The Inner Journey Summarized

[Menna]

As much as I value all the work Laura et al have put into themselves and this site, and as much as I believe more truth exists here than anywhere I know of on the planet--I think there's always the danger that subjective loyalty to anything can undermine objective thinking, and that we're all vulnerable to lapsing into that "monotheistic" mindset that we have a monopoly on the Truth.

I believe that this is calling out something that happens when ever someone is discovering something that others are interested in/changing others lives. They follow the information and just like all human beings naturally do except psychopaths they develop an emotional favoritism or to put in another word "favor" the person changing others and their lives for the better. This is not fault on the discoverer they don't always ask that people favor them usually they just ask that people respect them. This is just part of the typical motion of life IMO

The statement in quotes is true and I believe it does happen but you are pointing out why "The Work" is stressed on this forum, books to be read about genes and being primitive and animal like in nature and rising above this behavior. Your statement to me sounds like you think you are pointing out a truth but IMO it is a half truth. This type of behavior (subjective loyalty) happens all over the planet but the truth is that there are only a few places all over the planet where people have the information and strength of being to recognize and admit this to themselves and there are even fewer places where people come together recognize their anamalistic and mechanical behavior and are willing to put in the energy and time (sacrifice) to not fall into your statement in quotes.

 

[obyvatel]

Due to years I spent oppressed by Christian fundamentalist authorities (who disdained critical thinking and who implied that their little narcissistic world was sufficient to meet all needs), I think the thread went off in an unintended (though important) direction because of my strong reaction to these underlined words in The Strawman’s reply:

(if points) “don't slot neatly, like a square peg in a square hole, into the teachings of Laura and the Cs I think they need to be clarified...Even if Almaas is the real deal, what would be the point in turning to him when everything is already here."

Thanks for the clarification, JGeropoulas. I think we all have our own individual list of trigger words which lead to automatic, implicit associations determined by our experiences and conditioning. While it is not easy to change the implicit associations (as the psychology of blink suggests), becoming aware of them is an important part of self-knowledge. Then we can apply the law of three and consider the context instead of being pulled into a reflexive reaction triggered by the association. Your explanation was useful for me to reflect on some of my own implicit associations and provided a good learning experience.

 

[JGeropoulas]

Due to years I spent oppressed by Christian fundamentalist authorities (who disdained critical thinking and who implied that their little narcissistic world was sufficient to meet all needs), I think the thread went off in an unintended (though important) direction because of my strong reaction to these underlined words in The Strawman’s reply:

(if points) “don't slot neatly, like a square peg in a square hole, into the teachings of Laura and the Cs I think they need to be clarified...Even if Almaas is the real deal, what would be the point in turning to him when everything is already here."

Thanks for the clarification, JGeropoulas. I think we all have our own individual list of trigger words which lead to automatic, implicit associations determined by our experiences and conditioning. While it is not easy to change the implicit associations (as the psychology of blink suggests), becoming aware of them is an important part of self-knowledge. Then we can apply the law of three and consider the context instead of being pulled into a reflexive reaction triggered by the association. Your explanation was useful for me to reflect on some of my own implicit associations and provided a good learning experience.

I'm glad you could appreciate my explanation and I'm glad sharing it was beneficial to you. I have a basic understanding of the Law of Three and have read Mouravieff's (?) examples of it's operation. But I can't readily think how to apply that law to this current situation. If you could elaborate on your thoughts about this it would be very helpful.

 

[Buddy]

Hi JGeropoulas. I almost didn't post this because I'm never satisfied with the wording of my thoughts in print. I keep wanting to go back and make changes. I hope you can find some value in this and that it doesn't come across as too long-winded or abrasive in any way.

You've been around here long enough to have seen some of my understanding conflicts with various posters. I'm not a communications expert by no means but I have learned something I could share with you and I seem to see this lesson quite clearly in your post.

This part of your experience:

Due to years I spent oppressed by Christian fundamentalist authorities (who disdained critical thinking and who implied that their little narcissistic world was sufficient to meet all needs),...

