributed to the fact that we are always more inclined to do "bad" than "good". Grandmother's phrases. That's what I mean.

 

[Laura]

Would it be possible to elaborate on this, please? Can you give me an example? Thank you.

A really simple example would be sort of as follows: an individual is hired as a sailor/worker on a ship of some sort. He is taught by rote and experience that safety is important and that safety depends on order, organization, putting everything in its proper place and in usable condition, always putting ropes away properly because you may need them in an instant and won't have time to untangle them, etc, etc. Of course, it would take some time to learn this, but with a captain who is strict and demanding, the individual would soon understand that this sort of thing is crucial and could be life-saving. He's able to learn it.

But then, in any other environment, the guy slacks off, doesn't seem to be able to apply the principle of order, precaution, anticipating problems and being prepared for them in any other context. His home is a mess, nothing is ever put away where it belongs and prepared for the next use. He has an emergency and can't find his tools, his flashlight; his clothes are not put away and he can't dress fast enough to take care of an emergency; can't find his shoes, etc. So, as a consequence, a sudden emergency such as a burglar, tornado, stove-top fire, exploding water pipe, injury of family member needing immediate care, etc, completely overtakes him and he is helpless because he is not prepared. He was able to learn the principle only in the context of his job and having a boss/captain order him to behave in a certain way and the value of doing so. At home, he did not perceive that life, itself, is similar to working on a ship: one always needs to be prepared.

That's just a general, sort of inclusive example, but I'm sure you have noted people who have a very narrow range of competence, but in other situations that are dynamically similar, appear to be clueless and unable to understand that this other situation is, in principle, similar to the one in which they are able to act intelligently.

 

[Sybil]

A really simple example would be sort of as follows: an individual is hired as a sailor/worker on a ship of some sort. He is taught by rote and experience that safety is important and that safety depends on order, organization, putting everything in its proper place and in usable condition, always putting ropes away properly because you may need them in an instant and won't have time to untangle them, etc, etc. Of course, it would take some time to learn this, but with a captain who is strict and demanding, the individual would soon understand that this sort of thing is crucial and could be life-saving. He's able to learn it.

But then, in any other environment, the guy slacks off, doesn't seem to be able to apply the principle of order, precaution, anticipating problems and being prepared for them in any other context. His home is a mess, nothing is ever put away where it belongs and prepared for the next use. He has an emergency and can't find his tools, his flashlight; his clothes are not put away and he can't dress fast enough to take care of an emergency; can't find his shoes, etc. So, as a consequence, a sudden emergency such as a burglar, tornado, stove-top fire, exploding water pipe, injury of family member needing immediate care, etc, completely overtakes him and he is helpless because he is not prepared. He was able to learn the principle only in the context of his job and having a boss/captain order him to behave in a certain way and the value of doing so. At home, he did not perceive that life, itself, is similar to working on a ship: one always needs to be prepared.

That's just a general, sort of inclusive example, but I'm sure you have noted people who have a very narrow range of competence, but in other situations that are dynamically similar, appear to be clueless and unable to understand that this other situation is, in principle, similar to the one in which they are able to act intelligently.

I sadly noticed this trend. I came across people, who are not capable of reason or making a connection from one thing to another. They say something and then do something completely different, or listen to you, agree with you, then act in a completely different way.

Another one I noticed, the alarmingly rising number of fibbers. They are not really liars, because they don't seem to do this to archive anything, they seem to do it by habit. They just consistently falsify little things to the extend, that you don't trust them anymore whatever they say. It is very annoying. They seem to create a constant false excitement around themselves to make their life seem sort of epic. Magnifying little details into breaking news and presenting these things as major happenings. When you confront them, they look either blank or quickly adjust their statement, but they carry on anyway. Could those people be OP'?

 

[Laura]

I sadly noticed this trend. I came across people, who are not capable of reason or making a connection from one thing to another. They say something and then do something completely different, or listen to you, agree with you, then act in a completely different way.

Another one I noticed, the alarmingly rising number of fibbers. They are not really liars, because they don't seem to do this to archive anything, they seem to do it by habit. They just consistently falsify little things to the extend, that you don't trust them anymore whatever they say. It is very annoying. They seem to create a constant false excitement around themselves to make their life seem sort of epic. Magnifying little details into breaking news and presenting these things as major happenings. When you confront them, they look either blank or quickly adjust their statement, but they carry on anyway. Could those people be OP'?

Could be.

 

[Risen]

I sadly noticed this trend. I came across people, who are not capable of reason or making a connection from one thing to another. They say something and then do something completely different, or listen to you, agree with you, then act in a completely different way.

