"Suggestibility varies as the amount of disaggregation, and inversely as the unification of consciousness."
- Boris Sidis: The Psychology of Suggestion:
It begins with a compendium of Grimm's fairy tales as a metaphor lodged into rationality wherein we just may exist in an enchanted forest full of creatures that span the divide between the demonstrable and the theoretical.
One could say we live in a maze of choice which has it's parallel in the image of a house of mirrored desires and fears that blend into a profound state of suggestions that lack any coherency whatsoever yet it is important for our species, while losing the popcorn trail of finding our way back to it's origins, we constantly computerate unverifiable information as a navigational aid in our attempts to orient ourselves. Perhaps it is as Karl Shapiro suggested, that "We are deranged, walking among the cops Who sweep glass and are large and composed."
All of this is based on a consensus that resembles more of a weather system that a guidebook. This seems to be a taboo subject as if to admit this, all would be lost, and yet, to do so, can be a grounding influence that steers us into recognizing the buried skeletons in the closet rather than following what remains a comfort zone solely on the basis of their rote repetition or popularity defining reality from without.
The King is dead, long live the King in the critical assumption that follows the that we exist in a monarchical universe as the basis of "civilization" that remains steadfastly and indelibly followed for thousands of years, or conversely, as Hawkwind suggested an announcement is required to the effect of , "This is your captain speaking, your captain is dead."
Whenever I consider the findings of quantum physics in relation to a monarchical universe, I well consider myself then to be the surveyor of Kafka's Castle that has blurred the distinction between fact and fiction as if these findings simply confirm what already exists which requires a further explanation.
A.R Orage, asks "Are We Awake?"
http://www.gurdjieff.org/orage3.htm
The last post regarding social and cultural scripts related to the play being staged for Islamic version of the mythological “last battle” was preceded by William S Burrough’s humorously caustic advice to young people regarding the same when it is applied to similar controlling systems..which I tagged as living mythologies that create predictable results, whether it is technology improving our lives while destroying our the environment it (as well as ourselves) depend on, all the while the aggregate sum of humanity remains in the thrall of suggestion, which makes one consider how much we experience directly versus that which defines reality is suggested to us.
“The imaginary is what tends to become real.”
― André Breton
A consensus of a suggested reality that is prone to competition.
I was reading John Keel’s analysis of this in regard to the ‘UFO” phenomenon where he divided the leading proponents of various theories into a social and political spectrum of left wing and right wing factions, the conservative faction versus the liberal and I was struck once again to the similarities between the “normal” and the “paranormal”
One could consider the absence of the word “climate change” in the media as a means of suggesting by plausible and passive absence of recognition or discussion of it’s present and future effects as a means of reinforcing the products of capitalism on which it depends upon.
There should be no surprise when we encounter this. Again, we have a social script of a living mythology being staged and played as a sort of self comforting buffer, to avoid the clashing of apparent cross purposes being compounded daily with interest.
In this blog I have suggested that how we define prosaic reality is not a very reliable means to ascertain what constitutes the paranormal as normal is non existent as an objective math to calculate not only our own orientation but that which exists outside of our purview,
Consider how much information can we self verify? Our reach is relatively small, and yet with the proliferation of advanced communications technology we have to consider the vast amount of information both of a paranormal nature and “normal” nature that is accepted unquestionably due to it’s being simply communicated.
I was reading John Keel’s analysis of this in regard to the ‘UFO” phenomenon where he divided the leading proponents of various theories into a social and political spectrum of left wing and right wing factions, the conservative faction versus the liberal and I was struck once again to the similarities between the “normal” and the “paranormal”
One could consider the absence of the word “climate change” in the media as a means of suggesting by plausible and passive absence of recognition or discussion of it’s present and future effects as a means of reinforcing the products of capitalism on which it depends upon.
There should be no surprise when we encounter this. Again, we have a social script of a living mythology being staged and played as a sort of self comforting buffer, to avoid the clashing of apparent cross purposes being compounded daily with interest.
In this blog I have suggested that how we define prosaic reality is not a very reliable means to ascertain what constitutes the paranormal as normal is non existent as an objective math to calculate not only our own orientation but that which exists outside of our purview,
Consider how much information can we self verify? Our reach is relatively small, and yet with the proliferation of advanced communications technology we have to consider the vast amount of information both of a paranormal nature and “normal” nature that is accepted unquestionably due to it’s being simply communicated.
On another post I entitled “An Empirical Failure To Launch”, the same theme was played in terms of the debate over what constitutes evidence as well as the denial all around us that has existed for centuries in equal suggested layers of denial when it comes to actions and their results as an equally measurable equation that we seem to have a strange capability to repeat the same errors of behaviorisms in a cyclic manner….all due to the prevalent suggestions at the time which permeate the environment that nullify any learning curve.
One could call this situation the materialization of The Emperor's New Clothes, a fashion statement that cloaks itself in a ever changing wardrobe.
