OT: Desk Attack

[Mark Fergerson]

Mark Zenier wrote:

In article <pan.2004.11.13.23.42.36.703767@neodruid.org>,
Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:39:02 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:


Ignore Cuatro and get all your papers dumped in the floor ;-)

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/DeskAttack.jpg


Oh, ick. Cats.


Is this a case of "Like Charges Repelling"?

Cats are natural Libertarians.

I think you've got it in one.

I wonder who he "deigns worthy" to service his toxic
effluvia. Oh, right; everybody.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:55:49 +0000, Mark Zenier wrote:

In article <pan.2004.11.13.23.42.36.703767@neodruid.org>,
Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:39:02 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Ignore Cuatro and get all your papers dumped in the floor ;-)

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/DeskAttack.jpg


Oh, ick. Cats.

Is this a case of "Like Charges Repelling"?

Nah, they're the incarnation of distilled Evil. You'd be able
to sense the evil too, if you weren't already in its clutches.

Cats are natural Libertarians.

Absolutely not true, and a horrible insult to Libertarians
everywhere.

Only evil monsters torture their defenseless victims for
their sick perverted pleasure.

Thank you very much.
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:42:53 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Mark Zenier wrote:
In article <pan.2004.11.13.23.42.36.703767@neodruid.org>,
Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:39:02 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:


Ignore Cuatro and get all your papers dumped in the floor ;-)

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/DeskAttack.jpg


Oh, ick. Cats.


Is this a case of "Like Charges Repelling"?

Cats are natural Libertarians.

I think you've got it in one.

I wonder who he "deigns worthy" to service his toxic
effluvia. Oh, right; everybody.

Do you mean, deal with my own shit?

I do, you cat-serf.

Feh.
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:43 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

You just don't get it. You insist on applying _your_
moral and ethical absolutes where they aren't appropriate.
Yet another karmic zit that's building up pressure...

Well, if you can explain where the love is in torture, then
you win the prize, I guess.

Please continue...

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:43 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

It's the unloving intent that I hate.

You just don't get it. You insist on applying _your_
moral and ethical absolutes where they aren't appropriate.
Yet another karmic zit that's building up pressure...

No, I'm noticing loving versus unloving intent. There is one moral
and ethical absolute that I will fight for, to the death if
necessary until spirit either clues up or returns to the void
where unloving intent belongs, and that is that Love is Life,
Life is Better Than Death, and Overriding Free Will is Unloving,
and the True Root Of All Evil.

These are my own personal, inviolate, absolutes. Which also
happen to be in alignment with Mother. Or, with those of
her PIAs that translate to words. Even a freakin' ameba
will run for its life! Why?

And, maybe the most fundamental "moral and ethical absolute"
is, I Am. And I Am Because I Feel. And the rest is play, love,
work, school, whatever you want to call it, and whatever you
want it to be, and calling each other names is just part of
the Big Cosmic Dance Fest. It's a party goin' on, you know,
and I have to let those who want to play rougher than I
like to play, play as rough as they want - but I don't want
their rough play to disrupt my little chamber orchestra.

So let's talk.

Descartes was a dork. You think, therefore you think you exist.
I feel, therefore I _must_ exist. I am the medium in which
thought takes place.

I guess I could go full-on Kozmik, and say that in the long
run none of this matters, because I am on the path to True
Enlighenment, where All That Is Is Love, but interestingly,
that is, in fact, the case right now. (all there is is love,
and love is much bigger than any of us can possibly imagine,
i.e., there's room in it for all those things that we see
but don't like)

I just wanna not hurt any more, and I want nobody else to
ever have to hurt again, unless it's something they've
freely undertaken fully of their own Free Will, like
jumping off a cliff trying to fly or something else stupid.
And I guess the responsibility of deciding what one wants
to do or not lies with the individual. ("Will that hurt?"
"I dunno - try it!" **CRASH** [SILENCE] "Did it hurt?"
[SILENCE] "Welp, he didn't say it hurt!" **CRASH**)

I guess maybe "signing up to get sent off to war" would fit
in that category, but when you get into "go get revenge
for a heinous crime" it gets a little complicated, and
"sitting in an office building minding your own business
when some religious fanatic crashes an airplane into it"
presents a moral dilemma of an entirely different dimension.
But I do claim it's essentially practically indistinguishable
from "sitting in your house minding your own business when some
world leader bent on justice at any costs drops a bomb on it",
from the recipient's POV.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:43 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:24:20 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:


Rich The Philosophizer wrote:


On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:55:49 +0000, Mark Zenier wrote:



In article <pan.2004.11.13.23.42.36.703767@neodruid.org>,
Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote:


On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:39:02 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:



Ignore Cuatro and get all your papers dumped in the floor ;-)

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/DeskAttack.jpg


Oh, ick. Cats.

