|
|
Post by maxdprophet on Sept 1, 2016 7:33:28 GMT -5
Yes, it's rather poignant how hard it is to underestimate our fellow man.  A good faith reading of what maxy's written in this latest round leads me to opine that he's conflated "good faith reading" with whatever one might mean by "good faith writing". Sumthin like that. I spose he means 'reading' in the way it's used in 'psychic reading'. Oh silly ol' me. All this time I was writing 'reading' I should have been writing 'writing.' #overandout |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 16:06:32 GMT -5
Gotta love Iggy. Although he's not looking so hot lately. Maybe better than Daniel though! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 19:17:07 GMT -5
Oh yes, but is that all there is goin' on with that??  .. see now, seems to me that it's not only lack of desire to inquire, it's also an affirmative desire to re-wallpaper the bedroom. Yea and there's energy driving that whole movement. Even putting the beliefs aside for a week and just bringing consciousness into dynamics, behavioral or otherwise, can shine a new light on the beliefs. Of course the beliefs don't want that, but beliefs are less than you because they appear within you. They're like, snowflakes on their way to a steaming car hood. I'd call that, the universe universing. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 2, 2016 19:25:25 GMT -5
Well the 'pitchfork thing is repeated as a sort of affirmation and used strategically i the discourse, so we can imagine the language flowing like a river and exerting a force, which is simply an unavoidable facet of discourse. These allisios such as 'youve grown cynical' are all part of the game. It's disempowering the voice of the accused, and thats the reason it's said. It doesn't 'converse' like the flow of the river going to endless seas, and it sets up the attack and the defensive position. I think it's pretty obvious that is what it does. People often call me cynical, but I refute it, and I know these projections are common and that other readers 'get an impression' from it. Mud sticks, as they say. Lolly is presented as some sort of disease, and not of the physical type. It's a psychological aspersion that I have something infectious to spread and instills fear that others around will contract it and be rendered nonsencical. The implication is that lolly infected whoever it is whom is said to have 'become cynical'. It's clear that lolly is the center of blame ad cause and locale ot 'the problem'. There is a lot being done in those few lines. It's by no means kind, and I'd describe it as 'an underhand insinuation'. Now I question, is this an assertion that sort of slides by, but impresses minds with self-imagery portrayed in derogatory light? These depictions don't actually represent lolly or Quinn; they're more like toilet graffiti charactures; but the assertions do serve a particular purpose, or at least, have a certain effect, and effect implies power. You notice Satch opened his two previous posts to me with you... something something something, so as to diminish the image of lolly and take the dominant position . Thats 'what it does'. I know these uses of language, and I can't communicate on such terms. Re: the "I think you've grown cynical" comment. Good point about it's aim, not at the content but at the deliverer of the content. Good ole' ad hominem in play yet again. The purpose being to dis-empower, though, how can you be sure? Aren't there other 'forces of the river' besides that? Hard to know what's going on in people's heads, but this whole Teams/Gangs thing that gets brought up so much on ST may be a clue. If someone seems to be on one 'side' then acts like the other side, to say "oh, you're just being disagreeable" or "you've grown cynical" is a way to settle one's own dissonance. That's more how I saw it, anyway (in this particular case). Appreciate your insights on some of the subtleties of language.  The effect is to belittle you personally as cynical so that what you say is undermined - clear as day bro. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 2, 2016 19:29:35 GMT -5
You'll have to desist trying to make me appear ugly, because I basically only took phrasings common to STF and reappropriated them. I don't speak in those terms myself, ad I adopted them just for the sake of demonstration. They appear 'ugly' to me too. I never abuse people under the pretense of a zen stick (nor psychoanalys or call people deluded, insane etc...), and as you see, 'your ugliness' is a continuation on your part, along withyou insinuation that I'm 'infecting' Quinn and causing him/her to 'become cynical'. My first post to which you responded to as 'ugly' didn't contain you in mind, and I explained that, yet it was descriptive of the 'ugliness' of undermining, and even abusing, forum members directly, which is endemic around here on this supposedly spiritual forum, but you've continued to attempt to articulate me in a less than appealing light, so I'll leave you to it. 1) Trust me, it's effortless. From your own perspective, you criticize the use of the zen stick while making use of it yourself (as you describe above) and then deny you are doing so while you're doing it. It's similar to 'I'm not upset, I'm dismayed and frustrated'. I've been watching this forum at least as intensely as you have, and for much longer. Attitudes definitely are infectious. They embold, incite and push people's buttons. It's a manipulative tactic that works very well and provides the source material for discussions of mass insanity and angry pitchfork wielding villagers. the old turn it back on them trick, ay? I have done it more that and better than you (= power play) and therefore you are infecting Quinn (=authoritative statement). |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2016 19:41:30 GMT -5
Re: the "I think you've grown cynical" comment. Good point about it's aim, not at the content but at the deliverer of the content. Good ole' ad hominem in play yet again. The purpose being to dis-empower, though, how can you be sure? Aren't there other 'forces of the river' besides that? Hard to know what's going on in people's heads, but this whole Teams/Gangs thing that gets brought up so much on ST may be a clue. If someone seems to be on one 'side' then acts like the other side, to say "oh, you're just being disagreeable" or "you've grown cynical" is a way to settle one's own dissonance. That's more how I saw it, anyway (in this particular case). Appreciate your insights on some of the subtleties of language. The effect is to belittle you personally as cynical so that what you say is undermined - clear as day bro. "Sometimes a cynical banana is just a cynical banana, bro." Sigmund Freud |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 2, 2016 19:48:30 GMT -5
