The Predator - a dark truth right under your own nose, literally

[Alada]

Of cause I'm afraid of the Work, and networking, or I would have done more of it sooner, -though part of my not participating too much also were to learn more, in order to be able to participate in the future without being too embarrassingly stupid (both as internal and external consideration )

Yup, I know that one and I'm pretty sure many others will recognise it in themselves too. The irony is though in trying to do the 'I'll just fix this and then I'll be ready' thing, is that once we finally get around to fixing whatever it was (and it takes a lot longer on our own - wasted time), this then enables us to see the next thing in ourselves that needs attention, so we think it might be an idea to fix that first too, and then we'll be ready, and so it goes!

Sometimes it's better just to jump on the merry-go-round than to wait for it to slow to a more comfortable speed. What if it never does?

 

[Miss.K]

Of cause I'm afraid of the Work, and networking, or I would have done more of it sooner, -though part of my not participating too much also were to learn more, in order to be able to participate in the future without being too embarrassingly stupid (both as internal and external consideration )

Yup, I know that one and I'm pretty sure many others will recognise it in themselves too. The irony is though in trying to do the 'I'll just fix this and then I'll be ready' thing, is that once we finally get around to fixing whatever it was (and it takes a lot longer on our own - wasted time), this then enables us to see the next thing in ourselves that needs attention, so we think it might be an idea to fix that first too, and then we'll be ready, and so it goes!

Sometimes it's better just to jump on the merry-go-round than to wait for it to slow to a more comfortable speed. What if it never does?

So true!

 

[sitting]

I think you're missing an important point here. The people who claim "group think" are almost always people who have an agenda of their own that they are pushing. When they don't get their way, they try to blame everyone who has disagreed with them by lumping them all into "group think".

There may be another point as well. Faith ... or his lack of it.

I sense Archaea is a serious student of Seth. I assume he has read all of the Seth books.
Most readers are fascinated by the ideas of consciousness units, electro-magnetic energy units, coordinate points, and the like. But that was NOT the primary lesson in the Seth material.

The primary lesson had to do with beliefs--strongly held beliefs--interior psychological beliefs--inner self beliefs. In other words ... one's faith. Everything else is secondary.

Seth gave many readings to Jane Roberts to assist her during her health crisis. All for naught.
She simply could not break free. Her "sinful self" consumed her in the end. All the knowledge she had gone to waste because knowledge without faith was not usable.

You could not have had a better demonstration of this than in the person of Jane Roberts.

The C's have emphasized faith (faith in process) in recent sessions. I think for good reason. You cannot really get it without adequate faith. True knowledge and faith are inseparable--it seems. Hence their faith remark.

One needs to be exceedingly cautious tossing around terms like "group think" ... or "blind faith". The truly faithful may well have the last laugh--from 4th D. So my advice would be--tread carefully.

 

[Joe]

The C's have emphasized faith (faith in process) in recent sessions. I think for good reason. You cannot really get it without adequate faith. True knowledge and faith are inseparable--it seems.

I agree. True knowledge leads to faith in the existence of such knowledge, and therefore to true faith. It's a bit of a paradox, but "really getting it" is really getting faith in the process, not blind faith, but rather faith based in knowledge and awareness. The popular idea of "faith" is blind faith, faith in a fairy tale, in lies, with no direct understanding that makes us aware that any such faith is well-placed. No one is asked to "just believe". We're asked to do the work to gather as much knowledge as we can ourselves, and then have faith in the existence of the ability to gather that knowledge, which isn't hard, because you already proved to yourself that such exists.

 

[Archaea]

OK, I think maybe I'm projecting again, and now I feel like reflecting...

I think most people here are thinking for themselves, and the mods and admins are pretty tolerant. However, in high strangeness Laura say's that most people who have experiences with UFOs and whatnot have dissociative personalities. I think that because of the content of cassiopaea.org, there'll be a significant number of the dissociative personality types who are attached to their pet theories joining the forum. I think if this is true then maybe the mods and admins can be maybe a tiny little bit more tolerant of these people... maybe.

I've been thinking about it though and I don't know where the line should be drawn.

Can you be more specific - what control system?

The STS control system. I think that once the control system gains a foothold it will start excluding people. I also think that it can vector threads, discussions and "events" on the forum with single well placed words and sentences, and because it's so subtle it can be hard to see.

