lloydbaker

However, I have noticed that it is not as simple as psychological allegory vs. physical "reality"... the world is psyche in a sense. And if there is one thing I have learned it is that there is no rigid dividing line between mental and physical, and no rigid division between individual subject and others or the world "outside". Which may help account for apparently miraculous or magical events, etc.

Yes, what we often "take" for external reality is our perception and ideas of external reality. We have direct contact with our perceptions, feeling, etc., not external reality Of external reality we can only have theories, expressed in mathematics, etc. So, Gurdjieff's All and Everything can refer exclusively to our perceptual world and still cover near infinite ground. He seems very interested in deep levels of consciousness not normally accessible to waking consciousness that "think" exclusively in symbols, allegories, narratives, etc. I get the impression while reading "All and Everything" that he is often "talking to" my solar plexus, not me, not my conscious mind I am used to using. At one point at the beginning of the book he talks about someone walking on his hands. . . to me clearly a reference to the solar plexus "mind" to which the legs are arms, the intestines, the convolutions of its brain, the genitals, its nose, anus its mouth, etc.

My reading of Gurdjeff indicates Gurdjieff wrote psychological allegories in All and Everything, not esoteric science about external reality.

I am curious as to what people who frequent this section of ttb are studying and practicing and why. It just seems like such an amorphous subject area to me and i am trying to get a handle on it. Is it practical, does it provide a philosophical, ethical, or metaphysical/cosmological paradigm?

 

What would you call what you are studying/practicing and why? (For bonus points)

I'm interested from a primarily Jungian perspective.

So if global warming is nonanthropogenic or nonexistent, still lots of ways to hack up the Earth.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/mexico-earthquakes-linked-wastewater-injection-135333327.html;_ylt=AsM68lXhlPS8EAMeA8lKb2nQtDMD

That x follows y does not prove y caused x. Seismic activity is not a constant over time in any case. Energy is too important to flesh and blood people to yell stop every time someone fears something.

It's time to discover what the universe is like when thoughts, beliefs, emotions and concepts don't overlay everything.

I know it's irritating for me to pick at the TAO and Buddhism while, at the same time, admitting my exposure to it has been sporadic and non-systematic.

However, your sentence embodies my basic objection: the idea that one can get in contact with the universe via stilling meditation. Contact with the nature and laws of consciousness, YES! But, it would seem to me theories of the univese come only from interpretation of the senses, hopefully with the help of the scientific method.

haha well hey, I've tried all kinds of different tactics and none have produced any sort of rebuttal aside from poo-pooing of data sources and poo-pooing that it didnt go through the long since captured pal review echo chamber process. I mean, if he's that confident then he must have some scientific understanding and should be able to at least formulate some rebuttal.

Joe Blast: Are you the JBG Serene mentioned?

I attempted to point-out the "powers that be" who use vast monetary resources to DETERMINE the consensus on global warming and many other issues. Isn't it obvious that Goldman Sachs and their front man Gore are trying to set-up a carbon credits market that will profit themselve immensely at the expense of a more and more energy deprived population?

Also, the incredible "tolerance" for Islam, the most primitive anti-liberal religion on the planet, amounts to butt-kissing for Saudi PetroDollars. See Rockefeller, Soros, Norquist, Bloomberg, Carter and many many others.

JMG would not fit the description you give above

Again, who is JMG? Can I suggest abbreviations that block the flow of a thread be avoided? I can't know for sure what you are talking about if I don't know who JMG is.

More likely than false flag, the Boston massacre is blowback. The US is in bed with Saudi Arabia re: Big Oil. The US used Jihadist/Muslim Brotherhood in co-operation with Saudi Arabia in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Chechen for geopolitical purposes. The strategy continued and continues in Egypt, Libya, and Syria. The FBI has the impossible task of determining which Jihadists are useful in toppling various regimes and which are crossing the line to attack US/Saudi interests!

I guess the classical Chinese and their teachings on conforming to the Tao were all Absolutists.

 

There is such a thing as conforming to natural harmony. You should ask PythagoreanFullLotus about it some time. And really should start looking into doing some of those Taoist exercises and meditations I recommended.

Well, I certainly wouldn't rule-out in advance that conforming to the TAO is abolutism.

Natural harmony is a very very very big assumption. . . Looking at "natural history", I'd say that nature tends toward a bloody equilibrium which lasts only until the next big disruptive change. . . then chaos and carnage and movement to a new equilibrium. Humanity is part of nature and are a factor in destroying one equilibrium and moving toward another. I don't see any reason to think humanity should passively conform to nature.

