The Psychedelic Revolution

Am I? Perhaps I am. I suppose I should qualify my statements more often with 'I think' or 'it appears to me'. I do try to include such things, but I don't always qualify every statement as such.

 

Is this a level that you appreciate?

This is an expression of delusions about reality. We cannot bring truth to illusion and make the illusion real. we bring illusion to truth and truth dispels the illusion.

Defenselessness is invulnerability. This answer sounds pat. I was remarking on your misunderstanding of power.

It is not abhorrent in any manner. No matter your genteel sensibilities, the prime directive is still eat and be eaten.

These are all distinctions you have erected for yourself. If it were otherwise, would you have it so?

Jeez, Have you ever swallowed a camel. Simply accept healing for yourself.

 

You know thedope this series of responses really typifies what I have been talking about regarding your posts and it just became clear to me.
The biggest "problem" with them is the same thing spexxx commented on to autumnbreeze, every one of your responses are made as if you are in some superior position and you phrase them as if you are going to correct us and set us straight. That is what I meant in another post when I referred to your hiding behind your words. It would appear that your responses are crafted in such a way that they really can't be refuted, because they are only your opinion. Given that, your responses carry no more weight of validity then anyone else's, yet you present and phrase them as if you had the final answer.
Just look at each of your responses to autumnbreeze above, each is a rebuking of her opinions and your stating how they are wrong and giving the "correct" interpretation.
Couple that with your remark in another thread;

it really sounds as though you believe you have all the answers.
If that is the case then you may be more delusional then previously thought

That is why myself and some others perceive you to be arrogant and aloof, you only ever provide your OPINIONS as FACT.
The few times that I have dealt with you regarding Biblical quotes, you quoted them so far out of context and tried to impart meaning that is non-existent given the context in which the passage is given. The first time I called you on that many months ago, you didn't even respond with anything that remotely made sense or was relevant to the conversation.

So do you only put forth your opinions as fact because opinions ultimately can't be refuted and proven wrong? they are after all only personal opinion.

I always try very hard to distinguish between fact and my personal opinion, I'm not perfect and I toot my horn just as much as the next guy, but always come back to IMHO.
Challenge me on factual matters and if I KNOW your wrong or misinformed and I will go for the gusto. Prove me wrong and I will graciously admit such

At least have the grace to acknowledge that the vast majority of your posts are in fact your personal opinion and qualify them as such.
That is how you could become more amicable

 

I think you're asking for a lot on an LSD board, PB. The drug does sorta raise your personal sense of understanding and convictions about the world. Doubt you'll actually change dope's attitude towards other posters by pointing out his egotism.

 

Oh i get it. I'm not politically correct. Let us see what Autumnbreezes response might be. It could be that she might agree to what I am saying.

Let's do. the first response I make is a question regarding her level of appreciation. The second comment plays off the first distinction that she makes regarding the meaninglessness of sexual distinctions at a certain level of understanding. If we entertain that understanding then speaking of engendered imbalances turns out to not be the way things really work. Or speaking from the perspective of the absolute or first premise everything else is an abstraction.




[/QUOTE]

 

Has absolutely nothing to do with political correctness or even the content of your responses, it has everything to do with the delivery and the unspoken attitude with which they come across because you always state them as absolutes and never acknowledge that they are in fact only your opinions.

I don't believe for a minute that you are not intelligent or educated enough to understand the distinction that I am refering to.

You had asked me earlier what it was about your responses that I took issue with at times, thats it, opinion couched as an absolute truth.

 

In the third response I point out that I do not feel she has understood what I was referring to.
The forth response contains a question that speaks to the validity of what I am saying.
The fifth response is a personal reaction to all the "musts" that are required to restore balance.

 

Yes, it is one of many.

Ok... And I see that you are another Master of Truth, seeking to teach us poor souls lost in illusion. From my pov, my truth, as I know it, all views of reality are illusions, or, more rightly, metaphors. All systems we impose upon reality, all frames through which we view it, are merely metaphors by which we can attempt to grasp, to understand, to manipulate reality. Stories we tell each other, and ourselves, to make sense of it all. Reality itself, Truth itself, cannot be framed in words. It can only be lived.

K. I have my understanding of the meaning of the word, you have yours. Through one frame of reference, it has one meaning, one manner of functioning, one value. Through another, these change. You will find, my young jedi, that many things in life depend quite a lot on your particular point of view.

