It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Gnostic Delusion

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 11:46 AM
link   
I think one of the genuinely most astonishing traits of human beings - and this is not quite their fault given our sensitivities - is that we pathologically confuse social convention with ontological reality. These are not the same thing, yet their effects are carried out within the same medium - our 'brain-mind'.

How many people live a life of wanting to be 'a hero' in their own 'story'? How many people genuinely believe that they are at the tip of the ontological pyramid of their existence, and not reality itself? How many people ignore massive facts like 1) development 2) evolution and 3) the very concept of process? How many people ignore that process creates 4) structure, and such a structure is not a coincidence, but a reflection of causal laws - which is to say, reflects true ontological reality (ontology means metaphysics, or 'ultimate reality')

When someone gets fangs and dresses up as a cosplay character, what motivates this behavior - besides garden variety psychopathology? Oftentimes there are occult beliefs, which have this one concept at its root: I am the king/queen of my experience of reality.

From whence does this profound delusion emanate? There are many powerful factors, but at the top of the pyramid is 1) how humans mutually affect one anothers perception of reality, and hence, make certain values seem real by how they affect you; these values also have a long history, so the person is 2) deeply impressed, or wooed, by the 'ancientness' of a doctrine. They confuse ancientness, or age, with eternal. Clearly, the evolutionary i.e. archeological, record of human beings is varied, and complex, and shows many different ways of being that are fundamentally correlated to ecology. You are an expression of an ecology. There are no archetypes that precede human existence. They are emergent from our participatory sense making with one another.

So there was once a time, then, when this massive delusion didn't exist, where people didn't equate existence with suffering, and certainly would not have gotten carried away to think that there was any fundamental correlation between existence and suffering.

Yet this is the basic belief of many gnostics. Spirit = spirit and matter = matter. Above the hips "im angelic", and below the hips "I'm demonic". There's a logic to this claim, but it is not an ontological truth i.e. consistent with a complex analysis of causal processes and the effects they create for psychological experience and ones phenomenological experience of being. People accept these claims only because other people believe them as well, and to be a part of a group brings coherency to people.

It's because of this that death can bring not the angelic fortitude of overcoming the 'evil archons', but quite the reverse; dissociation is stripped away because the canalizing functions of your brain networks are taken away. The delusion is stripped because you are no longer in control i.e. you can't direct your own experience through dissociation/idealization anymore. The ecology of spirit takes over.

So where do these beliefs derive their authority from? Dissociation. Dissociation is a bottom-up brain based process which organizes from the brainstem, anesthetizing experience so that external events no longer have their usual 'oomph'. Depersonalization (loss of ones experience of being a person and self in relation to other persons and selves) and derealization (loss of the sense of 'solidity' to reality). Dissociation is fundamentally about self-protection, and so its a defense mechanism in relation to external events. This is the evolutionary and developmental basis of this process, which, if its to be appreciated and understood properly, should take priority to all other considerations.

But this is not going to 'fit' with many people's experience, because according to them, the material world is a 'shadow' of a 'truer' realm. This is where we get into mysticism, and ultimately, into concepts like 'spirits' and 'psychic' powers. A particular goof that reality plays on us is making us think that there are two realms - a spiritual realm and a material realm; but for many very well educated people, this dualism is fundamentally incoherent, as reality is only controlled by one principle - symmetry, and symmetry is expressed in a spatiotemporally extended manner, so that things change and transform in a sort of complementary relationship with asymmetry - but the 'difference' is not equivalent: symmetry is more primary than asymmetry. To summarize so far: reality is structurally a function of 1) symmetry, and this is symmetry is expressed through 2) processes of transformation, which creates 3) ephemeral structures. Since in evolution, 'matter' precedes 'mind', a coherent understanding of mind necessarily derives from tracking the way it evolved in animals, and therefore, recognizing the way genetic constraints preconfigure our behavioral systems to know the world in ways that precede our consciousness i.e. as infants, we need certain things. But if these thigns aren't present, our brains are taught via intense neuroplasticity to seek the same meanings that those around us are imposing on us. Hence, social convention creates utter confusion for human beings, leading to delusional beliefs of being 'gods', when in fact, and will one day no doubt be learned, you are a subsystem of a much grander, much more amazing mega-system i.e. the universe. And you do not program it - it - its laws, make possible what you experience.