Laura can be your petty tyrant, an impossible person in a position of power,

I think that remark is disrespectful and out of bounds. You can do better Archaea.

That statement was meant as a subjective statement for d3ck3r as a suggestion for a way of thinking. It wasn't meant as an objective statement. Sorry if it offended anyone.

As for rather "sensitive" people such as yourself; when someone disagrees with you or tells you an uncomfortable truth, you tend to attack the messenger. That kind of behavior might be tolerated in kindergarten, but it isn't tolerated here.

I'm not trying to attack the messenger, I'm trying to express my views. I agree that they're not all rational but I'm trying to make an effort not to let that stop me posting. I'm trying to air things out. Some of my views seem to be perceived as pathological by others and this is helpful because it gives me a reference point.

I don't think I'm quite done with it yet, but I might be, for all I know.

 

[sitting]

I'm not trying to attack the messenger, I'm trying to express my views. I agree that they're not all rational but I'm trying to make an effort not to let that stop me posting. I'm trying to air things out.

Hi Archaea,

I for one, look forward to your (substantive) views. Always have. I find them stimulating--if uncolored by attitude or covert antagonism.

You know your subject material well, and you see things from a different angle. Properly presented, this can be enormously helpful to the general discussion.

Your blockage seems to revolve around the "me" versus "them" thingy. And this: "I know things they should know as well--but don't." Both issues are small really, and easily solved--if approached the right way. A bit of faith is all it takes. Faith in the overall good intentions of everyone involved.

I look forward to your future postings.

PS
BTW--have you indeed read all of the Seth books? :)

 

[Miss.K]

The C's have emphasized faith (faith in process) in recent sessions. I think for good reason. You cannot really get it without adequate faith. True knowledge and faith are inseparable--it seems.

I agree. True knowledge leads to faith in the existence of such knowledge, and therefore to true faith. It's a bit of a paradox, but "really getting it" is really getting faith in the process, not blind faith, but rather faith based in knowledge and awareness. The popular idea of "faith" is blind faith, faith in a fairy tale, in lies, with no direct understanding that makes us aware that any such faith is well-placed. No one is asked to "just believe". We're asked to do the work to gather as much knowledge as we can ourselves, and then have faith in the existence of the ability to gather that knowledge, which isn't hard, because you already proved to yourself that such exists.

thanks for that explanation, -it makes sense that it must be "faith based on so far knowledge" that I feel, since I often feel I can't "believe, based on facts", as there could be a lot of things I don't know about so far, that could make me find "proof" in something that actually don't prove anything..

Can you be more specific - what control system?

The STS control system. I think that once the control system gains a foothold it will start excluding people. I also think that it can vector threads, discussions and "events" on the forum with single well placed words and sentences, and because it's so subtle it can be hard to see.

I actually don't think that the forum excludes people. To ban people who are behaving disrespectfully and in a way that disrupts the learning for others is necessary for creating a place where those who want to can learn and grow. I would think that most who have been banned, if later realizing that they want to learn and come back and make known in a credible way that they have realized that they didn't behave appropriately, and ask for another chance, will be given another chance..

But if you have a violin school, and someone comes and say that they think you should rather let them play guitar, and that you are wrong to insist that the school is a violin school, and that you are controlling and evil for saying they are not allowed to play guitar in the violin lessons; You have to ask them to leave (and forbid them coming back as long as they insist on playing guitar) or very soon you won't have a violin school anymore..

The Cs also said no to Lizzies request of power over all as far as I remember..

 

[obyvatel]

[quote author=Archaea]
I'm not trying to attack the messenger, I'm trying to express my views. I agree that they're not all rational but I'm trying to make an effort not to let that stop me posting. I'm trying to air things out. Some of my views seem to be perceived as pathological by others and this is helpful because it gives me a reference point.
[/quote]

Or it could be that you are taking advantage of the "airing things out" reference to take pot shots. You appear to agree that they are not rational, yet you go on indulging yourself in the same way.

[quote author=Arcahea]
I think most people here are thinking for themselves, and the mods and admins are pretty tolerant. However, in high strangeness Laura say's that most people who have experiences with UFOs and whatnot have dissociative personalities. I think that because of the content of cassiopaea.org, there'll be a significant number of the dissociative personality types who are attached to their pet theories joining the forum. I think if this is true then maybe the mods and admins can be maybe a tiny little bit more tolerant of these people... maybe.
[/quote]

You have the option to post in the swamp about your issues if you feel the need for it rather than advising how the forum ought to be run.