This is not the prime directive, not from my perspective. Within one limited framework it might be. Through others, there are others. Besides this seems to contradict/be contradicted by your 'defenselessness is invulnerability'. You can go off as you like on the notion that I have much yet to learn, young grasshoppa, that I've conflated notions, but it just makes you sound pretentious, not wise.

Again, only from a particular frame of reference. From that same frame, -gravity- is something I'm making happen too. I don't choose to remain on that level, it tends to be very lonely.

And ye shall be Healed! Lol. I'm actually pretty comfy with being me, thanks, camel and all. I have some hang-ups, some areas of pain. I have some areas where I can be damn uptight. Don't we all? Maybe some day I'll get to a point of acceptance of the all where I don't care about social injustice. Not there yet. Don't actually want to be yet. Feel a certain duty, or calling, or ambition, or something... Feel a drive to do what little things I can to make the world 'better'.

Or at least... what looks like better to me. Maybe in the end it's just window dressing, maybe I'm just making castles in the sand. But they're pretty castles to me.

 

In other words it upsets your sensibilities, yes political correctness.

I do understand, and I also understand that they are your preferred distinctions.

This is a characterization on your part. the only truth you will ever know is that which you accept as true. I am not couching my responses as absolute truth. I am speaking my mind. I have said this before. If I have not spoken an attitude, then where might that attitude originate?

 

Hum, ok...so you nitpick my phrasing(too many musts) then get all hurt when PB nitpicks yours? Interesting.

Besides, that isn't what political correctness even means.

 

Btw, your restating of what you meant by each of your original points is quite different then how they appear. And notably less pretentious, less patronizing. So lets' re-reply, based on what you meant instead of what you said.

1st point, my answer stands.

2nd point: Viewing things from the absolute is quite nice. I like to do it from time to time. But nothing can be said about -anything- in any meaningful fashion from that standpoint. Therefor one can make an argument against -any- statement that anyone ever makes by citing the absolute. Except, while in that frame of reference, that argument against is also meaningless. Because it's actually you arguing against yourself about your own illusions of experience of yourself.

3rd point: Sounds to me like you are not saying I misunderstood you, but rather that I misunderstood The Universe, and need to learn more. Power has many meanings. On a social level it can be the ability to influence, and the ability to restrict, others.

4th point, you seem to misunderstand me. These are not distinctions I have erected, any more then I have erected the universe. See point 2. Actually these are distinctions that I do -not- hold, but see that others do. And feel that they are both incorrect and potentially harmful. And I've seen some of the harm that they at east seem to cause.

5th point, restated that way, I will agree with you. Not that I've swallowed a camel(?), but that I did state 'my idea of what would be better' as 'The Way that things must go to get better'. Seems to be an epidemic of that sort of thing going around. I do try to check myself for it though. And I did -already- admit to this, and apologize, so your reiterating it immediately after I did so seems silly.

 

I am called many things by many people and at those times to those people I am those things, but I am none in particular.

We have much the same perspective then, mine would be different in that I don't feel that reality can be manipulated, I feel that we create through our being.

Only the flavor of your own experience. Do you think your transient perspective changes reality. Now I am a young jedi?

In terms of biological text, we eat and are eaten. In terms of the mind, well the mind is naturally abstract. I offer no defense against this process as none is needed. I don't know that you need to learn anything, and I don't care how I "sound".
If you defend yourself you will feel threatened even if you are not.

Care to elaborate.

 

Doesn't upset my sensibilities at all, I'm very malleable in that area.

No, they aren't just "my" preferred distinctions, those distinctions exist based on the function and rules of contextual meaning in the English language, and I sense others here pick up on the same underlying attitude present in a lot of your responses, so not just "mine" are they.

If the only truth a person will ever know is that which you accept as true then why are you always trying to impart "your" truth in place of anothers as if were a better "truth"? That is essentially what you just did in your responses to autumnbreeze. You didn't qualify your statements as your opinions, which is what speaking your mind is, just stating opinions, but rather you laid them out in such a fashion as to "correct" that which she stated as her "truths".

Who is that man behind the curtain

 

But hey Mr. thedope, your still A-OK in my book and it is always a pleasure to "dialogue" with you. If we all agreed all the time it would be about as interesting as watching paint dry.
:cheers2:


p.s. please, no pseudo-mystical shit about paint drying

 

You keep saying that phrase.
I do not think it means what you think it means.