Is this a case of "Like Charges Repelling"?


Nah, they're the incarnation of distilled Evil. You'd be able
to sense the evil too, if you weren't already in its clutches.



Cats are natural Libertarians.


Absolutely not true, and a horrible insult to Libertarians
everywhere.

Only evil monsters torture their defenseless victims for
their sick perverted pleasure.

How very provincial of you. That's what happens when
"philosophizers" judge other species by their narrow
personal standards.

Cats are _predators_ with finely-honed ancillary
behaviors, one of which is the "torture" you rail about. I
know the concept of predation offends your delicate
sensibilities. Tough.

Not at all. Everybody's got to kill something to eat. How
do you think a lettuce feels being eaten alive?

Every time I ask that question of a vegetarian they go
into total brain lock.

But they kill of necessity, and do it quickly and cleanly.
They don't intentionally prolong the suffering of their
victims, for no apparent purpuse other than their sick
amusement.

You snipped my explanation....

Of course. I didn't like it. IIRC, it was like "practice" or
"training" or something, as they teach their offspring to
"hunt", which still, to me, looks a lot like they're teaching
torture, and not just ordinary innocent hunting.

And yes, I include humans who kill strictly for the thrill
of it, rather than at least trying to rationalize that they're
killing for food. Killing specifically to get a trophy is
pretty much in the same category.

So I'm not singling out cats - they're just such an extreme
example of the bad end of the bad killing/good killing
continuum.

But just because I'm so damned pedantic and arrogant and self-
righteous, here's what I'd snipped, in context:
--------------<re-quote>-----------------
Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:55:49 +0000, Mark Zenier wrote:
Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:39:02 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
Ignore Cuatro and get all your papers dumped in the floor ;-)
http://www.******** [ snipped again because it's just that
cat picture]


Oh, ick. Cats.

Is this a case of "Like Charges Repelling"?

Nah, they're the incarnation of distilled Evil. You'd be able
to sense the evil too, if you weren't already in its clutches.

Cats are natural Libertarians.

Absolutely not true, and a horrible insult to Libertarians
everywhere.

Only evil monsters torture their defenseless victims for
their sick perverted pleasure.

How very provincial of you. That's what happens when
"philosophizers" judge other species by their narrow
personal standards.

Cats are _predators_ with finely-honed ancillary
behaviors, one of which is the "torture" you rail about. I
know the concept of predation offends your delicate
sensibilities. Tough.

What looks like "torture" to you is the cat making sure
the prey is healthy enough to eat. Cats will not eat caught
prey which is unable to attempt to escape. They will walk
away from it rather than chance illness from eating sick prey.

Mark L. Fergerson
---------------</re-quote>----------------------------

Heh! This is even better! They not only torture the weak but
healthy, but while convincing their human shit-shovelers that
it's rationalizable, they parade their insufferable arrogance,
and disdain to eat the ones that Mother Nature has gone to
great lengths to provide for them while minimizing the amount
of harm necessary to keep the worthless things fed. And they
shit all over her anyway.

And don't even get me started on hairballs!

Thanks!
Rich

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:43 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

It's the unloving intent that I hate.


You just don't get it. You insist on applying _your_
moral and ethical absolutes where they aren't appropriate.

Yet another karmic zit that's building up pressure...

No, I'm noticing loving versus unloving intent. There is
one moral
and ethical absolute that I will fight for, to the death if
necessary until spirit either clues up or returns to the void
where unloving intent belongs, and that is that Love is Life,
Life is Better Than Death, and Overriding Free Will is
Unloving,
and the True Root Of All Evil.

I can play on this level too, but I don't like to
capitalize as much as you do. ;&gt

Absolutes have no place in the physical Universe because
it is based on _change_. Love is an absolute in some other
timeless level of existence, but it comes in degrees _when
it's expressed in the timebound "real" world_. Not only
that, but a loving act may well be expressed in a form that
we, with our limited experience and capacity to understand,
looks completely unloving.