It is the acme of arrogance that humans could look at the world and have such little reverence or awe for its sheer size. But this is what metaphors do: social asymmetry creates elitism, elitism creates a hyper egocentricity, which makes people think the self is everything, which makes them think that even the universe is a function of a higher 'human self'...Isn't it obvious that the imperialistic cultures, or even the chieftains, would necessarily posit these beliefs, given their life-ways are fundamentally inconsistent with the truth of the universe?

So what does my depressing and sorrowful analysis ultimately mean for the gnostic who wants to believe lies - so long as it means more fun and power as long as they live? Will ignorance 'win the day', as Basilides taught? Or will knowledge 'teach' the individual that, they have merely been ignoring the primacy of social interactions and the way others affect us - such a trite and obvious thing which the megalomaniacal have structural difficulties recognizing?

Well, for me at least, it means a lot to give gifts - to those new people, children, infants, others, who can be positively structured by your relationships to them, so that reality will not appear in the painful way as it seems for the dualist who thinks he has found an "alienated" Godhead perspective which will forever protect him from what he dissociates from in self-protection. The 'allo-centric' or 'other-focus', to me, is a beautiful paradox: if you want to make reality better, start with the other, and only afterwards will you be rewarded i.e. be treated in a similar way. This means that although I may do this because I want to help myself, I also experience a great deal of joy and peace being able to bring goodness and joy - an experience of being so unlike the one I was born into - into the lives of other humans.




posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I prove through my actions that there is no light vs. darkness, nor is the physical world some evil delusion of a truer 'light realm'. Rather, reality is fixed yet changing; nature is real in its habits, and so am I, and humanity, in our ability to co-participate in its structuring. There is no antithesis between it and I - but I, and my species, are out of sync with IT - and hence, we keep seeing ourselves as existing in some sort of opposition with it, not recognizing that we are regurgitating metaphors from our own social development, where other humans were against us which made us feel like our body was against us. So naturally, the universe is against us. This is nothing but a repeating metaphor deriving from a structural duality, or complementarity, between self and other, reflection and prereflection, and being in the universe.

It is amazing how obscene humans can be - how pathetically bad their reasoning can be. They reify, or 'hypostasize', what is dynamical - what is changing - and what WILL change for you when the conditions are right.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

Congratulations you could be the next Charlie Manson!





posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

There is reason in what you say, and that is good. However, blaming whole ideology for being "inaccurate", with such a vague thesis like yours, can't be accepted seriously. That's as much I can add to the topic, my English is not as good to be able go on debating upon phrases like "spatiotemporally extended manner", so I'll have to leave further comments for the knowledgeable ones.



posted on Sep, 2 2019 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

There is no good or bad.
There just is.

I have heard this before and it makes sense.
Too bad we humans can screw up anything.
Especially if it's simple.





posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte




When someone gets fangs and dresses up as a cosplay character, what motivates this behavior - besides garden variety psychopathology?


And ...how is cosplay different than the office worker who wishes they were a mechanic, or a gardener working outdoors?

Psychopathology?...I think not.




It is the acme of arrogance that humans could look at the world and have such little reverence or awe for its sheer size.


Is it that prevalent? Who are these humans you generalize about? Why should we accept your reductionism



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Egoismyname

The OP/writer does this often, equating ills of the world run through the lens of whatever his reading is focused on for that particular day.



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Garden variety psychopathology?
I don't like the way that tomato is looking at me.
Gotta go now. My Archons are itching.

edit on 3-9-2019 by Homefree because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

I think that through sharing experiences online, such as here on ATS that we, conversely (as to your take on it), prove reality through epistomology (rationalism).

onto- (nail) vs. epi- (hammer); some onto- can look like a hammer.

super-, pre- (above, before) vs. hypo (under, below) - precognitions of supersymmetry - as above, so below, hypothetical?




“The only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing.” Socrates







edit on 19CDT11America/Chicago045111130 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2019 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: Astrocyte

I think that through sharing experiences online, such as here on ATS that we, conversely (as to your take on it), prove reality through epistomology (rationalism).

onto- (nail) vs. epi- (hammer); some onto- can look like a hammer.

super-, pre- (above, before) vs. hypo (under, below) - precognitions of supersymmetry - as above, so below, hypothetical?