1) I like that. 2) What happens is extistential 'discussions' are presented as Truth (under the notion of a pointer) and that is the production of 'knowledge' which is the power of influence, ad as power is exerted, it is resisted, so tension builds. We the fid that the 'knowers' fortify their position by claims such as the other person is in a tizz because their egoic self is threatened, ad this is where the person themselves becomes a subject of the knower's knowledge, hence a topic of discourse, and the projected location of lack, thereby further concentrating the excesses of power on the 'king' as his subject is articulated as the inverse form. If it was just a conversation, there would be no knowledge base to it, and people would be concerned with understanding what people mean by what they say rather than constructing right and wrong positions. 3) See how it starts whit 'self reflection, but ends in the subjugation of 'them'. Perhaps the interaction is not actually so unidirectional, but wrapped up in dynamics that go between, but people aren't perfect ad they might have a lot going on in life, ad who knows what's driving a person. When we talk about 'understanding'. and connoting that as some higher knowing of a spiritual kind, we have already lost the empathy which makes things mutual or shared, and instead, invoked a disparity between subject positions. In short, if the knowledge is dropped we can just say what we think, but that would dissolve the 'teacher' along with the 'student' and completely destroy the status quo. It'd probably be the end of STF discussion forums altogether! Maybe best to just go along with pointy teacher thingy, in that case. Well .. :) .. opportunities are always optional, no need to take'em, but ones like this tend to constantly re-present themselves until we do. Hey, you came to mind this evening on my bench, are you interested in the details? Sounds interesting, better pm me details. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 20:14:27 GMT -5
Yes. In the case of the bottom sentence, does that mean that NOTHING from the "latter" incarnation has anything to do with the "former" incarnation? (And on down the chain). My sense is that an individual is made up of components that have some 'energy' in Consciousness as a whole, which might include unexplored potentials of expression, curiosities, the desire to resolve conflict and contradictions, the desire to transcend limitation, and the like. These components assemble spontaneously, and we could say they all have their origin in previous human expressions, but we can't really say a particular expression is being continued or formed primarily from the past experiences of one particular individual.To begin with, a person is not really a physical entity so much as a dynamic of specific conditioning. IOW, what makes 'me' 'me' are my personal experiences, and if those experiences reappear at all in a subsequent newborn, they are deeply hidden. If everything I experience and express changes from lifetime to lifetime, it isn't really 'me' even if it is. Yeah, like each of us is a pinnacle on an assemblage of previously formed skulls. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 2, 2016 21:36:18 GMT -5
The effect is to belittle you personally as cynical so that what you say is undermined - clear as day bro. "Sometimes a cynical banana is just a cynical banana, bro." Sigmund Freud That's got nothing to do with me; nor does Quinn strike me as being particularly cynical. Apart from belittling Quinn, you also blame me. It's ludicrous. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2016 21:40:05 GMT -5
1) Trust me, it's effortless. From your own perspective, you criticize the use of the zen stick while making use of it yourself (as you describe above) and then deny you are doing so while you're doing it. It's similar to 'I'm not upset, I'm dismayed and frustrated'. I've been watching this forum at least as intensely as you have, and for much longer. Attitudes definitely are infectious. They embold, incite and push people's buttons. It's a manipulative tactic that works very well and provides the source material for discussions of mass insanity and angry pitchfork wielding villagers. the old turn it back on them trick, ay? I have done it more that and better than you (= power play) and therefore you are infecting Quinn (=authoritative statement). Wow! |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2016 21:42:58 GMT -5
My sense is that an individual is made up of components that have some 'energy' in Consciousness as a whole, which might include unexplored potentials of expression, curiosities, the desire to resolve conflict and contradictions, the desire to transcend limitation, and the like. These components assemble spontaneously, and we could say they all have their origin in previous human expressions, but we can't really say a particular expression is being continued or formed primarily from the past experiences of one particular individual.To begin with, a person is not really a physical entity so much as a dynamic of specific conditioning. IOW, what makes 'me' 'me' are my personal experiences, and if those experiences reappear at all in a subsequent newborn, they are deeply hidden. If everything I experience and express changes from lifetime to lifetime, it isn't really 'me' even if it is. Yeah, like each of us is a pinnacle on an assemblage of previously formed skulls. I guess one could say that.  |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 2, 2016 21:47:53 GMT -5
"Sometimes a cynical banana is just a cynical banana, bro." Sigmund Freud That's got nothing to do with me; nor does Quinn strike me as being particularly cynical. Apart from belittling Quinn, you also blame me. It's ludicrous. She's not particularly cynical, just moreso than she used to be in these discussions. I believe that's what I said. It's an observation, not an attempt to belittle. I'm not blaming you for anything, just disagreeing. You do, however, have a serious bug up your butt. |
|
|
|
Post by preciocho on Sept 2, 2016 22:05:28 GMT -5
Yea and there's energy driving that whole movement. Even putting the beliefs aside for a week and just bringing consciousness into dynamics, behavioral or otherwise, can shine a new light on the beliefs. Of course the beliefs don't want that, but beliefs are less than you because they appear within you. They're like, snowflakes on their way to a steaming car hood. I'd call that, the universe universing. I gave myself a haircut today. Didn't turn out that well. Perhaps should have hired the universe to do it |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2016 2:17:55 GMT -5
I'd call that, the universe universing. I gave myself a haircut today. Didn't turn out that well. Perhaps should have hired the universe to do it Or just be more careful. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2016 2:19:56 GMT -5
Yeah, like each of us is a pinnacle on an assemblage of previously formed skulls. I guess one could say that. If I were an artist, I'd paint the image. |
|
