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
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.