“The only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing.” Socrates






Who pisted on my dog?
His name is 'Mology.?



posted on Sep, 5 2019 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I understand the universe and "reality" basically through two sources: 1) personal experience, and 2) information presented to me through various social filters. Neither one of these is inherently more "accurate" than the other. My senses can be fooled, and the authorities from whom I receive my other information could be mistaken, lying or just plain wrong, or I could misinterpret the information presented to me. That's why the tendency among most people is to go by consensus and follow the laws. It's easier. If you go around referencing a different reality -- even though it might be arguably more accurate than the consensus -- there's a good chance you'll end up in jail, drugged out of your mind, or in an asylum.

Now, maybe it's not possible for me to change reality as it is loosely defined by society. However, I know for a fact that it's possible for me to change my interpretation of what my senses are seeing and what people are telling me is real. And because reality doesn't exist without me experiencing and interpreting it, that means I sure as hell can change reality just as if I were a god. And when I die, the universe will vanish forever because I won't be here to perceive it. There won't be any more "here."

Anyway, an entire universe disappearing when I die? That sounds pretty godlike to me.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 12:34 AM
link   
People are always trying to do things because they will feel good.. the concept of the pleasure principle or otherwise plaeboholder.. is within a brane.. much like the http:webpage.. myspace and facebook.. are all like ideas within the metal of time.. the metal of nickelback.. each and everyone holds onto something... but its when you let it go that you have the faith to carry over to emptiness.. and nothingness inside the manes of time!



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:12 AM
link   
It seems you can't save or help those who are already constructed in the shape of the delusion.

The mind is your brain. Your consciousness cannot be anything other than all those ecological elements which have shaped it.

We're you molested as a child? Did your parents beat you? We're you bullied?

Since the brain is shaped from utero, onwards, your experience of being becomes whatever was impinged upon you.

As an animal, you defend yourself, so your brain shrinks and shapes itself to accommodate the social world around it.

Gnosticism is essentially the end product of a traumatized mind and society. It is the uttermost acme of confusion: nothing a human being is can be more thoroughly perverted than to believe that 'nothing matters'. If you can think about these things in materialistic terms (which does not imply that consciousness isn't real or causally significant, only that its structure is fundamentally a product of material processes), symmetry shaped you: if you weren't given love, you have to shape yourself to make yourself whatever it was that your environment rewarded, so your "prereflective", i.e. affective, implicit, embodied, and 'feeling-of-being-in-the-world', was constructed to know things a certain way.

The gnostic imagines they can evade hell when they die, but quite the opposite will occur. You ignore ecology and causality, as if how you feel is random, out of the blue, or as everyone would like to believe, something "essential" about you. Yet if someone is mean to you, does your feeling not change? Isn't the right causative core of feeling the horizontal stream i.e. outside of you? And isn't this because your neural dynamics are built to synchronize with other human beings (and their neural dynamics), meaning that you're a subsystem of a 'dyadic' - two person - system? Self and Other?

If you really develop a subtle enough awareness, you'll understand that your mind is fundamentally metaphorical: your intersubjective early life brain development 'takes in' the caregiver or other persons responses to you, which shapes your-expectancies-in-the-environment. This becomes your prereflective experience of being. So, 'self+other' becomes encoded as 'reflection+prereflection'. Makes perfect sense if you pay attention to how you work. Next, when you begin to think about abstract objects, your reflective+prereflective experience (i.e. the thinking patterns, or cycling, between feeling and thinking) begins to project the relational structure of your early life intersubjective realities.

In short, if my parents were against me, or the world was against me, then my body will be 'against' me, and then the universe - the external world - will be against me.

This the crux and core of your ecological being - distributed between your brain, body, other people and your environment. Ignore it you may, but when you die, your denial - or you very ability to deny through your habitual cognitive processes - will be taken away, and reality in all its sordid glory (if you happen to be a dualist and all that means from a gnostic perspective) will pour forth upon you. There will be no 'secret mansion' to watch yourself; rather, you will be changed because the imagery-feeling ecology will change with and as you. No two realities: just a single reality.

There is no 'secret god' sitting above the universe.
edit on 6-9-2019 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

I have an imaginary other in my mind - a certain person I am thinking about.

You may or may not fall into this category, but overall, if you subscribe to a 'coniunctio oppositorum' thinking, combining good and evil in your being i.e. as your actions, then you fit the bill.

Mind you, its definitely important always to know your capacity to be evil - but this is different from actually enacting it, and justifying it on the basis of the above principle. Kierkegaard made this point long ago, and anyone who can think also has no trouble performing these acrobatics within their skull. If I don't do evil, its because i care for the effects it will have on other people. I understand my power to influence, and i understand in what ways my actions will shape the prereflective realities of others.