...has apparently taught you something and you no longer believe that the little narcissistic world of 'Christian fundamentalist authorities' is 'sufficient to meet all needs'. That's understandable and I agree with it. It would seem to follow naturally that if a forum member made a statement that reminded you of this experience and seemed to promote that 'Christian fundamentalist authorities attitude', you would have a strong reaction, although you say it was just two little words that you reacted to.

Anyway, in general terms so far this describes the dynamics of a conflict in understanding the way I have also experienced it, so I may have something to offer.

When you came across this:

...(if points) “don't slot neatly, like a square peg in a square hole, into the teachings of Laura and the Cs I think they need to be clarified...Even if Almaas is the real deal, what would be the point in turning to him when everything is already here."

This is obviously not something you expected to read and it seems to represent an idea contrary to a belief you now hold due to your own personal experiences which you wrote about just before what you quoted.

So, it was unwanted and definitely unexpected. There is a difference here, and in a communication context, new and sometimes very important information for you (or anyone) can be found in this or any difference. But what do most of us do? In the terminology of Crucial Conversations, we generally we go to silence or violence.

What is the information? To realize it yourself might depend on your background understanding of basic psychology, other knowledge and an ability to view the interrelated knowledge you have from various perspectives. For instance, from a perspective of people as self-referential systems, narcicissm would be overstated self-reference and its inverse, self-denial, would be understated self reference. The mainstream or common view of 'normal', or a 'balanced' psychology, would be a relationship to others and the outside world in a reasonable balance between two abnormal states: self-reference and outside world reference.

If this were anywhere else, the text you reacted to might seem like it was written by someone promoting self-denial in the sense of being unwilling or helpless to find and use outside information for self-development purposes or to bring it here for discussion and instead, preferring a state of "subjective loyalty" (your words) to a 'single' source.

However, context is important and meaning can be found in that. That's where the information that explains this difference can be found.

This is a forum for specific purposes and some esoteric development is possible with the use of recommended reading materials and interactions with other members. Since the poster who wrote that reply has only been around a couple of months or so and wants to learn, and since Gurdjieff has advised that one must be of a mind to place trust in a chosen teacher (whether 'teacher' is an individual or network), I personally chose to interpret that reply with that meaning.

For me, a useful alternative would simply be something Laura advised me some time back, and that is to simply ask for the missing information - i.e., ask a poster what they mean or what they are suggesting by something they wrote before reacting or responding to it. For me, it's just a way of comparing the information they provide with an implicit bias I might have in order to bridge the gap - to let "meaning" be a neutralizing or reconciling force, OSIT. And BTW, I'm still working on that.

My 2 cents, FWIW.


--------------------

Concerning your opening post on this thread:

I've recently begun reading my first book by this intriguing Kuwaiti-born author, who, according to Amazon, "seeks to integrate modern psychology with the insights of Sufism, Buddhism, Gurdjieff, and other wisdom traditions".

The following compilation of quotes from several of his numerous books was inspiring to me so I wanted to share them with everyone else:

{snippage}

Thanks for sharing. I immediately noticed a certain contrast. The way he describes the benefits or features that come from the journeying process itself sounds nice, but the wording associated with the 'destination' is quite ambiguous by comparison.

It seems evident that he has read some of the material he draws from, but is he saying anything that anyone else who has read that material couldn't say as well? I'm curious.

 

[obyvatel]

I have a basic understanding of the Law of Three and have read Mouravieff's (?) examples of it's operation. But I can't readily think how to apply that law to this current situation. If you could elaborate on your thoughts about this it would be very helpful.