Cats (and all other things that exist in the "real"
world") quite sensibly love themselves and their progeny
more than anything else. Hence they do what's best for
themselves, in the sense of ensuring their own survival, the
best way _they know_. Part of their specific constellation
of efforts toward that end is to make sure they're eating
the healthiest possible food. These behaviors evolved over a
very long period of time, and basically, it's just too damn
late to complain about it. We'll get to the mouse's
participation in a bit.

These are my own personal, inviolate, absolutes. Which also
happen to be in alignment with Mother. Or, with those of
her PIAs that translate to words. Even a freakin' ameba
will run for its life! Why?

Why do you ascribe human gender qualities to alleged
entities that have no need of such?

Why will an amoeba "run"? To ensure its survival, of course.

And, maybe the most fundamental "moral and ethical
absolute" is, I Am. And I Am Because I Feel. And the rest is

play, love,

work, school, whatever you want to call it, and whatever you
want it to be, and calling each other names is just part of
the Big Cosmic Dance Fest. It's a party goin' on, you know,
and I have to let those who want to play rougher than I
like to play, play as rough as they want - but I don't want
their rough play to disrupt my little chamber orchestra.

"Feeling" is entirely subjective, and is determined by
the hardware you have with which to feel. You are aware that
"feelings" are mental states strongly influenced by hormonal
activities in organs not subject to mental control, not to
mention, um, chemical modifications of same?

Now consider the "feelings" of other critters. They
usually have entirely different hardware from yours and
simply cannot be expected to have anything resembling a
subjective experience remotely comparable to yours.

You are completely unfairly judging the validity of
another's experiences by your criteria here, Rich,
especially as you haven't taken the trouble to understand
why you use the criteria you do or why others use their own
criteria. Grokking this is absolutely essential if you're
gonna call yourself a philosophizer; _experiential validity
is individual_.

Oh, and what you want _does not matter_ in the Great
Scheme of Things, except as you learn to want less and less
because you learn what's really important, like not
insisting that the entire Universe see things through your
own particular glasses because they just might not be
applicable to all others' timebound circumstances. And that
works both ways. Where the hell do _you_ get off not
accepting others' criteria uncritically? How can you be
absolutely certain they're not more "right" than you are?
You can't; you can only "feel" your way along, and I've
already pointed out the limitations to that.

So let's talk.

Descartes was a dork. You think, therefore you think you
exist.
I feel, therefore I _must_ exist. I am the medium in
which thought takes place.

No, therefore you _feel_ that you exist. Neither position
is sufficient proof of existence, except to the individual
doing the experiencing.

I guess I could go full-on Kozmik, and say that in the long
run none of this matters, because I am on the path to True
Enlighenment, where All That Is Is Love, but interestingly,
that is, in fact, the case right now. (all there is is love,
and love is much bigger than any of us can possibly imagine,
i.e., there's room in it for all those things that we see
but don't like)

Exactly what I tried to tell you above. You won't like
this, but try it on for size anyway, since we haven't gotten
to altruism; you are misinterpreting the mouse's loving act
of giving its body to the cat, thereby helping it hone its
perception of what's good to eat.

I just wanna not hurt any more, and I want nobody else to
ever have to hurt again, unless it's something they've
freely undertaken fully of their own Free Will, like
jumping off a cliff trying to fly or something else stupid.

Now ask the mouse's (whatever's left after the body's
dead) how it feels about helping the cat.

Pain hurts for a very good reason; it lets us know we've
just done something we shouldn't have in personal-survival
terms, but personal survival isn't everything.

Besides, why are you in such a hurry? The Universe has a
few billion years of life left in it, and that's plenty of
time for all of us to learn what we need to.

And I guess the responsibility of deciding what one wants
to do or not lies with the individual. ("Will that hurt?"
"I dunno - try it!" **CRASH** [SILENCE] "Did it hurt?"
[SILENCE] "Welp, he didn't say it hurt!" **CRASH**)

_To the limits of the individual's ability to choose_.

I guess maybe "signing up to get sent off to war" would fit
in that category, but when you get into "go get revenge
for a heinous crime" it gets a little complicated, and
"sitting in an office building minding your own business
when some religious fanatic crashes an airplane into it"
presents a moral dilemma of an entirely different dimension.

I can only speak for myself. When I signed up to go off
to war (thirty-some years ago), I did it because the
survival of those I love that can't fight for themselves is
more important to me than my own, not for imagined revenge.

