The Authoritarian Test

[luke wilson]

Been cross-checking some things with the Ra-material and I happen to come across an allusion to the phenomena of authoritarian followers mentioned in the Ra-material...

Questioner: Then the newest third-density beings who have just made the transition from second are still strongly biased towards self-service. There must be many other mechanisms to create an awareness of the possibility of service to others.

I am wondering, first about the mechanism and I am wondering when the split takes place where the entity is able to continue on the road to service to self that will eventually take him on to fourth density.

I’m assuming that an entity can start, say, in second density with service to self and continue right on through and just stay on what we would call the path of service to self and never be pulled over. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. The second-density concept of serving self includes the serving of those associated with tribe or pack. This is not seen in second density as separation of self and other-self. All is seen as self since in some forms of second-density entities, if the tribe or pack becomes weakened, so does the entity within the tribe or pack.

The new or initial third density has this innocent, shall we say, bias or distortion towards viewing those in the family, the society, as you would call, perhaps, country, as self. Thus though a distortion not helpful for progress in third density, it is without polarity.

The break becomes apparent when the entity perceives otherselves as other-selves and consciously determines to manipulate other-selves for the benefit of the self. This is the beginning of the road of which you speak.

So the authority figure is able to manipulate this inherent weakness to his/her own end?

 

[AnonGirl]

Thanks for the test.

I scored a 45.

 

[Buddy]

{snippage}

So the authority figure is able to manipulate this inherent weakness to his/her own end?

I may be wrong, but it seems you prefer novel wording to the same boring old posts made all over the forum and the online Wave, so maybe it will makes some sense this way:

For most of us and for all practical purposes there is a reroute mechanism underlying the shutdown of genuine emotional cognition in favor of buffering self-talk aka "thought". Whether the source is a neurochemical self-addiction or active pain-buffering neurochemical configuration, it seems fear makes it all work. Fear and a form of reflexive psychological cowardice too quick to easily re-cognize. We can call it fear of being rejected or ostracized socially or otherwise somehow singled out as "not one of us". For some people it may even be an aversion to fear and not actually fear. IOW, the avoidance of the adrenal response. Sort of like, if the behavior is continued or a person is not obeyed, it would result in fear.

This fear is so fundamental and deep, it practically maps to the same response regions as visceral pain as I have mentioned in previous posts. Because it can be triggered by facial expressions, facial microexpressions, and nuances of speech and body language, it is 99.99% sub-liminal to conscious perception, which means just about too fast for thought to catch just about every time.

Ostracism is an immensely powerful weapon. It can trigger that visceral pain reflex which I believe to be an induction shortcircuiting root mechanism just like addiction to, and practice of, comfortable, mechanical, repetitive routines.

Have you read the wave chapter on addiction with ample time for reflection? If so, perhaps you know the limbic system is more than an emotive sifter of the relevant from the inconsequential. It is an intense monitor of others as well, using its social fixations to retool/reframe your perceptions and your memories. In short, the limbic system makes each of us a plug-in of the crowd.

If you prefer a more novel wording, then consider the programmer reference of "Frame Compliance": being aware of the frame, then immediately normalizing/denying it so as to mystify one's self and not see it while being trapped by it (fully absorbed in it).

You can "get" all this from the online wave, but if you need another source, all of this is also covered in "The Manipulated Mind", by Denise Winn, which along with Cialdini's "Influence: Theory and Practice" also supports everything said in this post.

 

[monksgirl]

read the book 4 or 5 years ago, don't remember my score then. Today it is -11.

 

[luke wilson]

{snippage}

So the authority figure is able to manipulate this inherent weakness to his/her own end?

I may be wrong, but it seems you prefer novel wording to the same boring old posts made all over the forum and the online Wave, so maybe it will makes some sense this way:

For most of us and for all practical purposes there is a reroute mechanism underlying the shutdown of genuine emotional cognition in favor of buffering self-talk aka "thought". Whether the source is a neurochemical self-addiction or active pain-buffering neurochemical configuration, it seems fear makes it all work. Fear and a form of reflexive psychological cowardice too quick to easily re-cognize. We can call it fear of being rejected or ostracized socially or otherwise somehow singled out as "not one of us". For some people it may even be an aversion to fear and not actually fear. IOW, the avoidance of the adrenal response. Sort of like, if the behavior is continued or a person is not obeyed, it would result in fear.