The balancing of what we do know and that which we do not know is an entire ontology in of itself as another theme I have posited here is the recognition of what we do not know is more important than that which we do...where mythology meets rationality in terms of the supernatural, which I have always considered to be an error of language inasmuch as what exactly is supernatural? If all belongs to a natural but largely unknown nature?
On another venue, the subject of original sin was posited as the loss of recognising and encountering productively that which appears to be magical as we have lost the innocence to be aware of the liminal. My comment was as follows:
“As in everything, our species has written it’s own social script based on our own behaviorisms and attempting to rationalize them as being dictated by random choices that in turn are based on the vagaries of self awareness that are unique to our species. The anti-structural ( supernatural ) is domesticated into rational terms and you end up with a mess. God by it’s nature, is incommensurable yet defining the incommensurable remains a human activity.
Any extraterrestrial would find this a tragicomedy as evidence of a profound innocence.
Sin as the root of original sin is a judgement placed against the dualism of either praiseworthy or blameworthy behavior that is contrasted against divine ( sacred ) law or rules as a form of rationalism as defined as it was written by our forebears which then was divided into good and evil by Zoroaster who added reward and punishment by the crossing of the Chinvat Bridge.
In essence, his was a social control psychology that predates Moses. Some have suggested that demonizing of the Romans in occupied Israel led to the invention of Satan that built on Zoroaster's innovation which in turn influenced Egypt in the creation of the Sons of Light versus the Sons of Darkness from which Christianity was innovated from.
One could call this situation the materialization of The Emperor's New Clothes, a fashion statement that cloaks itself in a ever changing wardrobe.
The balancing of what we do know and that which we do not know is an entire ontology in of itself as another theme I have posited here is the recognition of what we do not know is more important than that which we do...where mythology meets rationality in terms of the supernatural, which I have always considered to be an error of language inasmuch as what exactly is supernatural? If all belongs to a natural but largely unknown nature?
On another venue, the subject of original sin was posited as the loss of recognising and encountering productively that which appears to be magical as we have lost the innocence to be aware of the liminal. My comment was as follows:
“As in everything, our species has written it’s own social script based on our own behaviorisms and attempting to rationalize them as being dictated by random choices that in turn are based on the vagaries of self awareness that are unique to our species. The anti-structural ( supernatural ) is domesticated into rational terms and you end up with a mess. God by it’s nature, is incommensurable yet defining the incommensurable remains a human activity.
Any extraterrestrial would find this a tragicomedy as evidence of a profound innocence.
Sin as the root of original sin is a judgement placed against the dualism of either praiseworthy or blameworthy behavior that is contrasted against divine ( sacred ) law or rules as a form of rationalism as defined as it was written by our forebears which then was divided into good and evil by Zoroaster who added reward and punishment by the crossing of the Chinvat Bridge.
In essence, his was a social control psychology that predates Moses. Some have suggested that demonizing of the Romans in occupied Israel led to the invention of Satan that built on Zoroaster's innovation which in turn influenced Egypt in the creation of the Sons of Light versus the Sons of Darkness from which Christianity was innovated from.
However, in it’s earliest form,the blameworthy original sin was divine itself in Sumeria,Then there was the People of The Garden, known as the Yezidis believe that Tawsi Melek , the Rainbow Peacock or The Angel of Earth ( the planet itself as a divine creature ) was amoral, and manipulated humankind for it’s own purposes which then led to the other authors much later creating the Demiurge as a supernatural agency of Tawsi Melek.
This led to what remains today that the Yezdi’s are devil worshippers.
The formulation of the Demiurge ( supernatural forces of a planetary nature) as a organised influence to promote ignorance by knowledge that harness animal appetites to foment chaos in the guise of knowledge. Some authors early on ascribed this tactic to the development of writing as a divine or supernatural edict leading to a loss of memory, where the means ( rationality ) becomes a self referential illusion of knowledge that underpins humankind as innocent victims who have been duped thinking they are conscious.In Babylon, there was a school of thought ( Sarmoun Darq) that migrated to Afghanistan that being born was an effect of original sin, that we exist in a living purgatory of physicality as a result. The Garden was elsewhere….”
One impetus for originating this blog was the absolute absence of any philosophic consideration of the issues that the paranormal raises and this continues to be the case as far as I know.
“A constant human error: to believe in an end to one's fantasies. Our daydreams are the measure of our unreachable truth. The secret of all things lies in the emptiness of the formula that guard them.”
― Floriano Martins
And so I continue to wonder as I wander...
One impetus for originating this blog was the absolute absence of any philosophic consideration of the issues that the paranormal raises and this continues to be the case as far as I know.
“A constant human error: to believe in an end to one's fantasies. Our daydreams are the measure of our unreachable truth. The secret of all things lies in the emptiness of the formula that guard them.”
― Floriano Martins
And so I continue to wonder as I wander...
No comments:
Post a Comment