Paul Misiunas: gathering-minds?

[anart]

"la Gurdjieff", sorry I'm not familiar with that. I felt wrongly accused as I said, there's been a number of times in my life that others accuse me of things I know in my heart are false and my explanations had little affect in that regard. My parents are still doing this and I do not see them as a result - that right there is the sadness which situations such as this trigger in me and what I have not as yet connected to fully.

You're missing the point entirely, which is understandable since you're unfamiliar with the term 'identification'. Identification is a very normal thing. No one is accusing you of anything. They are merely making an observation based on understanding and experience. It would help if you could read some Gurdjieff to get up to speed, then there would be no need to be offended. Here is the definition of identification: http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=41&lsel=

 

[truth seeker]

I felt wrongly accused as I said, there's been a number of times in my life that others accuse me of things I know in my heart are false and my explanations had little affect in that regard. My parents are still doing this and I do not see them as a result - that right there is the sadness which situations such as this trigger in me and what I have not as yet connected to fully.

Yes, it can feel like an attack and as is usually the case with others, these feelings were triggered because of long standing issues with your parents - possibly not feeling heard/understood. In other words, you confuse what's been said by others with what your parents said/say to you and how they make you feel. One of the things we try to do here is to learn discernment - to know the difference between what passes for "normal" in real life and a more objective view.

Your idea of Misunias and how that makes you feel about yourself has been threatened and you may feel rejected as a result but this is not the intention. The intention of not only the replies in this thread but this forum as a whole is to get as close to the truth as possible because when we comfort ourselves with lies and ideas that support our view of the world as we want to see it, we are lost. Unfortunately, going through this process hurts but it's the only way. Try to keep in mind, it's not personal to you. Most of us have gone through it at one time or another.

 

[Sol Logos]

At what point does an observation about someone else turn into a judgement?

 

[anart]

At what point does an observation about someone else turn into a judgement?

It doesn't on this forum. If you'll familiarize yourself with G.I. Gurdjieff, you'll understand.

 

[Mr. Premise]

Yes, Alkhemst, the work we do on this forum is based to a large extent on Gurdjeiff, so you might want to put him at the top of your reading list so as not to keep spinning your wheels. A good place to start is with In Search of the Miraculous by Ouspensky.

 

[Sol Logos]

Thanks Premise, will check that out.

Anart, do you remember when you told me I could not possibly know the meaning of another's dream not long ago as that is something in them and whatever I'd claim to know is only subjective? Do you really know for certain the intentions and motivations in me about this matter? If not, then it's clear that's it's not altogether just an observation anymore, yet I'm led to believe there are no judgements here. Do you honestly believe that? Did Gurdjieff see things clearly without reading Gurdjieff?

 

[mkrnhr]

Hello alkhemst,
Yes you cannot know for sure what somebody's dream means, you can only propose hypotheses. There is nothing to ruminate about.

 

[Renaissance]

Thanks Premise, will check that out.

Anart, do you remember when you told me I could not possibly know the meaning of another's dream not long ago as that is something in them and whatever I'd claim to know is only subjective? Do you really know for certain the intentions and motivations in me about this matter? If not, then it's clear that's it's not altogether just an observation anymore, yet I'm led to believe there are no judgements here. Do you honestly believe that? Did Gurdjieff see things clearly without reading Gurdjieff?

Hi alkhemst, your intentions and motivations that you are conscious of are somewhat different than what Gudjieff defined as identification. I think it would be helpful to check out In Search of the Miraculous to really get an idea of what is being discussed here rather than try to continue debating what you think it means. Since Gurdjieffs work is also used as a basis for the work done on the forum, all the much more reason to check it out.

 

[Sol Logos]

It's not so much my motivations but what others hypothesised those to be. This was given with certainty and authority - such words give that away like "it's obvious" etc. But that is not considered a judgement here.

Anway I'd like to look into Identification: "qualities of enthusiasm, spontaneity, passion are overwhelmingly mechanical and strip one of the little free will or being one might otherwise possess" as I believe that's what you're referring to because I mentioned I'm passionate about Paul's work.

I don't agree, but I'm interested to know the basis for why this is considered true because my personal experience has been just the opposite in that finding passions and living with passion has expanded my freedom of will.