 

[Skyalmian]

[quote author=Archaea]I'm not trying to attack the messenger, I'm trying to express my views. I agree that they're not all rational but I'm trying to make an effort not to let that stop me posting. I'm trying to air things out. Some of my views seem to be perceived as pathological by others and this is helpful because it gives me a reference point.[/quote]
There's probably a lot of anger flying around right now, individually and collectively which is meddling / interfering individually within, so it may be hard to tell the difference, especially if/when surrounded by many others. Misdirected anger is dangerous and "I'm trying to air things out." IMO would be best done on an intentional release session with EE. Don't be surprised if two (2) or more layers of 'reasons' are peeled away, each with a dominant emotion like fear/terror or rage, etc. before reaching the root, which is highly likely to be unexpected.

Also, the title of this thread, the discussions within, and how it happens to overall contain some of the nastiest posts on the forum in recent memory, doesn't seem to be much of a coincidence, also factoring in theorized very close timing. If people can't keep themselves together now, what makes them think they can "hold it together" then?

 

[Phill4]

OK, I think maybe I'm projecting again, and now I feel like reflecting...

I think most people here are thinking for themselves, and the mods and admins are pretty tolerant. However, in high strangeness Laura say's that most people who have experiences with UFOs and whatnot have dissociative personalities. I think that because of the content of cassiopaea.org, there'll be a significant number of the dissociative personality types who are attached to their pet theories joining the forum. I think if this is true then maybe the mods and admins can be maybe a tiny little bit more tolerant of these people... maybe.

I've been thinking about it though and I don't know where the line should be drawn.

Can you be more specific - what control system?

The STS control system. I think that once the control system gains a foothold it will start excluding people. I also think that it can vector threads, discussions and "events" on the forum with single well placed words and sentences, and because it's so subtle it can be hard to see.

Laura can be your petty tyrant, an impossible person in a position of power,

I think all of this is a matter of perspective , because if everyone takes Laura's comments to D3ck3r towards themselves not evaluating that the comment was not aimed at them but at a specific exchange between them, it may sound "wrong put of context".

So if the argument is about superficial opinions then there is no ending to the argument.

The reason i say that is that eventhough D3ck3rs opinions and particular experience are valid tfrom that point of perspective there was an intent of control behind it, it also came up when he pointed another forum and basically advertise his own ideas not leaving room for devate also claiming to know the "truth".

Now it may seem as a normal thing that can be discussed in the forum however like i said it is not about us, but rather new members and outside observers.

I think what happened between Laura and D3ck3r in this thread was a continuation of the same back and forth from, and it simply does not add to make statements as unmistakeble turth when no one knows anything unmistakebly, we are just making opinions on this exchange of them.

Archaea, consider there might be new members out there who are trying to find this knowledge or this forum which may be fitting for them and may be suceptible to divertion or led astray from this door (this forum). And that is what is leading my opinion mainly.

Lets not ignore the amount of knowledge shared here on the forum and consider that this knowledged has a value worth protecting for others yet to come as it was for ourselves.

 

[Archaea]

BTW--have you indeed read all of the Seth books?

No, not all of them, I recently got the health one and the mass events one, both of which I haven't read yet, I think they should be interesting. :)

Anyway, I was doing some reflecting and I think the core reason for some of my projections might be because I was banned from this forum... seems obvious, doesn't it? When I rejoined the forum I said I understood why I was banned, and I do, but I still didn't feel like I deserved to be banned. I think this meant that I suppressed that emotion and this caused me to "split" like what Luke Wilson was saying. So sometimes I like Laura and sometimes I don't, and sometimes I like the forum and sometimes I don't... It's a work in progress, but now that I've said something it might work itself out.

Having said that there are still some things I want to say, based on my various perceptions and whatnot. However, my posts won't appear until they're reviewed by a moderator, so I might wait awhile before I continue to try and dig my way out of this hole.

 

[sitting]

When I rejoined the forum I said I understood why I was banned, and I do, but I still didn't feel like I deserved to be banned. I think this meant that I suppressed that emotion and this caused me to "split" like what Luke Wilson was saying. So sometimes I like Laura and sometimes I don't, and sometimes I like the forum and sometimes I don't... It's a work in progress, but now that I've said something it might work itself out.

