The Illuminati in Saudi Arabia

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: redletter

Isn't it possible that the Bible and Christianity has been heavily influenced and/or altered by these "occult" ideas? Nothing is infallible in this world.

Every religion has been altered. Look at what happened to Catholicism in the past 20 years, now known for being a haven for pedophiles rather than a place of worship.

a reply to: Skyfloating

Bunch of psychopaths these people.

The mind is nothing more than a system of knowledge. Knowledges in turn associate with cultures (humans who share common value-relations) and these cultures more or less enforce a fairly rigid relationship to other knowledges.

The best thing a person could do, in my opinion, is read as widely as possible - particularly in the neurosciences, experimental psychology, developmental psychology, relational and interpersonal psychoanalysis - before the religious perspective takes you over and holds your mind captive to beliefs and views that are either a) overly assertive and therefore credulous, or b) under assertive, not even appreciating certain facts which can be known and treated as 'justifiable knowledge'.

To me, the most alarminf thing about modern science is how utterly relational everything is. The mind is literally an 'enfolded' structure which embodies from the get-go the qualities of interpersonal interaction.

The thing about conspiracy theories, and in particular, the thing about trauma, is that it never goes away: how can it? You're brain is holonimic storage system; storing experiences, but not just any kind or in any way; there is a dynamical thread running from the tactile and thermoregualtory experiences of infant with mother, to the visual, auditory and eventually psycholinguistic connections with a growing semiotic environment. There is continuity.

This means that only someone deeply damaged at the brainstem level, with a hyper-activated noradrenergic control on experience so that whenever a possible symmetrical interaction is about to occur, the amygdala fires off, mediating the 'visceral disgust' feeling that we feel when a past object has traumatized us i.e. produced exactly this sort of effect.

In short, I am deeply, deeply untrusting of contemporary religions, for a very profound and good reason: they are in dialectical tension with one another: Judaism from Near East religions; Democratic though in Greece with Greco Aristocratic mystery cults; Buddhism with the Hindu Brahmic, Noble caste system. If you understand dynamic systems theory, what you have here is a 'dynamical tension' between one perturbing dynamic (the oppression of cities/societies) and the attempt by humans to get away: Judaism, Buddhism, medieval Scholasticism, Islam - all seek to TRANSCEND - which necessarily implies that "this world" is a BAD WORLD!

I'm sorry, but that is just downright reflexive and unaware. It's not there fault: the power of scaling up human thinking, and turning knowledge-making into a project in itself (science) takes time to grow, and works much more strenuously and for the most part, humbly, than the mystic would. A huge idea that the sciences produce was this: the human being is WISHFUL. 20th century psychology has expanded this idea so that normal animal behavior occurs in the human mind: negative feelings that are consciously known become threatening objects that activate the threat-response systems of the brain. The reflexive response is to suppress the object, and with time, this suppression mechanism is 'forgotten' because the basal ganglia work just like this: what is conscious can become 'automatic', freeing the conscious mind for other matters. In effect, this suppression -> dissociation dynamic grows into a tangled web of reflexive idealizations, because suppression of negative is not sufficient: we also posit something 'good' and 'feels better' to dissociate ourselves from the threatening internal object.

Why I am talking about this? Because this thread is a bit strange. Are you pro-Illuminati Skyfloating? Are you anti-illuminati? Do you see the illuminati as being composed of 'seriously competent' people, or a bunch of religious fanatics who think they have a coherent grasp of reality, but more or less torture themselves in a way that probably refers back to see early life traumata, and/or, to a life of pampering and entitlement which was canalized and directed by scripts such as "you are a god" - all this stuff is real and it describes Saudi royalty as much as it does Donald Trump. Add weird pythagorean and other pagan mysticisms and you get the 'trauma' part: any person who dares to believe he is 'above' nature will more or less suffer from the asymmetry dynamics that fairly easily follow from misrepresenting reality in such perverse ways - you come to hate people, goodness, beauty, value, more or less anything that reminds you of thinking, or teh 'representation of representation' - with the latter being feeling, which in turn is a representation of unconscious brain activity 'sensing into' the world outside of us.