Another one I noticed, the alarmingly rising number of fibbers. They are not really liars, because they don't seem to do this to archive anything, they seem to do it by habit. They just consistently falsify little things to the extend, that you don't trust them anymore whatever they say. It is very annoying. They seem to create a constant false excitement around themselves to make their life seem sort of epic. Magnifying little details into breaking news and presenting these things as major happenings. When you confront them, they look either blank or quickly adjust their statement, but they carry on anyway. Could those people be OP'?

Good observation! What I seem to feel about these people is that they don’t have an individual personality at all. They are always trying to be the person that will get attention from whoever they are around.
Sadly, I have some close relatives who fit that description exactly.
Something I’ve been wondering about for a long time is this: The C’s have said that being an op is genetic and souled humans marry other souled humans when they are available or something to that effect. So what happens when souled people marry op’s? Are their offspring souled, op’s, or some kind of combination? Maybe something to ask the C’s.

 

[irjO]

Something I’ve been wondering about for a long time is this: The C’s have said that being an op is genetic and souled humans marry other souled humans when they are available or something to that effect. So what happens when souled people marry op’s? Are their offspring souled, op’s, or some kind of combination? Maybe something to ask the C’s.

Although we don't have a proper way to prove this, I think its matter of genetics. When a blue eyes man marries a black eyes woman the son/daughter may born with either light color eyes or very dark color eyes (depending of the family genes of course) so, something like that may occur if an OP marries a souled being, it could be a 50/50 chance that their kid may or may not born with the genes to hold a proper soul. Although the Cs mentioned that, first, the mother usually has more influence than the father in passing down those characteristics, Example; if the mother is a psychopath there is more chance that the son/daughter could born Psychopath as well. And second, is a little unlikely that a person with soul marries an OP, again according to the C's, but it could happen anyways.

 

[Sybil]

Something I’ve been wondering about for a long time is this: The C’s have said that being an op is genetic and souled humans marry other souled humans when they are available or something to that effect. So what happens when souled people marry op’s? Are their offspring souled, op’s, or some kind of combination?

And second, is a little unlikely that a person with soul marries an OP, again according to the C's, but it could happen anyways.

My little ponderings on this.

I am not very comfortable with the idea, to call these people 'another race'. It kinda suggests that some are superior to others. Like a superior race vs an inferior race. I might be completely wrong but I would be more lenient to call these people soul impaired.
If you look at the numbers, what the C's gave us back then, about 2 million OP's on Earth, that would not add up. Why? Because as to my experience, full souled people are outnumbered by soul impaired, or OP's. I would say, the ratio is 1/3 and 2/3. I can count on one hand how many full souled people I met in the last 15 years. It could be, that OP's are part of this large soul impaired group.
So, if you look at the sheer number of soul impaireds, For a full souled person, it is difficult to find another full souled one.

Another important factor. The reality of having a soul in this time on Earth. I cannot speak for anybody else, I can only rely on my experience and the experience of others, close to me.

Having a soul is difficult in a soulless world. I feel too much, too much love, too much pain, too much empathy than most. I tend to have periods when I feel depressed when I experience fear, or I have so much love, that I could hug the whole world. (I don't think it's being Bipolar, Its having heart, and soul). A full souled person tends to suffer greatly in this world from childhood because everything and everyone telling you, that having a beating heart and compassionate soul is actually an impairment. You don't need these things for getting more money, power, or sex.

So what happens? After years of indoctrination, the full souled will believe, that the problem is inside her. Confidence is completely lost. What can she do? Find somebody who doesn't have these problems. And who doesn't have these problems? The soul impaired.

Of course, it doesn't work in the long run. The full souled believes that everybody is just like her inside, with the full spectrum of emotions. That is not true, but it takes time to find out because the full souled is kinda naive. It could take years and a couple of children. But parenthood is a good test. It is usually very evident when you see the soul impaired parent interacting with a full souled child. It's heartbreaking. The full souled pics up her handbag and her children and leave.

This takes us to the next question: Could a soul impaired and full souled couple have a full souled child? I say it is very probable. At least 50/50. Both of my children have well-developed beautiful souls despite the odds.

These are my reflections.

 

[MirAd]

it's said in the transcripts that we shouldn't consider every other human we encounter in life as a potential organic portal type because sometimes it takes years to recognize them, and on the other hand we can never be 100% sure.

i sometimes have a issue thinking about half of people i interact are ops, they seem perfectly normal. i know mimicking souled individuals is their modus operandi, but still.

i wish there is some better way to recognize them.