This fear is so fundamental and deep, it practically maps to the same response regions as visceral pain as I have mentioned in previous posts. Because it can be triggered by facial expressions, facial microexpressions, and nuances of speech and body language, it is 99.99% sub-liminal to conscious perception, which means just about too fast for thought to catch just about every time.

Ostracism is an immensely powerful weapon. It can trigger that visceral pain reflex which I believe to be an induction shortcircuiting root mechanism just like addiction to, and practice of, comfortable, mechanical, repetitive routines.

Have you read the wave chapter on addiction with ample time for reflection? If so, perhaps you know the limbic system is more than an emotive sifter of the relevant from the inconsequential. It is an intense monitor of others as well, using its social fixations to retool/reframe your perceptions and your memories. In short, the limbic system makes each of us a plug-in of the crowd.

If you prefer a more novel wording, then consider the programmer reference of "Frame Compliance": being aware of the frame, then immediately normalizing/denying it so as to mystify one's self and not see it while being trapped by it (fully absorbed in it).

You can "get" all this from the online wave, but if you need another source, all of this is also covered in "The Manipulated Mind", by Denise Winn, which along with Cialdini's "Influence: Theory and Practice" also supports everything said in this post.

:P

 

[anart]

:P

luke, what is the point of your response?

 

[Etevarran]

FWIW, my result is: 51!

 

[NewOrleans]

I think I did this wrong: I scored 11....Geez I'm so bad at math.

 

[Earl/Brownie]

I don't think I added my score correctly, either. Back to the drawing board for me.

 

[luke wilson]

:P

luke, what is the point of your response?

Let us just forget about it, my bad for the noise.

Apologies.

 

[davidfxl]

I scored a 35. Of course it is not surprising to see scores well below 100 on this site. That was fun!

 

[Buddy]

:P

luke, what is the point of your response?

Let us just forget about it, my bad for the noise.

Apologies.

So...I'm a bit confused. Did you not experience the answer you asked for? Or would you prefer I constrain further replies to the level of symbolic thought only? Need I remind you how you had a beneficial "imagination-free" moment the day you awoke and "realized the truth..." (your words) that there was nothing at all pushing a certain problem at you? Personally, I believe you're capable of benefiting a lot more than you do considering the amount of energy you put into the network, whatever that may be worth to you. :)

 

[SethianSeth]

Finally got around to taking this one. I got a 60. I think the most difficult word for me was "traditional."How are we to frame that? Nationally? Globally? Obviously, this is part of the point of the test.

Looking forward to reading the whole book!

 

[luke wilson]

:P

luke, what is the point of your response?

Let us just forget about it, my bad for the noise.

Apologies.

So...I'm a bit confused. Did you not experience the answer you asked for? Or would you prefer I constrain further replies to the level of symbolic thought only? Need I remind you how you had a beneficial "imagination-free" moment the day you awoke and "realized the truth..." (your words) that there was nothing at all pushing a certain problem at you? Personally, I believe you're capable of benefiting a lot more than you do considering the amount of energy you put into the network, whatever that may be worth to you. :)

No I appreciate your reply to me bud. My reply to you was meant to reverse the impression I got from your reply, confusion. But I came to understand you were describing the authoritarian follower. I don't know if you know this, it's not like a criticism or anything like that, but you're very unique in the way you talk/write, everything comes down to either a computer/neurobiology reference for the most part. Definately something that pushes one to really use his mind to understand. How did you get this way bud? I doubt you grew up communicating on such a highly refined intellectual level but then I suppose you could have been a child genius.. Was it university or your job? Just asking.

 

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=luke]it's not like a criticism or anything like that[/quote]

It certainly reads that way. What’s up?

everything comes down to either a computer/neurobiology reference for the most part

I’ve been reading Bud’s posts regarding various topics now for a few years, and this generalization isn’t true. What’s up?

How did you get this way bud? I doubt you grew up communicating on such a highly refined intellectual level but then I suppose you could have been a child genius.. Was it university or your job?

??!!

For an exercise, try to put yourself in the shoes of the many non English speaking people of this forum who take the time to understand what’s written here. English is your native language isn’t it? Bud’s last post offers something and a dictionary can facilitate comprehension, but cursory reading as in a chat room makes that annoying, doesn’t it?

Just asking

You don’t come across as sincere by saying this, luke.