The part of Strawman's post which you quoted when taken by itself could possibly be interpreted as dogmatic or partisan. Your reaction to it seemed to generalize this flavor of dogmatic attitude at the level of the forum instead of treating it as Strawman's opinion - even though it was not your conscious intention. This reaction was likely unconscious in nature and can perhaps be traced to the automatic association triggered in your mind with past experiences concerning Christian fundamentalism. The environment that this forum espouses is the opposite of the monotheistic mindset that claims we have the monopoly on the truth. In fact here there is a constant enthusiastic effort to enquire into the nature of reality and modify existing hypothesis based on new data. In terms of the law of three, this context of awareness of the general forum philosophy was missing in your initial reaction to Strawman's remarks - osit.

As regards Strawman's comments, like Buddy pointed out, he is relatively new to the forum and getting adjusted to the environment here. So his comments need to be interpreted in that context, also taking into account that he was interpreting your post based on his past experiences as shown by his statement
[quote author=The Strawman]
but I do remember when my feet were planted firmly in the air, and I would have gone running off after Almaas at the drop of a hat.
[/quote]
Strawman was likely trying to warn against the uncritical open minded attitude which is the opposite of narrow minded dogmatism and can sometimes develop as a reaction against fundamentalism and dogmatism.

In the context of spirituality and self-development, I have observed the general tendency of liberal westerners to often accept philosophies which come from the eastern parts of the world without adequate critical thinking. This may be partly due to a rebellious reaction to the narrow and rigid fundamentalist flavor of Judeo-Christian monotheism that has held sway over the western world. Many teachers know this and cunningly exploit the situation to their advantage - one teacher apparently revealed that his audience tripled when he took up an eastern name replacing his original western name (discussed here ). When I reflect on my posting history on this forum, I would say that I often react to buzzwords like "enlightenment", "oneness" etc. These could be called trigger words for me, which is what I was referring to when I mentioned about reflecting on some implicit associations.

 

[Vic]

I have been reading, and learning from, the conversation that opened up as the result of certain comments I made.

I'm not sure if clarification of the context in which I made those comments would actually be helpful to those in the discussion, but it feels a little strange at the moment - I feel invisible. Especially as only one member of the discussion has bothered to mention my username. So at the very least it would help me.

Yes, I'm new to the forum, and I am still trying to find out how to fit in. But please don't let that fool you into thinking I am clueless. I know all about narcissism and dogma. At one point in my life I was walking up to people falling out of city centre clubs at 2 in the morning and saying "Do you know that God loves you?"

I absolutely believed it. Those good old signs and wonders manifested during my conversion, and they cemented the 'teachings' into the 'truth' areas of my brain. I had absolutely no doubt that Christianity was the real deal. It was this absolute faith in the truth of it that also had me standing on benches, inflicting adhoc sermons on the general public at weekends.

This only went on for a couple of years, until, for whatever reason, it all came tumbling down and I saw the real truth of christian dogma and the dynamics behind it. I promptly dumped it.

But christianity, in my darkest years, wasn't the only religion that I had complete faith in as 'truth' - and religion wasn't the only category of programming that I jumped, feet first, into. And in the gaps between them I played the homeless alcoholic, drug user, petty criminal and general nuisance. I suppose 'scrambled' might be a good term to use for how my brain/mind ended up after forty odd years of banging my head on walls.

Now I am looking for a little security in terms of the esoteric realm. This place is striking me as the best bet - mainly because of the pre-reading, but also because of the level of objective intelligence and inquiry found here. I absolutely believe in everything Laura has said in her books and in this forum, as well as the conclusions arrived at by certain forum members. My faith is as great as it ever was. I know that is not how it should be, but with me, at the moment, that is exactly how it is.

I am aware that I have ruffled a few feathers, and I have to hope that my nature isn't misjudged through those instances. My goal at this point is to avoid ejection and survive long enough to find my own place here. A place where fellow travellers get me enough to let me hang around. That would be a major advance for me.

I think what I was trying to say was that the idea of people posting in this forum about other avenues of knowledge frightens me. It isn't dogma that I want, just a place of consistency for a while until I feel some degree of safety.

 

[mada85]

I think what I was trying to say was that the idea of people posting in this forum about other avenues of knowledge frightens me. It isn't dogma that I want, just a place of consistency for a while until I feel some degree of safety.