I ordered the 2 books you mentioned so I might know better what Taoists are trying to do. On the other hand, I have had a program of self observation for many years which might be considered a form of meditation. . .

What I am saying, using 'is' leaves out a lot of possibilities as opposed to one extreme view which you seem to adhere to. You have not provided links to the so called conspiracy of Soros, Rockefellers et al.

 

I am challenging generalizations. I guess that you have no proof of the conspiracy. When I was very young I believed in such worldwide conspiracies as an emotional response. Then I realized that was no longer important. There is more to life than worrying about who controls the world.

All you have to do is read David Rockefeller's AutoBio where he basically confirms his role and the role of others in similar positions in setting the agenda for the world. Sure, he doesn't confirm the more wacko theorists, just the basics: The Trilateral Commission he founded with Zbig, the CFR, the Bilderbergers, the UN, etc.

I generally don't even use the word conspiracy; ruling class influence is more appropriate. All you need to do is google around the Rockefeller Foundation and Rockefeller Brothers Fund sites to see what they promote. Recently, someone leaked a Rockefeller Bros. Fund power point presentation which showed how they co-ordinated wide-spread environmentalist oppostion to the Keystone Pipeline. A few years ago, the Rockefellers formed a stockholders bloc to restrain Exxon from finding too much oil, insisting on green energy projects. Soros also has a far flung array of Foundations pushing similar causes. Both have been PetroDollar recyclers and thus part of the Saudi/OPEC/Big Oil camarilla. I'm just urging people keep their eyes open for this sort of information, not allowing the shrillness of some theorists to blind them to easily confirmable aspects.

If I was to set out to prove my contentions based on decades of studying and thinking, I wouldn't do it here. I'd write a book or www site or something. I just put forth my ideas. Treat them as a hypothesis in your mind to check against information as you move forward in life. Check some of the sources I mention.

Even precise scientific experiments don't "prove" precise scientific theories. They just provide another instance of conformity of observation to theory, or not. Overall worldviews are always far from "proveable."

I never text in all capitals, but just as sometimes I raise my voice for emphasis when speaking, I capitalize certain phrasing when texting or blogging for emphasis.

There are more than one kind of Environmentalist. For example, JMG would not fit the description you give above but he definitely cares about the environment enough he has inspired hundreds of people to change their lifestyles to live more in harmony with the earth while being resilient to the monetary and fiscal gaming that's going on these days.

Who is JMG?

I said a lot of environmentalists don't have a sense of humor. I should have continued: "a lot" of environmentalists are absolutists.

However, I would point-out that anyone who believes in living in harmony with the earth, actually is buying into absolutist environmentalism. The idea of pre-arranged natural harmony with which to conform is unproven absolutism.

To continue to survive without a drastic die-off, humanity must continue to plow ahead changing the environment, taking into account as best possible cause and effect.

You are making a lot of claims. Show me your peer reviewed research. Are you a climatologist? I doubt it. Your use of 'isness' indicates that you want absolute answers. I have kicked the addictive habit of using 'is' in my writing. Rarely will you see me use it. Authoritarians love using 'is'.

All sentences imply something is. All thought are the thinker's theory about what is. Constantly repeating that anything I say is my theory just as anything anyone else says is their theory is silly. You seem to be using absurd rhetorical devices to disparage others.

Peer review is not a valid concern as it only a manifestation of "collective authority." Gallileo got some bad peer reviews, for example.

A lot of absolutist environmentalists don't have a sense of humor. . . They don't get Limbaugh humor either. EVIRONMENTALISTS ARE ABSOLUTIST! No one is allowed to joke about absolute truth. Wacko is not a serious "condemnation". . . get real!

The fact is, it is the global warming propagandists that are taking their precarious theories of a very complex reality as absolute truth and pressing government to act on it!

To make it worse, government action in this area is and would drastically decrease the amount of energy available for human needs. Nearly all human needs require energy input. Reducing the amount of energy available to humanity in the absence of ready alternatives means inconvenience to some, squallor or death to others. All based on ABSOLUTIST thinking.

Those of us who know climate is too complex to be caused by a single variable are the ones who are not ABSOLUTISTS!