These people, in short, are stuck in a way of thinking taht can be understood far more parsimoniously - the idea that 'don't suppose more than is necessary' - and good lord, Judaism, Hinduism and Pythagoreanism assume SO FREAKING MUCH! And to make matters so much worse, they don't seem to get that these horrid feelings of theirs are related to actions against others; and that actions against others acts as 'entropy' for affective functioning i.e. stimulating guilt. Thinking, especially metaphysical thinking, then becomes torturous, and at this point, even more desperate efforts are made to 'regulate' experience. Ironically, its as if 'doing evil', or being in opposition to nature, becomes a source of pleasure; but could such a weirdness be possible without other humans believing the same thing?

The principle of parsimony would say: this is a symmetry dynamic between self and other in interaction. Since humans in interaction mutually enliven one another, this makes much sense. But remove the human from affiliation and attachment, and they get depressed etc, and they come to think that they need to become 'more at one' with their archetype of choice. Archetypes certainly exist, but the notion taht teh self exists, even after death, makes me chuckle: clearly, something - the archetype - will say anything (just as you would - so why get mad?) just to produce an effect. The geni reflects the wishes of the wisher; the geni is nothing more tnan that 'divizined other' - that consciously held value; a god it is not - although humans have long thought of these things in this way.

Buddhism has a healthy attitude - a penchant for parsimony that few religious views have. It is pragmatic - but, as for the Dalai Lama, modern science has the same sort of spirit and attitude, and so he very much wants to integrate science into buddhist education in Tibet.

These mystery cults and the fantasies they produce ad nauseum - to interact with it is to expose yourself to another culture - a very bizarre and epistemologically arrogant one. So much has been thought; so much has been averred. So why not assume that perceptions in altered-states of consciousness aren't simply self-organizing dynamics around a particular existential feeling produced by an UNCONSCIOUS contrast between an early forming self-other dynamic, and as a fractal, has been there as the unconscious 'template' for mentalization processes in adulthood.

I do believe a collective unconscious exists - a mind that has all the thoughts and the affects they formed from.

What is happening today, in my estimation, is simply a mass psychosis - a depressive, world-hating, traumatic affect perception in which cognitive processes are driven to denounce life and denounce existence.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
With regards to one eyed symbolism in Islamic culture:

Thank you for responding to all the threads questions about one-eye symbolism in one excellent post.

originally posted by: Astrocyte

Why I am talking about this? Because this thread is a bit strange. Are you pro-Illuminati Skyfloating? Are you anti-illuminati? Do you see the illuminati as being composed of 'seriously competent' people, or a bunch of religious fanatics who think they have a coherent grasp of reality, but more or less torture themselves in a way that probably refers back to see early life traumata, and/or, to a life of pampering and entitlement which was canalized and directed by scripts such as "you are a god"

I am pro transcending psychopathic and secretive "leadership" on this planet.

a reply to: Skyfloating

How would you suggest we go about doing that?

When you think of someone like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren - I can see them getting a bullet in their brain before they be allowed to dismantle the secretive banking system, corporate dominance and the military industrial complex.

Would logic persuade them? Would a really good, logical and sound book explaining their situation change?

Aye...This is where the "traumatize the public" in a really social way - reminding me of Jung's suggestion in his book "Aion", that such a collective ordeal would be like a 'collective therapy'.

While trauma can be a very effective goad, it is arrogant and insane to insist that 'this is the best way' to develop human beings. Far more people die - fall through the cracks, than 'ascend'. Their existence SHOULD matter, but when you think in such disembodied ways, Karl Popper (who I think was very level-headed) and his idea of piecemeal progress no long matters. Although people could be supported in their growth, instead, we have these deranged psychopaths literally engineering the third world war right in front of us, at a time when the climate and the planets homeostasis is severely compromised, such that the possibility of using nuclear bombs and the effect that will have on the climate almost certainly condemns the human race to a future where the cryosphere - something necessary for temperature stabilization - no long exists, at which point, other positive feedback loops may come into effect, and the idea of Earth growing too hot becomes a real possibility.

a reply to: MountainLaurel

Here's my stab at the symbolism of the Kaaba.