That's very interesting, Strawman. I experienced the same thing when I was a member of the Rajneesh cult, many years ago in the 1980s. It was generally thought that we should only read books by the guru, watch lectures by the guru, and that the guru should be our only source of knowledge.

It seems to be a tactic of such cults, including Christianity, that they discourage all seeking, saying that they and only they have the whole banana, and looking elsewhere is frowned upon as a betrayal of the guru. Here we have the opposite approach. We acknowledge that we have some pieces of the banana, and we try to fit those pieces together to make as large a part of the banana as we can. :D

Given your background I think that your fear is perfectly understandable, but there's no need to be frightened by discussion of other avenues of knowledge here, as they will be discussed and dissected until we have all arrived at a better understanding of them. Are they beneficial to humanity, or are they detrimental? Consistency in this forum lies in that, and dogma will not be found here. One can therefore say that consistency is achieved by a certain approach to knowledge and information, whatever the source.

 

[Vic]

I think what I was trying to say was that the idea of people posting in this forum about other avenues of knowledge frightens me. It isn't dogma that I want, just a place of consistency for a while until I feel some degree of safety.

That's very interesting, Strawman. I experienced the same thing when I was a member of the Rajneesh cult, many years ago in the 1980s. It was generally thought that we should only read books by the guru, watch lectures by the guru, and that the guru should be our only source of knowledge.

It seems to be a tactic of such cults, including Christianity, that they discourage all seeking, saying that they and only they have the whole banana, and looking elsewhere is frowned upon as a betrayal of the guru. Here we have the opposite approach. We acknowledge that we have some pieces of the banana, and we try to fit those pieces together to make as large a part of the banana as we can. :D

Given your background I think that your fear is perfectly understandable, but there's no need to be frightened by discussion of other avenues of knowledge here, as they will be discussed and dissected until we have all arrived at a better understanding of them. Are they beneficial to humanity, or are they detrimental? Consistency in this forum lies in that, and dogma will not be found here. One can therefore say that consistency is achieved by a certain approach to knowledge and information, whatever the source.

Thanks, Endymion. Yes, that makes total sense, and of immediate help to me. I also now know the true value of networking to individual progress. It's interesting how one can see things in theory but not actually know them.

The fear is a juvenile one, I know that much. But at least I now, as a result of this thread, see it, whereas before it was pulling my strings. Bring on the big banana :D

 

[Mrs.Tigersoap]

I absolutely believe in everything Laura has said in her books and in this forum, as well as the conclusions arrived at by certain forum members. My faith is as great as it ever was. I know that is not how it should be, but with me, at the moment, that is exactly how it is.

Do you mean 'faith' or do you mean you have 'trust' in Laura and the network? Because, as you obviously know, having faith and believing is not really what this forum is about. The forum encourages people to see things and to think for themselves, to check the data, to ask questions, etc. It's important for many reasons, one of them being that this is how the network learns and discovers new things.

The way I see it, it's also to protect you (after all, the C's say 'knowledge protects' not 'faith protects' ;)), so to speak. In a way, if Laura had just had 'faith' in the C's, she would not have done all the research she has, which led to her amazing discoveries, which literally changed her life, which, in turn, helped others.

I'm not sure if clarification of the context in which I made those comments would actually be helpful to those in the discussion, but it feels a little strange at the moment - I feel invisible. Especially as only one member of the discussion has bothered to mention my username. So at the very least it would help me.

Yes, I'm new to the forum, and I am still trying to find out how to fit in. But please don't let that fool you into thinking I am clueless.

Thank you for clarifying, The Strawman.
Well, I don't know if it will help, but I think that most of us have at some point felt 'invisible' on the forum. As I'm sure you realize, not every post can get a personal reply. That does not mean that members think you are clueless. Sometimes, people read something, nod in agreement and move on to the next subject, they don't necessarily take the time to reply. Some also feel that they have nothing valuable to add to what has been said. Sometimes, members reply and, because it's easier, make a general reply without necessarily quoting the members concerned. You know, I used to joke with my husband that I should change my forum name to Thread Killer because I felt that once I posted, the thread would just die down and nobody would answer anymore. Then I slowly realized that it was just self-importance.