But I do claim it's essentially practically
indistinguishable from "sitting in your house minding your

own business when some

world leader bent on justice at any costs drops a bomb on
it",
from the recipient's POV.

Apparently, the reason you have trouble with "who started
it" is because you don't want to recognize the timebound
nature of learning. If we knew It All, we wouldn't bother to
keep breathing, nor would we take any note of the squabbles
(learning processes) of those who don't.

Again, don't be in such a hurry. You understand the
wisdom behind the part of the A.A. prayer about not
stressing over things you cannot change? Now realize that
some of those things are none of your business to begin
with. You are neither cat nor mouse; let them work it out by
themselves.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Tim Williams]

"Rich The Philosophizer" <null@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.11.16.04.11.38.586432@neodruid.org...

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:43 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

It's the unloving intent that I hate.

I hate philosophers. They're grown men trying to argue in a way that to the
average person looks educated but is a poor excuse for true scientific
research...

Tim

--
"I've got more trophies than Wayne Gretsky and the Pope combined!"
- Homer Simpson
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:26:02 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

"Feeling" is entirely subjective, and is determined by
the hardware you have with which to feel. You are aware that
"feelings" are mental states strongly influenced by hormonal
activities in organs not subject to mental control, not to
mention, um, chemical modifications of same?

Now consider the "feelings" of other critters. They
usually have entirely different hardware from yours and
simply cannot be expected to have anything resembling a
subjective experience remotely comparable to yours.

Well, here's the rub. "Feelings," as you so cavalierly dismiss
as "mental states", are the magnetic field being experienced,
and expressed, by the very material of which Everything There
Is is made.

Free Will is the fundamental raw material of Creation, and
Desire is the Cause of Existence.

It's just that for all of this time, spirit, which has the
thoughts and the power to withhold itself, has thought that
it was supposed to be calling the shots, and in its arrogance,
has been ignoring the pain that has been caused by the act
of ignoring that which is hurting.

In the beginning All was One, and perfect, and had done
everything and all that, and after an infinite time of
playing with itself, realized it was alone. So it had
many conversations with itself, and other little pockets
of consciousness here and there, and came to the conclusion
that there should be An Other. So, after a few gahooption
millennia of contemplation, All decided to tear itself
in two.

Nothing like this had ever done before. And this was the
point at which it was discovered that Pain Hurts.

But it didn't hurt the two halves equally - or maybe more
accurately, the two halves had one little difference that
has become an imbalance that has resulted in all of the
pain and suffering that we see now.

The half that was more electrically, mentally, spirit
polarized had the ability to "shake it off" - heal
the pain of the wound, and move right on with its
business of "getting to know the other."

The magnetic, feeling, will half didn't get off so
lucky. It doesn't have the ability to "just shake it
off". It gets stuck holding the pain until the Light
of Unconditional Love gets around to noticing it and
healing it.

And all of this is going on while creating all of the
infinite variety that we see around us, every single
component entity of which is suffering from the pain
of the original split.

Spirit has been in the habit of dismissing Will's
pain, and feeling smugly superior, "Well, you're just
as much God as I am, what's wrong with you that you
can't heal yourself like I can?"

Well, that isn't the way reality works.

But no spirit, no electrically-polarized consciousness,
can know this until it undenies its own, living, breathing,
feeling will.

And once you do decide that there is more than one way
of looking at things, the process of opening up your
"eyes" is about as complicated as opening your eyes.

All it takes is intent to be whole.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:26:02 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

You are completely unfairly judging the validity of
another's experiences by your criteria here, Rich,
especially as you haven't taken the trouble to understand
why you use the criteria you do or why others use their own
criteria. Grokking this is absolutely essential if you're
gonna call yourself a philosophizer; _experiential validity
is individual_.

When you feel your own Will, you will know.

Have Fun!
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:38:36 -0600, Tim Williams wrote:

"Rich The Philosophizer" <null@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.11.16.04.11.38.586432@neodruid.org...
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:43 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

It's the unloving intent that I hate.

I hate philosophers. They're grown men trying to argue in a way that to the
average person looks educated but is a poor excuse for true scientific
research...

Oh, if you even knew the half of it.

It's a kind of lonely multidimensional infinite playground out here,
watching all the mundanes in their little boxes, each insisting that
he has "scientific proof" that that's all there is, world without
end, amen.

But when you undeny enough of yourself to actually feel your own
Will, you will know.