Its thus super-important to know your potential for evil.
edit on 6-9-2019 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Egoismyname

Its vague only because the full thesis, which leaves no 'gods of the gaps' positions to think otherwise, is too massive to be condensed into a thread.
edit on 6-9-2019 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

lol, it's true that my daily reading does influence me. So smart of you to recognize that!

But refer to my last post.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Egoismyname

Consciousness can be understood as an 'integral' of 'spatio-temporally' extended processes.

Do you believe in space and time? You should, because you do have a body, and your body is interacting with other humans and external objects in a shared-environment. All these 'objects' i.e. the 50 trillion or so cells of your body, the 86 billion neurons of your brain, are interacting with the similar situations of other bodies/brains, as well as an objective world around you, where the objects you interact with are mediated by light hitting off the object, interacting with your retina, and being absorbed into your brain patterns to generate a 'gestalt' - an 'essence' - of what it is your perspective provides you.

This is what "spatiotemporal" means. Now, if consciousness is an 'integral', it means it exists in a sort of point-counterpoint relationship with these extended processes, without at all being anything other than the bottom-up effect of these myriad inputs which both generate its qualities and ceaselessly shape it.

Mysticism is akin to being a 4 year-old, and then being put into a room with the greatest physicists on earth. All their machines are very impressive to look at, but you don't understand one-lick of what your interacting with. To become a physicist like them, you need to go through the stages of mathematical development, and then the corresponding concepts in the natural sciences. To know and understand something of great significance, you need to be profoundly educated.

To be spiritual is everyones right, but when you start thinking about things like magical power, or being one with nature, you better freaking understand what sort of complexities these processes are running-through.

The problem with alchemy, hermeticism, gnosticism etc, is that it is typically unconscionably stupid with its assumptions of duality. And if they make token paeons to 'monism', they don't even understand it properly because they dissociate action i.e. and the effects created (i.e. morality) on the systems around them, from their perceptual and cognitive processes. In other words, they can't hold to a single principle i.e. love, or symmetry, because their prereflective experience is still obscure to them. And if they know they know things the way they do because of how the were raised, they then redound to dualism, positing two principles, light vs. dark, battling it out in 'human hearts'. They can't escape it because their social relationships, their beliefs, and their feelings, all converge to this 'shared-attractor'.

An escape-route is oftentimes cosmology - i.e. a super-abstract, and completely rarefied position vis-à-vis the nuts and bolts of social living. Such a position will aver that thermodynamics is more fundamental, because the universe is growing more entropy. And yet the first law states that all energy is conserved, and since particle physics teaches/shows that all energy - as bosons or fermions - exists in a structured way, then that implies that the second law is somewhat of an illusion, as symmetry is being preserved at some fundamental level as the first law. Asymmetry derives from symmetry. Chaos does not actually precede Order, but Order creates chaos in order to establish a greater Order i.e. the universe in a perfectly ordered state creates itself (creating a chaotic plasma i.e. big bang) which then works towards ordering itself over evolutionary time.
edit on 6-9-2019 by Astrocyte because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astrocyte
a reply to: Egoismyname
1.Do you believe in space and time?
2.Now, if consciousness is an 'integral', it means it exists in a sort of point-counterpoint relationship with these extended processes.

3.The problem with alchemy, hermeticism, gnosticism etc, is that it is typically unconscionably stupid with its assumptions of duality.


1. I do experience the space-time continuum as any other human being.

2. There is no doubt in that. I called that Uni-praxis, long tome ago in one unpublished paper. History gave it many many names, the most popular of them would be "Tao".

3. I do not agree with that statement. In my experience, all these three arts confirm what you have stated in the above line(point 2), so they are in a sense close to your doctrine of thought. Also, I really do not think that they should be called stupid for taking the free right of discussing reality as seen from the perspective of the conducting vessel (a.k.a. mind), thus exploring duality in its own right. This has its valuable purpose as much as geometry or any other logic based discipline which human intelligence developed.



posted on Sep, 7 2019 @ 01:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte

It has been conjectured that not all humans are born with a soul, and unfortunately these people without souls simply cannot know what they cannot know.



posted on Sep, 7 2019 @ 02:18 AM
link   
Guess your not a Joseph Campbell fan op



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join