 

[obyvatel]

Anway I'd like to look into Identification: "qualities of enthusiasm, spontaneity, passion are overwhelmingly mechanical and strip one of the little free will or being one might otherwise possess" as I believe that's what you're referring to because I mentioned I'm passionate about Paul's work.

I don't agree, but I'm interested to know the basis for why this is considered true because my personal experience has been just the opposite in that finding passions and living with passion has expanded my freedom of will.

From what you have written so far, it appears that when you read a material you evaluate it by how much you like it or enjoy it. If what you read elicits a pleasurable reaction from you, then it is something you accept. This is the place from where more or less everyone starts, so if you tend to agree with this observation, then don't feel alone.

The premise of the Work however is quite different. The ideas of the Work can elicit a very uncomfortable and distressing reaction. Laura mentioned in the Wave series that when she first read "In Search Of the Miraculous", the book went flying across the room quite a few times. It is very difficult for us to accept that we are mechanical creatures or we are asleep and dreaming that we can do great stuff. But based on painstaking observations of the self carried out over a period of time, we start to see the truth behind these statements. But that too is not a onetime thing - we may see for a moment our mechanicalness and then fall asleep again for a long time before the next "shock" comes to give us a jolt again. But for those who can persevere in this uncomfortable state, gradually the statement that we are mechanical/asleep ceases to be a mere idea and becomes a fact. It is not easy - it is called Work for a reason.

To add to the growing list of reading suggestions that you have received, if you want to take a look at what modern cognitive science has to say about the working of our minds, you can take a look at the Psychology and Cognitive Science board - especially, the Adaptive Unconscious and the Thinking, Fast and Slow threads. It could illustrate to you how little we typically know about ourselves. Now if we know little about ourselves, and in addition accept Casteneda's Don Juan's very unsavory proposition that human beings are energetic prisoners of higher beings or "flyers", then we start to look at things more seriously.

It is not about my point or your point or what I or you are passionate about. It is more about enquiring with ruthless objectivity about the nature of reality we inhabit. And in that regard, Paul Misiunas' recommendation

All that we can do is to follow the rhythms of time, following the scent well laid out for us to follow otherwise we run the risk of following ourselves into the deepest darkest holes we could ever possibly fall into. Frantically scurrying from either light to dark or dark to light and back again, allows the wheel of time to express itself but in the end what is really being accomplished other to chase one’s tail. Just because we are the expression of that which is doesn’t mean anything other than what it is.

will not find much support or hold much appeal for most people here. If one comes to the uncomfortable conclusion that one already is in one of the "deepest, darkest holes one could fall into", all effort is geared towards getting out of the hole. Many choose to sit in the hole and dream that they are fine. This reminded me of a "story" I read in Theodore Illion's "Darkness Over Tibet.
[quote author=Darkness Over Tibet]
Once upon a time there were clever philosophers. They did not believe in the Creator. “We follow our own light, ” they said. And in all matters they only relied on the light of introspection.

Then they came across the Devil.

“What a monster!” said one of them. “What a comfort to know that nothing is real and everything is a mere reflection of ourselves!”

“You are right,” put in a second philosopher. “Everything is subjective; nothing is objective.”

Then the Devil opened his mouth and swallowed them.

When they arrived inside the Devil’s body the clever philosophers said with a superior smile: “Is it not obvious that we were right? The monster has disappeared.”
[/quote]

fwiw

 

[Laura]

I think you didn't read the forum guidelines and purpose statement when you signed up. Best go read it asap. It seems that it is just a simple matter of you being in the wrong bar.

 

[Iron]

Alkhemist, do you know the difference between objectivity an subjectivity?

If I give you two apples to hold in your hands, how many apples you have in your hands? Two. Despite any intelectual musings, or feelings or inclinations to believe that an apple is actually a orange. The objective fact remains.
Objective facts are reproducible, and are mensurable. If they are the basis of a theory, a mode of seeing the world, this theory has the potential of enhancing your navigation on this world.
Objective facts are verifiable by diferent persons. Subjectivity is not. The very word says - relative to subject.
Subjective things hold not that much value in understanding the workings of the world. Why?

Because, despite what you think or feel about apples, they still exist, will keep on existing, and have a purpose that has nothing to do with your inner considerations.