Hint - the sound of one hand clapping has nothing to do with
acoustics. =:-O

;^j
Rich

 

[Reg Edwards]

When you feel your own Will, you will know.

=================================

Very interesting but sorry to be so disappointing. Free will is
maginary - there's only Shroedinger's cat.

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:38:36 -0600, Tim Williams wrote:

"Rich The Philosophizer" <null@example.net> wrote in message
newsan.2004.11.16.04.11.38.586432@neodruid.org...
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:43 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

It's the unloving intent that I hate.

I hate philosophers. They're grown men trying to argue in a way that to the
average person looks educated but is a poor excuse for true scientific
research...



You don't even know the meaning of the word "true scientific research".

Hint: it involves not blinding oneself with one's own prejudices.

And, in case you'd care to actually bother to Read The Fucking From Line,
you'd see that I've never claimed to be a "philosopher."

I've simply named this particular homunculus "The Philosophizer", because
I wanted to distinguish myself while playing this role from myself while
being mundane Techie Rich. That political crap has truly torn me
asunder. ;-)

I've got my inner Jack the Ripper pretty much redeemed, but am
still having trouble evolving my Inner Cat. )-;

And my Inner Little Match Girl trusts me not to kill her, but she's
even lonelier than I am. )-;

Thanks!
Rich

 

[Reg Edwards]

Very interesting but sorry to be so disappointing. Free will is
maginary - there's only Shroedinger's cat.

Of course that's all that's true for you. That's because
that's all that you're allowing to exist in your universe.

When you feel your own Will, you will _know_.

Ironically, it's the Will that's real, and the part of you that
thinks it's the only part that's real, is actually the imaginary
part!

You simply haven't learned to see outside your own box yet.

Cheers!
Rich
=============================

Meow!

Cheers!
Reg.

 

[N. Thornton]

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message news:<8k2fp0h3ukql072fcm8p47lsruoq95q42i@4ax.com>...

To the left of my keyboard is a climber with bed-on-top roost. He
presides there most of the time. But if he needs his ears scratched
he often will simply step out and drape himself straight across the
keyboard. He's too big to sit in my lap... he's Burmese and twice the
size of a typical domestic cat.

...Jim Thompson

Cats make us choose between them and the keyboard, in the nicest
posible way. Those who choose wisely enjoy life. Those who choose
unwisely have chosen their discontent themselves.

NT

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:50:40 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

Spirit has been in the habit of dismissing Will's
pain, and feeling smugly superior, "Well, you're just
as much God as I am, what's wrong with you that you
can't heal yourself like I can?"

Well, that isn't the way reality works.

Sure it is. But one half is timebound, and that's why
it holds onto its pain until it figures out how to let go.

Misspoke myself; should have said:

" ...one half is timebound, and that's how it is possible
for it to hold onto its pain until it figures out how to let
go." If it weren't timebound, the possibility wouldn't exist.

This is Original Error.

The Magnetic Essence _can't_ "let go" of _anything_, because
the Magnetic Essence is where everything goes _to_ when the
Electric Essence so easily "lets go" because it doesn't feel
good.

This makes partial sense. But "bad feelings" can be
rephrased as "knots in perception/response mechanisms caused
by misperceiving cause-effect relationships as discrete
events not connected causally to other events". Correctly
identifying the relationships resolves the misperceptions,
and the pain along with it; appropriate responses, if any,
become obvious as you said earlier.

But get this straight; non-timebound entities _cannot_
misperceive cause-effect relationships, because they are
incapable of making past/present/future distinctions. Events
are perceived as part of a continuum, not discretely. Hence
there is no possibility of confusing what's going on; there
is no possibility of making bogus asociations that lead to
bogus attitudes.

The closest thing non-timebounds can feel to what we call
pain is the "anticipation" of watching us timebounds figure
things out, and that's stretching analogies way past the
breaking point.

You're trying to feel something else's pain because you
misidentify what's going on at several apparently unrelated
levels since you're as ill-equipped to properly perceive
what's going on _the same as they are_. It isn't your pain
to feel in the first place, and it's ephemeral for those
involved anyway. Their pitiful little four-bangers are
diligently running their simple programming because that's
all they _can_ do. Don't despise one of them and despair for
the other; that's a bit of bloatware you don't need to run
and which will only cause you more pain.

