several questions about validity
- Thread starter walkingon
- Start date
Tristan said:I beg your pardon, What means" release the hounds"? It is a cheeky expression or something like that
Well, according to wikipedia, Mr. Burns in the Simpsons (for example ;)) says it "so as to let his vicious guard dogs attack any intruders, enemies or even invited guests." Of course, the hounds here are actually cute little puppies, and they will certainly give anyone who repeatedly and unashamedly breaks the rules a fierce licking.
wanderer33
Jedi
I've seen the statement "release the hounds" on another forum. It's usually a call for a 'literary hunt' against an individual. Not pretty. I have, in the past, attempted to defend these individuals. Sometimes successfully.
I've read most of this thread and it follows the usual pattern. Although here, it is much more eloquent and surgical. I think walkingon was trying to make a point, and that point has a certain validity in small part. Unfortunately what seemed to trouble Walkingon was not explained in her/his? post. I'll call him a her just for now.
Look at Leonardo da Vinci's painting Mona Lisa, and you see a woman smiling. I don't. I see a man dressed as a woman smiling the smile of a man dressed as a woman. Walkingon had a small infinitesimal point to which Ark responded. He cringed at the idea of being 'respected' in the sense of mild worship. He could see there was an issue among some posters which may lead to affirmations of ideas out of respect rather than logic. Good call Ark. There is a problem with that. There is a tendency toward reverence here, even if the dynamic duo, Ark and Laura, have no part in it, nor any desire to accept it. I think that was Walkingon's issue which really was not articulated very well by her/him.
Now that I've played the devil's advocate, at my peril, methinks. I shall bid you all good evening.
BTW Ark, your assumption regarding the identity of this fox was likely off the mark. Just sayin'. :/
I've read most of this thread and it follows the usual pattern. Although here, it is much more eloquent and surgical. I think walkingon was trying to make a point, and that point has a certain validity in small part. Unfortunately what seemed to trouble Walkingon was not explained in her/his? post. I'll call him a her just for now.
Look at Leonardo da Vinci's painting Mona Lisa, and you see a woman smiling. I don't. I see a man dressed as a woman smiling the smile of a man dressed as a woman. Walkingon had a small infinitesimal point to which Ark responded. He cringed at the idea of being 'respected' in the sense of mild worship. He could see there was an issue among some posters which may lead to affirmations of ideas out of respect rather than logic. Good call Ark. There is a problem with that. There is a tendency toward reverence here, even if the dynamic duo, Ark and Laura, have no part in it, nor any desire to accept it. I think that was Walkingon's issue which really was not articulated very well by her/him.
Now that I've played the devil's advocate, at my peril, methinks. I shall bid you all good evening.
BTW Ark, your assumption regarding the identity of this fox was likely off the mark. Just sayin'. :/
I understand your point, wanderer33. I also understand that what walkingon was doing and the way it was being done was pathological. Not that walkingon IS a whacko at the core, but s/he knows no other way to interact with people than in the socially/culturally defined context and manner. That is precisely what we seek to undo in ourselves and others: the control programs. And so, as a result, I also understand the need of those who are just beginning to realize that they don't have to give their power away to manipulators to need to poke fun at the newly exposed bugaboo. I also notice that others have progressed beyond the need to go on the attack when they sense the presence of a predator; they have learned that the predator really has no power and are content to observe and perhaps even experiment a little.
Getting back to the point: when a child wakes up in the night from a bad dream, having a big sister or brother there to reassure him or her can determine whether that child grows up fearful or courageous. Some of us are better equipped to face fear and deal with it and pass the knowledge on to others. For some people, wanting or needing to cling to that during the "growing up" phase is normal. While neither Ark nor I even like to be put into this position, (it's a HEAVY burden and leaves us exposed to a lot of unpleasant attack and believe me, I'd rather be reading if I had my druthers), we don't see anybody else doing it. You could say we are rather reluctant big brother/sister who will do our best by everyone who comes to us for help, but the main thing we want them to learn is how to become as knowledgeable and objective within themselves as possible. This is a NETWORK of teachers, not a hierarchy; and who is teacher and student changes constantly in every dynamic.
But the important thing is that, while people are being "reborn" into their true selves, and growing up, they still need big brothers and sisters to handle the bullies.
Added: Actually, we KNOW the identity of "walkingon" via tech data.
Getting back to the point: when a child wakes up in the night from a bad dream, having a big sister or brother there to reassure him or her can determine whether that child grows up fearful or courageous. Some of us are better equipped to face fear and deal with it and pass the knowledge on to others. For some people, wanting or needing to cling to that during the "growing up" phase is normal. While neither Ark nor I even like to be put into this position, (it's a HEAVY burden and leaves us exposed to a lot of unpleasant attack and believe me, I'd rather be reading if I had my druthers), we don't see anybody else doing it. You could say we are rather reluctant big brother/sister who will do our best by everyone who comes to us for help, but the main thing we want them to learn is how to become as knowledgeable and objective within themselves as possible. This is a NETWORK of teachers, not a hierarchy; and who is teacher and student changes constantly in every dynamic.
But the important thing is that, while people are being "reborn" into their true selves, and growing up, they still need big brothers and sisters to handle the bullies.