A giant, tilted rotating, variable solid/water/biological surface, out of round sphere with a multi-gas atmosphere, an internal heat source, magnetic poles, and exposure to varying radiation and sub-atomic particles from the sun is a very difficult heat transfer problem! No attempt has yet been made to model it including all the relevant variables. By the way, climate itself is actually CONVECTION, a form of heat transfer. So, to the extent one factor tends to increase the temperature, climate (convection heat transfer) is affected. Good luck with your super computer and the 100 differential equations.

No models to date predict the actual minute changes in average temperature. . . where's the hockey stick predicted early on, for instance?

Your posts are replete with hearsay and innuendo with no supporting evidence. BTW, Witch isn't here to defend herself so stop the personal attacks directed to her. Persons that resort to arguments such as yours have no credibility whatsoever.

Nonsense. There was no personal attack. . . "Environmentalist wacko" is a joking term of endearment. I argued with her about global warming years ago. Check you own rants if you want to see over the top mindless attacks. Hopefully Witch(?) will drop by some time and add her opinion to the thread. Uh, that is how threads work. Someone does not have to be on site to talk about them.

Lloyd...what do you think Zaneblue (she's known as Witch here at TTB) would think of your post above, hmm? You know how she was at Thunders and M.com.

 

For what it's worth I think scientists on both sides can be "bought and paid for". That's one of the problems with the way the environment in academic research has changed. As public money for University research has been cut the crony capitalism system has intensified as researchers still want to do research but can't do it on shoestring budgets and still get published. My guess is some like this arrangement while others do not. It likely depends on the specifics of each situation.

Zane is an environmentalist wacko. I argued with her about this years ago.

You have to look at the winning side; the Establishment side. The big Rockefeller/Big Oil/Saudi-Soros/OPEC forces patronize and fund the UN which is behind the global warming propaganda. Global warming concerns reduce exploration and drilling by govt regulation and, thereby, raise the price of oil: THE WHOLE POINT! Simple application of supply and demand. The Koch Bros. and other sponsor research attempting to disprove the ESTABLISHMENT propaganda.

Climatologists are NOT PART OF A CONSPIRACY. They are just like lawyers and experts giving testimony in court: BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. . .

The leaked email in the UK showed what the scumbag climatologists are doing. . . FAKING DATA! for their UN masters! Reducing the amount of energy available to the world is MURDER!

At some point in time when you both clear your minds of foolish absolute thinking, we might have a reasonable discussion.

It's the global warming crowd that is mired in absolute thinking. Established science my ass. "Science" bought and paid for by big oil.

The non-linear equations are modeled on 'supercomputers' which only a few research facilities are equipped with. Where do you obtain such nonsense?

Yeah, theoretically any number of simultaneous differential equations can be soleved by digital methods given enough computer power. . . but this task would far exceed anything attempted here-to-fore. Climate "scientists" have made no such attempt. The initial conditions would basically be the earth and atmosphere in all its complexity. All they are doing so far is plugging fudge factors into models that fail to predict actual temperature changes or lack there of. . .

I did a little research on these guys and their papers have not been peer reviewed.

Peer review means the big money has bought the "group think" outcome. Gallileo was peer reviewed too.

Now...what was that I was saying about not having any sort of model for solar output and giving it one narrow, non-comprehensive value to the sun's output would prove to be a huge problem regarding the predictability of "climate models?"

 

There so much wrong with "climate change models." 1st they don't predict anything. But, why should they? The "scientists" are paid to produce alarmism to feed a world government agenda. Much like lawyers or experts testifying in court; they say what they are paid to say, but are expected to add the technical gloss!

Further, physicists have determined that over 100 simultaneous differential equations would have to be solved to really understand the earth's surface temperature. . . global warming scientists do nothing of the sort. They just model with presumed "factors". . . ABSURD! Not only can't the equations be solved, but no one knows how to establish the initial conditions.

The main thing: We must have and will have WORLD GOVERNMENT. As Rockefeller's banker James Warburg said, "By conquest or consent."

I check-in with Alex Jones' sites periodically as I like to keep multiple hypotheses active in my mind.

However, his concept of "proof" is problematic. For instance, drills are common, so the presence of a drill, though frought with possibilities is not proof. Neither are similar backbacks. Further, he erroneously assumes "media memes" or "buzz" always reflect "orders" from on high rather than the mindless partisan "group think" it usually is. The media, except Fox, is populated by 90%+ democrats as survey after survey has shown. That Democrats in the media hoped and prayed the Bomber would turn-out to be a Tea Party conservative does not necessarily mean the bombing was initially planned to "frame" the Tea Party.