This only went on for a couple of years, until, for whatever reason, it all came tumbling down and I saw the real truth of christian dogma and the dynamics behind it. I promptly dumped it.

If you don't mind my asking, what do you think helped you wake up? Do you remember an event in particular, perhaps?

I am aware that I have ruffled a few feathers, and I have to hope that my nature isn't misjudged through those instances. My goal at this point is to avoid ejection and survive long enough to find my own place here. A place where fellow travellers get me enough to let me hang around. That would be a major advance for me.

At the risk of repeating something which has been said many times, the forum does not ban anyone lightheartedly. The ban is discussed by the mods and the member in question is usually given many chances. Many members here can testify to that. So you should not feel like you might get banned because you might have 'ruffled a few feathers' (although I'm not aware that you did). You get banned because you 'ruffle a few feathers' on purpose, repeatedly and despite having been called out on it several times. See the difference? ;D

When you say 'that would be a major advance for me', do you mean that you were/felt rejected from other places or forums?

 

[Vic]

I absolutely believe in everything Laura has said in her books and in this forum, as well as the conclusions arrived at by certain forum members. My faith is as great as it ever was. I know that is not how it should be, but with me, at the moment, that is exactly how it is.

Do you mean 'faith' or do you mean you have 'trust' in Laura and the network? Because, as you obviously know, having faith and believing is not really what this forum is about. The forum encourages people to see things and to think for themselves, to check the data, to ask questions, etc. It's important for many reasons, one of them being that this is how the network learns and discovers new things.

Yes, Mrs. Tigersoap, I do mean trust. Thanks for bringing that to my awareness. Trust is exactly what it is - not faith with its religious connotations. I suspect that I am asking questions all the time here on the forum, but in an indirect, cowardly way. It's time for me to start being myself I think - time to jump into Aleta Edwards' Abyss.

The way I see it, it's also to protect you (after all, the C's say 'knowledge protects' not 'faith protects' ;) ), so to speak. In a way, if Laura had just had 'faith' in the C's, she would not have done all the research she has, which led to her amazing discoveries, which literally changed her life, which, in turn, helped others.

Point taken and understood. But how would I ever validate Laura's research findings. I only have the time to absorb - no time to check and confirm. My focus seems to be to read, absorb, understand, apply (as far as is possible) and become aware - my current belief is that this process gives me the knowledge that protects. Because it all makes sense to me (whatever sense is) I trust it as truth. It explains things (Laura's discoveries and explanations) that despite decades of searching, no other source has explained to me to my satisfaction. I found flaws in every other realm that I ventured into. So although I had 'faith' in religions and other belief systems, there was always a part of me questioning, otherwise I wouldn't have seen through the illusions.

I'm not sure if clarification of the context in which I made those comments would actually be helpful to those in the discussion, but it feels a little strange at the moment - I feel invisible. Especially as only one member of the discussion has bothered to mention my username. So at the very least it would help me.

Yes, I'm new to the forum, and I am still trying to find out how to fit in. But please don't let that fool you into thinking I am clueless.

Thank you for clarifying, The Strawman.
Well, I don't know if it will help, but I think that most of us have at some point felt 'invisible' on the forum. As I'm sure you realize, not every post can get a personal reply. That does not mean that members think you are clueless. Sometimes, people read something, nod in agreement and move on to the next subject, they don't necessarily take the time to reply. Some also feel that they have nothing valuable to add to what has been said. Sometimes, members reply and, because it's easier, make a general reply without necessarily quoting the members concerned. You know, I used to joke with my husband that I should change my forum name to Thread Killer because I felt that once I posted, the thread would just die down and nobody would answer anymore. Then I slowly realized that it was just self-importance.