The Kaaba is a perfect black square. Around the square is a desert. Interpretation: the desert is the experience of trauma - the 'voyage' towards 'losing' any earthly attachments (and so believes itself to be 'above good and evil', as per Nietzsche, Pythagoreanism, and all the way back to Zoroaster; this is why Islam and Christianity have more in common than usually suspected). The black square is the underlying implicit idealization: nature with its fractal geometries is 'evil', whereas the human mind (falsely imagined as differently organized from nature) and its rampant idealizing - hence the perfect cube - is the "new world" to be created by these "masterful adepts of hidden wisdom".

Now, of course, this is profoundly impossible, and clearly grist for psychoanalytic interpretation. But is it surprising? Why would the history of the two crusading (against other humans) religions not refer back to a common noxious ideology? This is the burden of the elite: they've inherited a deranged belief system that clearly is an emergent property of the long evolution of cities, and the effect it has had on human meaning-systems.

a reply to: Skyfloating

Dajjal looks a bit like Odin.

Seriously, there is such a nice and tidy naturalistic explanation for all of this gobbled-gook. Shamanism and the ethics of the shaman apparently has played a huge role in the organization of cities.

Current anthropology supports the view that towns didn't begin on an evil note; but by the time cities formally emerged, there is a great deal of iconography that seems to clearly refer to rather 'evil' stuff; the reptile, for instance, is an archetype associated with threat, and in Eridu, we find quite a few of these figurines in burial sites (yikes!).

a reply to: muzzleflash

You know you can be blinded by the light?

originally posted by: Astrocyte
a reply to: Skyfloating

How would you suggest we go about doing that?

Mass awareness of psychopathic leadership. New types of positive therapies.

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: muzzleflash

You know you can be blinded by the light?

Physical reality is an illusion of the senses. It is not concrete - change is the only constant.

Therefore it is your eyes that decieve you.

The invisible Spirit is everywhere but your eyes see not.

However the Light has blinded me so therefore -

a reply to: CreationBro

I'm guessing nature 'destroys' at the same time that it heals - yes? I'm referring to whatever happens with their "observer cognition". They appear to believe that they have a complete power over their inner experience.

I only wish I could show them brain scans that show differently; "see, the information is still there; what enters your consciousness is what you idealize".

Take away a brain, and the pathways and processes that make your experience of you, "you", and it confounds me what you will have to defend yourself against what you've spent your life creating. There would appear to be no defense for this level of consciousness, which more or less implies that not knowing how the brain works - its simplistic, generalizing pinkish-grey mass appearance - means you don't know or recognize what sort of complex highways of information processing builds your experience. Neuroscience makes all of this wishfulness about "life after death" look more and more unlikely - and more likely, as it appears to be, a mere defense mechanism against traumatic feelings. A "positing" of something better to make you feel better.

Everyone who needs the same ways they need are at risk of employing the same unconscious defense mechanism: accepting what sound stupid and wishful, and taking a risk that, on closer inspection, is about as sane as jumping off the Burj Dubai in a lead suit and expecting to fly away.

Its a bit amazing that life allows so much delusion. "Being wrong", as they say, can feel good. But it is a maniacal state of perception.

Here's the 85 year old CG Jung commenting on the excesses of his youth:

“Best thanks for the quotation from that accursed correspondence. For me it is an unfortunately inexpungable reminder of the incredible folly that filled the days of my youth. The journey from cloud-cuckoo-land back to reality lasted a long time. In my case Pilgrims Progress consisted in my having to climb down a thousand ladders until I could reach out my hand to the little clod of Earth that I am.” – Jung, C.G, Letters, Volume 1: 1906-1950, Gerard Adler (ed.) R.F.C.Hull (trans).Princeton New Jersey: Princeton University Press, taken from: Ladson Hinton, Hessel Willemsen, Temporality and Shame: Perspective from Psychoanalysis and Philosophy; pg. 7, Routledge, 2017

I wonder how many fans of Jung's early writing realize that he more or less denounced a large part of his earlier work as deeply idealistic i.e. unreal, and therefore, unhelpful?

a reply to: Skyfloating


Ooh, I agree.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Its actually precisely the reverse.

The mind is a function of energy interactions between objects in the physical world. The mind 'arises' from it, like a mist from the water.