Did you ever see one of those "robot destruction orgies"
staged by college students, and I mean actual robots
programmed to flame, crush, and otherwise destroy anything
moving within a fenced arena? It's the same exact thing with
cats and mice, and any other predator/prey relationship,
except the latter's programming isn't as obvious and the
survivors get to recursively reprogram themselves.

The "timebound half" has known since before the beginning of
time "how to let go", and that is for the free half to do
its job of giving unconditional loving acceptance to whatever
the timebound half is _feeling_, to bring the needed
understanding
and healing of the gap.

Which cannot happen until it first lets go of its
habitual misperceptions. But so far, they've provided a
small measure of relief from the original pain of separation.

Spirit has been shirking its responsibility, but that's OK -
the supervisory part of Spirit has clued up and is healing
all of the essence that wants to be healed as fast as the
judgememts and guilt and denial can get shaken out of our
magnetic energy field, kinda like rubbing the crinkles out
of your eyes when you first wake up, stretching and
scratching,
and - oops - first thing in the morning - better take a leak!

Yup. Get your priorities in order; resolve your own
pain(s) and cause as few new ones for others as possible.
Leave others to do the same at their own pace.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:21:49 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Yup. Get your priorities in order; resolve your own
pain(s) and cause as few new ones for others as possible.
Leave others to do the same at their own pace.

You are getting close, but there are beings who are experiencing
the feeling of being at the bottom of a well with no way out.
He cries for help, and all the blessed ones walk by and yell
down at him, "Just pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like
we did."

That just does not work, has never worked, and never will. And
every time it happens, it exacerbates the problem. She gets
buried that much deeper. On top of all the shit that she got
buried under that you left behind so that the part of you that
thinks it's the only part, could lift out and not feel the pain
that it itself has caused.

And the being at the bottom of that well is the part of yourself
that you have cut off from your perceptions - you've hypnotized
yourself into ignoring the pain, and have successfully convinced
yourself that their pain is either imaginary, their own fault,
or something that they'll figure out how to get out of.

They KNOW how to get out of it! Your timeless self has to dive
down to the bottom of the well and rescue her, and levitate her
out with you just like you did with your mental half.

If you were walking by a physical well, and you heard the cries
of a drowning child, "Help me! please?" would you just yell down,
"Well, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like we did?"

Well, that's exactly what you're doing to the only part of you
that can experience anything as anything other than pretty
pictures.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:21:49 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Yup. Get your priorities in order; resolve your own
pain(s) and cause as few new ones for others as possible.
Leave others to do the same at their own pace.

You are getting close, but there are beings who are experiencing
the feeling of being at the bottom of a well with no way out.
He cries for help, and all the blessed ones walk by and yell
down at him, "Just pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like
we did."

<gently, not stridently>

So are you and I. The well has no bottom or top.
"Blessedness" is relative...

That just does not work, has never worked, and never will. And
every time it happens, it exacerbates the problem. She gets
buried that much deeper. On top of all the shit that she got
buried under that you left behind so that the part of you that
thinks it's the only part, could lift out and not feel the pain
that it itself has caused.

You still cannot feel another's pain. That's a horribly
wasteful illusion.

And the being at the bottom of that well is the part of yourself
that you have cut off from your perceptions - you've hypnotized
yourself into ignoring the pain, and have successfully convinced
yourself that their pain is either imaginary, their own fault,
or something that they'll figure out how to get out of.

Others "above" you in the well have no business messing
with yours either.

They KNOW how to get out of it! Your timeless self has to dive
down to the bottom of the well and rescue her, and levitate her
out with you just like you did with your mental half.

No. That wastes the entire exercise.

If you were walking by a physical well, and you heard the cries
of a drowning child, "Help me! please?" would you just yell down,
"Well, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like we did?"

Bogus analogy, and you know it.

There are billions of microorganisms dying horribly in
your gut right now. Why don't you help them?

Well, that's exactly what you're doing to the only part of you
that can experience anything as anything other than pretty
pictures.

And deny them the benefits of learning what they
needed/signed up to/have to learn?

Why are they alive in the first place?

Why are you? Do you really want The End Of The Story
handed to you on a platinum platter?

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 19:57:08 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:21:49 -0700, Mark Fergerson wrote:

Yup. Get your priorities in order; resolve your own
pain(s) and cause as few new ones for others as possible.
Leave others to do the same at their own pace.

You are getting close, but there are beings who are experiencing
the feeling of being at the bottom of a well with no way out.
He cries for help, and all the blessed ones walk by and yell
down at him, "Just pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like
we did."

gently, not stridently

So are you and I. The well has no bottom or top.
"Blessedness" is relative...