Mrs. Tigersoap you have sussed me out! It is beautiful to read that 'thread killer' sentence. Me too. I thought about posting about why threads ended when I added to them, but was scared of not getting any replies. And that's not a joke. Thanks for that. I definitely don't feel as invisible and 'different' now.

Yes, self-importance. I am dogged by it but am working on it.

This only went on for a couple of years, until, for whatever reason, it all came tumbling down and I saw the real truth of christian dogma and the dynamics behind it. I promptly dumped it.

If you don't mind my asking, what do you think helped you wake up? Do you remember an event in particular, perhaps?

Yes. I moved into a halfway house back in the late eighties. The man I shared it with looked so comfortable sitting in his armchair reading his bible that I tried reading it myself. I also substituted churches for pubs - one addiction for another. Psychic phenomena happened immediately and I was convinced and converted. I ended up at a 'bible school' in Scotland - stayed for a year - plenty more signs and wonders of a personal nature.

Then one of my retinas detached itself. Surgery went wrong and I was in hospital for ages. The help I got from the christian community was not what I expected. I returned down south. Carried on going to church - pentecostal - but began to notice a falsity in the way the 'message' was preached. The I started noticing inconsistencies (to say the least) in the teachings themselves.

I then enrolled at university as a mature student. They had a christian club so I went to it. I watched the charismatic preacher and saw every other preacher I had ever seen. The same tricks. I saw right through him and the whole illusion. I went to a lecture straight after that - Religion as a Form of Social Control. It all dropped away.

I am aware that I have ruffled a few feathers, and I have to hope that my nature isn't misjudged through those instances. My goal at this point is to avoid ejection and survive long enough to find my own place here. A place where fellow travellers get me enough to let me hang around. That would be a major advance for me.

At the risk of repeating something which has been said many times, the forum does not ban anyone lightheartedly. The ban is discussed by the mods and the member in question is usually given many chances. Many members here can testify to that. So you should not feel like you might get banned because you might have 'ruffled a few feathers' (although I'm not aware that you did). You get banned because you 'ruffle a few feathers' on purpose, repeatedly and despite having been called out on it several times. See the difference? ;D

Yes I do. Thank you.

When you say 'that would be a major advance for me', do you mean that you were/felt rejected from other places or forums?

Now you actually pose the question I see that it was a case of 'felt' rather than 'were' in terms of being rejected. It's that common experience, Mrs. Tigersoap - common to so many of us - that feeling of being different- an outsider looking in. I doesn't cripple me by any means - not like it used to. But I think the level here - I haven't encountered the level of what I call objective intelligence (not sure of how else to explain it) - people with such courage in facing truth, which means facing the truth of themselves, which means facing the universe, the unknown. So I was probably fearing the loss of something that I need, and in doing so was not having the courage to be myself - back to Edwards' abyss again.

I thank you so much for your questions Mrs. Tigersoap. And for the answers.

 

[JGeropoulas]

I have been reading, and learning from, the conversation that opened up as the result of certain comments I made.
<snip>
Yes, I'm new to the forum, and I am still trying to find out how to fit in. But please don't let that fool you into thinking I am clueless. I know all about narcissism and dogma. At one point in my life I was walking up to people falling out of city centre clubs at 2 in the morning and saying "Do you know that God loves you?"

I absolutely believed it. Those good old signs and wonders manifested during my conversion, and they cemented the 'teachings' into the 'truth' areas of my brain. I had absolutely no doubt that Christianity was the real deal. It was this absolute faith in the truth of it that also had me standing on benches, inflicting adhoc sermons on the general public at weekends.

This only went on for a couple of years, until, for whatever reason, it all came tumbling down and I saw the real truth of christian dogma and the dynamics behind it. I promptly dumped it.

But christianity, in my darkest years, wasn't the only religion that I had complete faith in as 'truth' - and religion wasn't the only category of programming that I jumped, feet first, into. And in the gaps between them I played the homeless alcoholic, drug user, petty criminal and general nuisance. I suppose 'scrambled' might be a good term to use for how my brain/mind ended up after forty odd years of banging my head on walls.