How can you measure a dream up? Test the things that you think are true?
Other persons are necessary for imput of information. We cant test and reach the truth alone. Because there are things about ourselves, about our common way of thinking, that we cant see, even with the most ferocious introspection. This is not my opinion - its a fact, verified by modern cognitive science.

So, given the facts, not opinions, that you can't see where your thinking errors are, and that identification clouds the judgment where does that leaves you?

Note that people here in this forum see many people passing along the years. The mods are very accurate in perceiving subtleties. So, why don't you follow the suggestions given and see where this leads you?

 

[anart]

Note that people here in this forum see many people passing along the years. The mods are very accurate in perceiving subtleties. So, why don't you follow the suggestions given and see where this leads you?

If he's sincere, he will. If he's not sincere, he needs to find a forum that will make him feel good about himself by reinforcing his current thinking. That not being the purpose of this forum, he may have indeed walked into the wrong bar.

 

[Alana]

I felt wrongly accused as I said, there's been a number of times in my life that others accuse me of things I know in my heart are false and my explanations had little affect in that regard. My parents are still doing this and I do not see them as a result - that right there is the sadness which situations such as this trigger in me and what I have not as yet connected to fully.

While you seem to be coming close to the issue here, alkhemst, you then back off and start acting mechanical again.

I was reading something interesting today in a psych article, which I think fits with the context of this thread (others as well). It's on the subject of transference in a clinical setting (therapist - client relationship) but I think it applies in all our relationships. A general definition of transference from Wiki:

Transference is a phenomenon in psychoanalysis characterized by unconscious redirection of feelings from one person to another. One definition of transference is "the inappropriate repetition in the present of a relationship that was important in a person's childhood."[1] Another definition is "the redirection of feelings and desires and especially of those unconsciously retained from childhood toward a new object."[2] Still another definition is "a reproduction of emotions relating to repressed experiences, especially of childhood, and the substitution of another person ... for the original object of the repressed impulses."[3]

Keeping that in mind, here's the quote from the journal:

Bradley and her associates summarized their conceptualization of transference:

Transference phenomena... reflect the tendency of the brain to map current onto past experience and to craft responses that represent a combination of automatic activation of procedures and mental representations from the past, (and) integration of current with past data and experience to generate responses that reflect the co-activation of old and new neural networks...(Bradley, Heim & Westen, 2005, p. 348)

[...] Individuals may see [or read, imagine] the faces of others as angry, condescending, disapproving, sad, or threatening, when they are not. Their social reactions to, and relations with, others can be inappropriate (mismatched with current situations) as a result. [...] If clients repeatedly interpret and respond to the behavior of others in skewed or distorted ways, they strengthen the psychodynamics that are typically associated with transference phenomena in therapy.

This fits with all the other studies/books we've been studying recently, that shine light on the fact that our thought processes, reactions, actions, have roots in our minds (and biologically in our brains) of which we are unaware of, stemming from childhood experiences and interactions with our environment and prime caregivers at that time. If you are interested, alkhemst, I think you will really like Gurdjieff's work and the readings that have been suggested to you. It can be depressing, but I think it's also extremely fascinating. Who wouldn't want to learn more about his/her condition, the human condition in general? Its the only way we can do something about changing our mechanical natures. And boy do we need to! Look at the state of this world!

 

[Sol Logos]

Thanks for all your suggestions. For the record I didn't join here to feel good about myself the opposite is closer to the fact. I did skim read the guidelines so that's flippant of me, I'll read in more depth as I get the impression that I may have broken some guidelines due to reactions here? I just don't agree that the reason I enjoy reading Paul's work or shared it was because it makes me feel good about myself as many have concluded. I shared my feelings on the subsequent interactions for clarity and how it's relates to my current emotions that actually stem from my relationship with my parents. Those emotions aren't attracting me to Paul's work though. These were mentioned in relation to the interactions that ensured. In truth my personal work is more related to what I've learnt since listening to AJ Miller which is very different to what Paul Misiunas might value. Because I enjoy many of the material you discuss here (Casteneda, Jung, Sott.net for eg) I joined as these topics interest me personally. I also value the process of seeking Truth (capital T) as I believe in objective truth. I might say this is God's truth as opposed to our subjective truth and I'm sure many will disagree. Do I need to accept what is prescribed here to be here? If that's true then I sorry I've intruded as it is not my forum and if I've not followed your guidelines that is my error.