Not to the guy at the bottom of the well. "Blessedness" means not
drowning.

That just does not work, has never worked, and never will. And
every time it happens, it exacerbates the problem. She gets
buried that much deeper. On top of all the shit that she got
buried under that you left behind so that the part of you that
thinks it's the only part, could lift out and not feel the pain
that it itself has caused.

You still cannot feel another's pain. That's a horribly
wasteful illusion.

DOOOOOOOD!!!!

I am here to tell you, I Feel Them ALL! That's the point of this
whole exercise! What you feel is the _only_ reality there is!

And all pain really is One. I _know_, because I _am_ it! just in
human form, trying to bear a message to the linears and mundanes.

And the being at the bottom of that well is the part of yourself
that you have cut off from your perceptions - you've hypnotized
yourself into ignoring the pain, and have successfully convinced
yourself that their pain is either imaginary, their own fault,
or something that they'll figure out how to get out of.

Others "above" you in the well have no business messing
with yours either.

But each of us has our _own_ Light Being, which needs to clue up,
and find our own personal rope. The whole Grand Quest is simply
each of us trying to find our other part.

I am The Lucky One - I got my Higher Being's attention, while
staying connected to Mother. But there's so many people that still don't
even know about the gap, let alone want to bridge it. They think that the
fragment that talks and visualizes and rejects feelings is the only
fragment of them that's real. Almost the opposite is true. And it's so
fucking easy to get to the other side, that it'd be laughable if it wasn't
so fucking tragic. All you have to do is unjudge. Undeny. Feel. Be.

They KNOW how to get out of it! Your timeless self has to dive
down to the bottom of the well and rescue her, and levitate her
out with you just like you did with your mental half.

No. That wastes the entire exercise.

Ach! Please unjudge this, Thanks.

If you were walking by a physical well, and you heard the cries
of a drowning child, "Help me! please?" would you just yell down,
"Well, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like we did?"

Bogus analogy, and you know it.

Wrong! Your _judgement_ of it as bogus is prima facie evidence that you
are in the grip of the most insidious meme of all.

There are billions of microorganisms dying horribly in
your gut right now. Why don't you help them?

There are no microorganisms dying horribly in _my_ gut. It's the ones
dying horribly in _your_ gut that concern me. ;-)

Which, of course, is none of my business - it is, after all, each person's
choice as to whether they'd like to learn how to not die or not.

Well, that's exactly what you're doing to the
only part of you

that can

experience anything as anything other than pretty pictures.

And deny them the benefits of learning what they
needed/signed up to/have to learn?

The deepest part has known it since before the beginning of time.
The learning is supposed to be for the electric, mobile, conscious,
intelligent, spirit/mind half - and it's only recently come to light
that spirit causes all of the problems, and will/body has been taking
all the knocks unfairly for all of this long time.

Well, the times, they are a-changin'. :=P

Why are they alive in the first place?

My intestinal flora? To make farts, of course.

Why are you?

Why am I what? Alive? I'm a messenger from Mother.

Do you really want The End Of The Story
handed to you on a platinum platter?

Yes, of course - now that I know that the end of the story is Infinite
Love.

;^j
Rich

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:55:49 +0000, Mark Zenier wrote:


In article <pan.2004.11.13.23.42.36.703767@neodruid.org>,
Rich The Philosophizer <null@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:39:02 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:


Ignore Cuatro and get all your papers dumped in the floor ;-)

http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/DeskAttack.jpg


Oh, ick. Cats.

Is this a case of "Like Charges Repelling"?


Nah, they're the incarnation of distilled Evil. You'd be able
to sense the evil too, if you weren't already in its clutches.


Cats are natural Libertarians.


Absolutely not true, and a horrible insult to Libertarians
everywhere.

Only evil monsters torture their defenseless victims for
their sick perverted pleasure.

How very provincial of you. That's what happens when
"philosophizers" judge other species by their narrow
personal standards.

Cats are _predators_ with finely-honed ancillary
behaviors, one of which is the "torture" you rail about. I
know the concept of predation offends your delicate
sensibilities. Tough.

What looks like "torture" to you is the cat making sure
the prey is healthy enough to eat. Cats will not eat caught
prey which is unable to attempt to escape. They will walk
away from it rather than chance illness from eating sick prey.

Mark L. Fergerson