Hi Archaea,

I think all of us, with perhaps only a few exceptions, are works in progress. And that's okay.

But time is running short. And the "sometimes this" ... "sometimes that" thingy might not work so well--when the hammer hits. Faith has no middle ground--I don't think.

Rather than waiting for a preview before posting, why don't you just do the very best you can, in the most sincere way you can, keeping your intentions pure--and then trust the good judgement of your readers. That just might work.

PS
If you haven't read it, I think you'll like "Dreams, Evolution & Value Fulfillment." Touches on the origin, nature, and purpose of the cosmos. In an intuitive way that ordinary people can understand.

 

[Possibility of Being]

Anyway, I was doing some reflecting and I think the core reason for some of my projections might be because I was banned from this forum... seems obvious, doesn't it? When I rejoined the forum I said I understood why I was banned, and I do, but I still didn't feel like I deserved to be banned. I think this meant that I suppressed that emotion and this caused me to "split" like what Luke Wilson was saying. So sometimes I like Laura and sometimes I don't, and sometimes I like the forum and sometimes I don't... It's a work in progress, but now that I've said something it might work itself out.

A question perhaps worth pondering is: Is it the same 'I' each time? (in keeping with the saying that "the 'I' that sets the alarm at night is not the same 'I' that hits the snooze button in the morning", or something along the lines...)

 

[sitting]

BTW--have you indeed read all of the Seth books?

No, not all of them, I recently got the health one and the mass events one, both of which I haven't read yet, I think they should be interesting. :)

Hi Archaea,

Here's a suggestion for you, if I may. :)

Given your obvious interest in the subject, and your ability to neatly summarize and organize, you may want to jump into "Dreams, Evolution & Value Fulfillment." If you thought CU's, EE's were intriguing--wait till you get to the Big Bang and Sleepwalkers.

Regarding this work, two specific remarks from the C's come to mind. Both important.

"information arranged by a truth, becomes consciousness,"
and
"energy of information configurations of infinite permutations."

I've thought about both a lot, separately and in conjunction with one another. But not much luck.
I am convinced however, that logical explanations to both are in that book. I get glimpses--but not the full picture. And this is frustrating.

With your intellectual bent and natural ability in this area, you might get it way more than I can. I saw what you were able to do with that previous post on coordinate points. Tying it nicely into the session material. It was impressive.

If you're successful, it would be a worthwhile contribution--as both remarks touch upon the basic truth of our existence. It would also get you out of the "hole". And may help you take leave of that "sometimes this" ... "sometimes that" thingy. FWIW.

 

[lilyalic]

Hi Archaea,


It may help reading this thread, :)

http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,31760.0.html

It is in working memory that "conscious feelings" occur. In working memory, three things come together to create conscious feeling: present stimuli, activation of the amygdala in some way and activation of conscious memory in the hippocampus.

Present stimuli might include standing inside a church. This would arouse the amygdala so that the unconscious memories of the many experienced in church - the flooding of the receptors with neurochemicals; and this would activate conscious memory of the last time you were in church, or several memorable times will pass through the mind. When all these things come together in working memory, with the body now activated with chemistry and past history, this is perceived as "feeling."

The same thing can occur in any kind of encounter as we have already described. Something that is present now will turn on the chemicals which will arouse conscious memories that are related to those chemicals, and then the present moment will be interpreted in those same terms.

Since what we are looking at here is the fact that unconscious, chemical imprints, have a much greater ability to influence thinking than vice versa, we realize that we are face to face with an age-old debate between reason and emotion, logic and passion, knowledge and faith.

When you are aroused emotionally whether by fear or pleasure or sexual attraction, it is a cold hard fact that emotion dominates thinking.

I used to have the mind-set of basically distrusting the "teacher" or distrusting this network, but that was when I distrusted myself and frankly didn't want to believe any mirroring I received on this forum. I bounced back and forward as you did, but I found that the more work I actually did on myself (in terms of realizing my thoughts about the "process" where merely a sense of disbelief because it was a shock to the system to believe in that kind of stuff, and I definitely didn't want to believe I was a narcissist and draining peoples energy) the more I believed in the process... The more I saw little tiny improvements within myself, and therefore creating more faith within the process/work. It also helped to start owning the traits I didn't like about myself...

The truth hurts.