Hmm. 'Defenselessness is invulnerability',
'This is an expression of delusions about reality. We cannot bring truth to illusion and make the illusion real. we bring illusion to truth and truth dispels the illusion.'
'you misunderstand power'
'No matter your genteel sensibilities, the prime directive is still eat and be eaten.'
'These are all distinctions you have erected for yourself.'

These are all opinions stated in the form commonly used in the English language for stating facts. When you do so about the existential, about things for which there -cannot- be facts, cannot be proven, you are presenting yourself as a wise person. As a font of knowledge, from which less wise people can learn. Doing so without any built up relationship, and without any argument, any logic or story upon which to base your presumptuous statements, is very pretentious.

And no, that's not me being politically correct. It is just my preference though. I prefer when people don't talk down to me, or act all holier then thou. Shrug.

 

What about watching Paint Dry on acid??

 

I don't recall saying I was hurt. But this is a point I can take. That you are willing to qualify or moderate to facilitate understanding, I appreciate.

Politic is displaying shrewdness tact and cunning. If I were politically correct, I would couch my phrases in more self effacing terms as to not arouse the ire of PB. Is there something yet I do not understand regarding political correctness.

 

What is the motive then, because you bring it up?

I am aware that I am received in any manner of ways. Yes, I am found arrogant and aloof. I am also found intelligent, whole, funny, completely trustworthy, retarded, generous, thought provoking, and, oh did I say retarded.
I just got this information from members of my household.

To the extent only of addressing the self avowed "hangups". I am considering my own past here as well. My wife was at one point a radical feminist and had a substantial amount of identity invested in the anti patriarchal emergence to the point of becoming hysterical at the use of the male pronoun, he.

I am you and you are me and you and me and we are all together. I call you friend.

 

Would you care to debate these points then?

 

Same same. Manipulation, continuous creation, all depends on your frame of reference. Either way, we use frames of reference themselves to make choices on what to create, or how to manipulate, reality. Either way, those frames themselves are like maps, they shouldn't be mistaken for the territory. Yet talking entirely outside of such frames is impossible. And meaningless, as there's no one to talk to.

Yes and no. It changes my view of reality of course, and hence my experience. That is all of reality I can ever know, my experience. From another point of view, it doesn't. If the universe has a state of objective 'realty' outside of my experience, then changing my frame of understanding of it doesn't change it. Only the manner in which I will react to it.

Though I have no real evidence to lead me to believe either of these ideas, or a number of other parallel ones, over another.

Hence, it's true from one frame of reference, ie: a biology text. If that is your personal bible, then it's true that will be the 'prime directive'. Otherwise, it isn't. Personally, I've never thought of a biology text as my personal bible, hence it is distinctly not -my- prime directive. Sensibilities, genteel or otherwise, notwithstanding.

Well... From the point of view of supreme non-dualism, there is no other. It's just me, looking at me looking at me. I'm interacting with myself, and creating all experience spontaneously. And... I'm alone. I spent a fair degree of time wandering more and more into that frame of reference, several years in fact. And the further I went, the less other people seemed to have independent existence. The more it was just me, me and my illusions. Me and the infinitely complex and endlessly fascinating fully immersive and interactive game I call reality. But I'm still alone. There might be -something- behind the curtain, pulling strings and interacting in a meaningful fashion, but I can't interact directly, only through the game. And it's lonely there.

So I fell back into duality. Actually, I clawed and scraped and worked quite hard on -rebuilding- duality. On rebuilding my essential faith in the basic existence of other people, and the meaningfulness of my interactions with them. In the process I lost a lot of peace, I lost a lot of understanding. As things became meaningful, they became far more capable of really hurting me. But in the process, it became possible to have love. It became possible to believe, at least in part, that I share my life with others who are having similar experiences. I found people I could talk to, people I could commiserate with. People who I could share my joys with, who could comfort me in my sorrows.

For all the rough elements of dualistic existence, I wouldn't trade it. Perhaps one day I will, but for now, this world, and these limited frames of understanding, suit me well.

I find myself searching now for an in between state. Or the ability to move back and forth at will. Breath in, be at one with the universe; breath out, immerse myself in duality. Hold onto the precious meaningful aspect of duality, and the sense of someone to share it with, hold onto love and passion, yet also have a constant reminder that everything is -ok-.

But for now, I exist as I exist. And I do get tied up in issues that I see. My love of those in my world drives me to act, inspires me to do. When I see those I love hurting one another, I want to try to show them... something. I want to try to help them see that their actions are causing hurt. Not because I am wise and know better, just because I am seeing one particular thing that it doesn't seem like they can see.