Added: Actually, we KNOW the identity of "walkingon" via tech data.
wanderer33 said:
Please, explain, in which respect he was right? Was he on target or was he off target? What was this "infinitesimal point" that he was right about? About what? But please, before writing down the answer think about, contemplate it for a while, make sure you are not making some kind of an error of judgment, then, please, write it and justify your reasoning. You wrote "There is a tendency toward reverence here". Can you support this statement with data? I am really curious. (But, please, do not do it simply out of "respect" :).
Bluestar
Jedi Council Member
Gonzo said:
Not sure. How I see it is if you put a person or an ideology on a pedestal, eventual that person or idea will fall off the pedestal and guess who will get crushed from being at the bottom of it...?
I think that this persons foundation was being rocked from some source and they lashed out at the place that was rocking their pedestal.
The gift was that there are those that teach us how to be with research, data, sharing and doing (Laura, Ark and the rest for example) and those that teach us how not to be...
It is up to each and everyone of us to distinguish the choice.
A
andi
Guest
It was obvious from the beginning that his INTENT was not that of helping and bringing additional benefit here but to disrupt the learning flow for his own benefit.
It is funny how people think they can change somebody with such an attitude. Witch makes me think that he was not even interested very much in changing the minds of people here but something like projecting his anger and missunderstandings in order to get rid of them. Maybe he was beginning to get eaten from inside and he could no longer take it and decided unconsciously to sabotage himself by appearing as a fool -thus becoming a one -thus liberating himself of the grief of having to work .
It is funny how people think they can change somebody with such an attitude. Witch makes me think that he was not even interested very much in changing the minds of people here but something like projecting his anger and missunderstandings in order to get rid of them. Maybe he was beginning to get eaten from inside and he could no longer take it and decided unconsciously to sabotage himself by appearing as a fool -thus becoming a one -thus liberating himself of the grief of having to work .
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Deedlet said:I hear you Gaurdian-Guardian said:walkingon said:
Oh would you trolls PLEASEEEE just knock it off with the "cult" crap?? Here's a cluebrick for ya sunshine....if there's a little "X" in the upper right hand corner, it's not a "cult" ... it's a COMPUTER! Anything you can turn off with less effort than it takes to pick your nose does not even remotely qualify as a "cult"
I really can’t understand people who come here and compare this site to cults. Do these people even know what cults are??
Oh I think they know the difference... but they hope others don't and will just react to the trigger word.
More and more frequently people are forming close extended families in modernized tribal/clan structures, with many of them choosing communal living. I've noticed a definite trend towards labeling these groups as "cults" when in fact they do not meet ANY of the criteria.
Groups of folks of like mind who are choosing to live together outside mainstream society, off grid, etc. are intentionally being demonized, for obvious reasons....and it ticks me off
knowledge_of_self
The Living Force
ark said:
I just wanted to say that I understand what you mean Ark and that it makes sense. Because “respect” sometimes tends to become blind faith for people. And as you stated, they become too passive to try to correct the person they respect.
In my culture the term respect is widely used. For example “respect your elders”
And most of the time it wouldn’t matter if that elder was a total psychopath you still must have respect because they are older than you. So as I grew up- respect became something for me that must be earned instead of blindly given. But this was my own perception/programming.
I also agree that there must always be a balance.
Like if you go to someone else’s home, you should have respect by following the person’s rules for their house.
Guardian said:Deedlet said:I hear you Gaurdian-Guardian said:walkingon said:
Oh would you trolls PLEASEEEE just knock it off with the "cult" crap?? Here's a cluebrick for ya sunshine....if there's a little "X" in the upper right hand corner, it's not a "cult" ... it's a COMPUTER! Anything you can turn off with less effort than it takes to pick your nose does not even remotely qualify as a "cult"
I really can’t understand people who come here and compare this site to cults. Do these people even know what cults are??
Oh I think they know the difference... but they hope others don't and will just react to the trigger word.
More and more frequently people are forming close extended families in modernized tribal/clan structures, with many of them choosing communal living. I've noticed a definite trend towards labeling these groups as "cults" when in fact they do not meet ANY of the criteria.
Groups of folks of like mind who are choosing to live together outside mainstream society, off grid, etc. are intentionally being demonized, for obvious reasons....and it ticks me off
Funny that you should say this, because I was looking up the dictionary definition for the term cult and one of the definitions was:
From _http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult
And I found myself thinking, what a convenient way for the PTB to start labeling any group that wants to live an “unorthodox” life of like minded individuals as a cult. Unorthodox could mean anything- such as not believing in a hierarchical way of life or that the government doesn’t have the public’s best interest at heart. Or simply wanting to grow your own food and have a healthy diet. So if any group of people wanted to do this, they’d get slapped with a “cult” label – and there goes their credibility out the door.
lamalamalamalama
Jedi
ark said:
Just curious, what is 'The Law' and why is a lack of respect for it worse than lack of respect for a person?
Buddy
The Living Force
Deedlet said:
It appears the word "cult" is undergoing a ponerization process. I think it's not possible to form a more general abstraction than that definition if your goal is to include everyone outside a "mainstream".
The two main things that bother me about that definition:
1) "considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist". "Considered" by whom? Who is the hidden judge and why is he hidden?
2) "...often living outside of conventional society." Often? So, sometimes living "inside" conventional society too, hmmm?
Looks like someone's running around trying to cover all the bases.