Now I am looking for a little security in terms of the esoteric realm. This place is striking me as the best bet - mainly because of the pre-reading, but also because of the level of objective intelligence and inquiry found here. I absolutely believe in everything Laura has said in her books and in this forum, as well as the conclusions arrived at by certain forum members.
<snip>

FWIW, though initially we (or rather, our ideas) polarized into opponents, it's interesting that so much of what you opened up and shared about yourself (commendably) in this post as well, as the one to Mrs. Tigersoap, are things I could've written to describe myself at earlier points in my own parallel journey--including "walking up to people falling out of city centre clubs at 2 in the morning and saying "Do you know that God loves you?" and " standing on benches, inflicting adhoc sermons on the general public at weekends" ! ;)

 

[Vic]

FWIW, though initially we (or rather, our ideas) polarized into opponents, it's interesting that so much of what you opened up and shared about yourself (commendably) in this post as well, as the one to Mrs. Tigersoap, are things I could've written to describe myself at earlier points in my own parallel journey--including "walking up to people falling out of city centre clubs at 2 in the morning and saying "Do you know that God loves you?" and " standing on benches, inflicting adhoc sermons on the general public at weekends" ! ;)

:D What a crazy world we live in, JGeropoulas - excuse the cliche. But it is so comforting to know that you have been involved in the same craziness as me. Until I found Laura's work I believed I was mad - harmlessly mad, not the kind that one ends up in system 'treatment' for. A private madness that one hides from everyone, unless you are blessed with a friend who knows what you are babbling on about.

I am a quarter of the way through Amazing Grace. For me it completes the context in which The Wave was written. And it puts my own life experience hitherto on a very secure footing.

I am very lucky (term used loosely) to have found you, Laura, and everyone else in this particular corner of 3D STS reality. Life is moving forward again.

 

[Mrs.Tigersoap]

Point taken and understood. But how would I ever validate Laura's research findings. I only have the time to absorb - no time to check and confirm. My focus seems to be to read, absorb, understand, apply (as far as is possible) and become aware - my current belief is that this process gives me the knowledge that protects. Because it all makes sense to me (whatever sense is) I trust it as truth. It explains things (Laura's discoveries and explanations) that despite decades of searching, no other source has explained to me to my satisfaction. I found flaws in every other realm that I ventured into. So although I had 'faith' in religions and other belief systems, there was always a part of me questioning, otherwise I wouldn't have seen through the illusions.

Sorry if I was unclear, The Strawman. I did not mean to validate Laura's findings by doing your own research on the same subjects but putting in practice what is put forward on this forum. Whether it be about diet, about supplements or even about psychology (narcissism, psychopathy), there are many things and concepts that can be discussed, road-tested and experienced first hand by members and reported about. It's a form of research as well.

Yes. I moved into a halfway house back in the late eighties. The man I shared it with looked so comfortable sitting in his armchair reading his bible that I tried reading it myself. I also substituted churches for pubs - one addiction for another. Psychic phenomena happened immediately and I was convinced and converted. I ended up at a 'bible school' in Scotland - stayed for a year - plenty more signs and wonders of a personal nature.

Then one of my retinas detached itself. Surgery went wrong and I was in hospital for ages. The help I got from the christian community was not what I expected. I returned down south. Carried on going to church - pentecostal - but began to notice a falsity in the way the 'message' was preached. The I started noticing inconsistencies (to say the least) in the teachings themselves.

I then enrolled at university as a mature student. They had a christian club so I went to it. I watched the charismatic preacher and saw every other preacher I had ever seen. The same tricks. I saw right through him and the whole illusion. I went to a lecture straight after that - Religion as a Form of Social Control. It all dropped away.

Very interesting. Thank you for sharing, The Strawman! :)

I thank you so much for your questions Mrs. Tigersoap. And for the answers.

You're welcome! :)