Therefore the physical world is profoundly real - way more real than what occurs in your mind. In fact, the best way to maintain sanity would be to compare an experience you're having against what's known about whatever it is you've just previously done. So, if I feel bad, and have been drinking 36 ounces of coffee and no water, my negative feelings are related to that. If I ignore this, and allow whatever that pops up in my head to distract me, I am literally treating an unreal byproduct of something else (coffee, dehydration) as the thing that really bothers me.

This example shows how the mind is dependent on the body. You can't eat just anything; you can't just avoid sleep; you can't harm your body - and yet these are all thing that some fake spiritualities prescribe as "good".

All they teach is that the brain can be constructed to create the illusion of being "beyond the body". But good lord, how wrong they are about how these things actually work!

a reply to: Skyfloating

That link was a lead in, as if you start with Hempher
some will dismiss it out of hand as unproven, or fake.

The real story is that an Iraqi officer believed
it as do many. Makes you wonder what is really
going on....

Here is a link to that end, and this is the real deal.
a classified Iraq document

fas.org...

a reply to: burntheships

Written by Iraqi Intelligence. I browsed through it, it looks amazing. Thank you. I had no doubt that Wahabism was planted there as a tool of oppression but its the first time I see a Government document to back up the hunch.

a reply to: Astrocyte

So you disagree with Descartes famous revelation "I think therefore I am", and instead believe it is "I am therefore I think".

Fascinating.

How do you explain quantum entanglement in your world view than? How do you explain the double slit or psychic phenomena or ghosts?

Although your view seems logically true at first - the problem arises when you attempt to explain things in terms of physics and metaphysics.

There is a long tradition of many centuries of debate over this distinction and the view you espouse and I hope you have been studying it.

a reply to: Astrocyte

As someone with a degree in psych and a lifelong interest in basically everything you listed I agree. But... I have personally been helped more in these areas by studying symbolism, mystery schools, kabbalah and tarot. Our current social sciences are disgustingly pitiful compared to knowledge ancients literally had (received?).

a reply to: ShamnaOahu

So because nature self-organize's dualistically, the human being should as well? So when you say the 'square' builds the physical world, whereas the spirit is the 'compass', that somehow grants you the right to behave in ways that, like nature, is 'beyond good and evil'?

It's a weird little fantasy, freemasonry. Humans with the same sorts of issues can persuade one another of all sorts of things: same issue, same solution. Makes sense...

In short, you could never enter a state high enough to put you beyond the reach of an evil action against another human. I am not you and you are not me - relatively speaking. But the person who reasons from the ultiamte position - "we're all the same", is baited into the epistemological buffoonery of thinking that anything could justify hurting another person.

You're not me; I'm not you. I would never want to know the experience of a person with major depression or the struggles and pains that put them there. I trust that it's traumatic; I don't need to pretend to believe that I coud "be it". It's because there is such an intrinsic gulf between selves in this hyper-complex world of ours that it is insane to assume a vantage point that you couldn't possibly have - or rather, could possibly tolerate having.

For instance, compassionate people feel good precisely because their minds are more other focused than self focused. Yet how many spiritualities profess the opposite: only the self, love for the self, etc for the self, with scant mention of the actual moral dynamics of relating with other people i.e. how we psychodynamically affect one another.

a reply to: muzzleflash

There is no problem at physics or metaphysics. But if you want to flesh out my view at the physical level, here it is:

The world of our mind is perched on what Stuart Kauffman calls the "poised realm"; it lies between "res potential" and "res extesna".

These two terms mean "potential" and "reality". When you think, you CANNOT, as a neurological impossibility, reason without down-up input from your body's physiological and biodynamical homeostasis processes.

This means every thought is a MOTIVATED thought. Res Extensa is very much MAKING you whether you like it or not.

As for the 'lightness' of thought. Descartes like anyone else who believes this way evidently is dealing with a dissociative disorder i.e. past traumatic experiences which have forced the brain to self-organize in a way so that visceral and hoemostatic information is 'minimized' - but not excluded. Experimental psychology shows how full of # humans are - and it applies to the yogi and mystic as much as anyone else.

originally posted by: Prisoner60863
They say the dijjal has one eye. Makes me think of all those in Hollywood and music who pose with one eye.

That's EXACTLY what that is a reference to.