What can't be denied is that the US plays a double game with the Islamic Jihadists world-wide. America supported Jihadists in co-ordination with the Saudis/Muslim Brotherhood in Afghanistan and Kosovo opposing the Russians; Also in Chechen. Now America has used Jihadists in Libya and Syria. In spite of the demonstrated disasterous results of getting in bed with Jihadists, the POLICY CONTINUES!

In my view, ass kissing the Saudis is a Rockefeller / BIG OIL / OPEC policy, not America per se. In fact, the NeoCons and Zionists and others oppose this policy. America is a clash of policies from a range of power groups resulting in chaos. Big Oil is dependent on Saudi co-operation re: oil and thus pressures the US to support or tolerate Saudi sponsored Jihad around the world. Right now, Big Oil and the Saudis have the upper hand via Obama.

As before, this policy of getting in bed with Islamic Jihadists has terrible blowback potential. That the FBI was involved with the Boston Bombers doesn't necessarily mean they helped plan the bombing. They had the impossible task of determining if these Jihadist wackos were "our wackos" for use in Chechen or Syria and/or whether they presented an imminent threat here in America.

Conservatism:

 

Koch Brothers Exposed documentary -- from building up Stalin's empire to buying out the government for creating their own Stalinism in the U.S.

What nonsense! The current Koch Brothers are RADICAL libertarians. Their father liquidated his investments in the Soviet Union and became an inveterate anti-Communist, helping Robert Welch to found the John Birch Society. There is absolutely NOTHING STALINIST about what the Koch Bros. advocate.

The Koch Bros. are fighting the uber ruling class in America: The Rockefellers, Big Oil, OPEC, global warming, environmentalism, etc. The Kochs are "little oil" that want more production: pipelines, drilling, exploration! PROSPERITY!

Check-out who the Rockefeller Bros. Fund and Rockefeller Foundation fund: THE LEFT! The LEFT is bought and paid for to keep prosperity down for OPEC/BIG OIL in the name of the environment!

By the way, there are many brands of conservatism.

One brand of conservatism (NeoConservatism) thinks that all the march to the left, ie. increasing collectivism and departures from laissez-faire, must be accepted fait accompli. This brand only wants to alter the direction of future developments some and create more workable welfare statism or "social democracy."

More radical conservatives and libertarians want to reverse the New Deal and Great Society programs which they see as destructive.

Defining conservatism as mental illness without defining the brand of conservatism you are addressing is just silly leftist propaganda.

Rockefeller conspiracy? Club of Rome conspiracy? Why not throw in the Bilderbergers or Rothschilds while you are at it. Your post offers no proof except your opinion. As for oil prices, the main problem is rampant Wall St. speculation which there is plenty of evidence.

 

The simplistic view of 'supply and demand' misses the point and is only part of a complex system of global economics. I doubt you are an economist and neither am I.

It is easily verifiable that the Rothschilds and Rockefellers plus other ruling class factions and lesser minions have met at the Bilderberger Meetings since the 1950s to discuss and hammer out the very issues we are discussing. What they decide creates the marching orders on these "big picture" issues. Don't be confused because extremists or ideologists you disagree with also focus on these same players. They are right about the players, but have all manner of interpretation that may be right or wrong.

I have studied economics extensively. . . but, there is no reliable consensus in economics. Ya gotta think for yourself!

Speculation cannot be a lasting cause of high prices. Speculation is a game of gambling on future supply and demand. If Obama suddenly revoked all the Presidential orders limiting exploration and drilling on Federal Land and Offshore, the price would tumble the next day due to short selling by speculators. Currently, speculators are gambling, with good reason, that OPEC is here to stay along with restrictive environmentalism and bought and paid for global warming scientists via the UN (just coincidentally on land donated by the Rockefellers at the founding).

His post is entirely based on emotion with no foundation.

Have you studied the Club of Rome? The Rockefeller Foundations? David Rockefeller's AutoBiography? . .No foundation to my thinking? Hardly! Really, it's just a simple application of the supply and demand. Big Oil wants production of oil restricted to keep prices high. Funding environmentalism and global warming propaganda through the UN is how they get the job done.

Meadow's LIMITS to GROWTH was a book, a report on the alleged results of a computer program claiming to simulate the world economy way back in the late 60s or early 70s. It did predict apocalypse and was the basis for the current enviornomentalist paradigm that is strangling the world!

That's what we need: The rise of ANTI-ENVIRONMENTALIST Billionaires to defeat the current environmentalist Billionaires intent on world-wide genocide!