It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


How to tell when someone might be tellng lies or is deluded /psychological curiosities

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 10:41 AM
Why accept what is ingenuine , it will never do . A gold ring encrusted with diamonds , or a cheap carbon copy ?

Every time you will know the difference . What someone offers up for others , any symbol , is the first thing they are judged on , even if they hang their head , by others . Nature suffers man and man is a lucky soul , when he was in a pushchair . So a persons attitude to life , will belie both , their judgement in the eyes of others , and , their good fortune to be alive . Human morale can make amend s for lies or lessen the effects not always according to familial or legal or social expectations , a liar can have a heart if you like . A liar may try to amelioate situations, So a great indicator is leniency of judgements and the expectation socially carried to individuals to follow suit , is often a trait of liars or shills . Apologists , want to throw in the 'other ' facts , as they want people to see them , the national socialists , or racists among others. On an intense level those recruiting in cults and sects or carrying out brainwashing

The liar is lenient with other liars , he expects you to be so , he will call you out if you're not , So being called out from the political pub is metaphorically being offered a fight . And this is the ground on which attitudes are bred , and brought up , and fed , and put to sleep . A person must take his own attitude , for the honest , he will exclude all deluded practise , every single part of it. So his attitude in life is integral to his results , in an undelinkable manner .

Consider the outcomes by example - a person 'can' take up an offer, when that person forgot that they could say no . Because the person has been told he can take up the offer - an opportunity apparently - he say he 'will' take up the offer . Now because he said he will , his action , his 'doing' , is that he signs an agreement . He didnt decide _not to because he could have changed his mind . But he wont do that , he will take it up .
Since 'doing' the signing of the document came next , then process followed that 'when' he was due to receive what he offered , he did not receive what he expected - and now he does not 'have' the goods

Individually , we are the owners of 'can' and 'cant , 'will and wont' do and dont' , have and have not . The process starts with can and cant , if you are using an order . A person can be approach in various ways , 'would you please.. for exmple , bypassing a natural barrier , and a person taking direct orders does not consider can and cant , because he must . He simply will go and do until he _has finished . So an honest attitude begins with can and cant , no i cant belieive that .
An helpful atitude, might say 'yes I will ' , but here is a great diversion point . Its not necessarily an honest attitude . Whether the person does or not still has to come , in the process . And the having of results .
This diversion point is theological one , in that goodness , becomes a mode of operation , helpfulness , is not the truth . The honest seeker of truth therefore avoids all deluded diversion the other modes of which are passion and ignorance , which may take him from the path to truth . /Gita buddhi-yoga etc

So the honest man is or will be a person with a good attitude , the best . He cannot be drawn away from the truth or have it take away . Becasue he could understand it the honest mans view of life will be true, ad therfore he will gain from it what he can , without having to do too much . To focus honestly with proper attitude , then all things can be gained from the honest approach , nothing a rich man or married man hasnt got , isnt available either . for the time being at least . Not making the wrong decisions_ in the first place (_when you make up your mind=rarely) means being not tied to future problems , and the releasing of previous attachments , if there were any .

The wise , or wisdom is knowing how to adapt to circumstances. Special players or anyone should know this . The honest will know this . What nature fronts , is the storm we weather , whatever the conditions , wherever that may be . And we weather it together , if need be . So in looking for shortcuts , which one has been continually recommended here ?
It is honesty , truth telling , and faithful good conduct as regards these . Moral honesty and law is a subject of itself , and traditionally the faiths we have on one God the world over , was always and shall remain a founding point of life , in that , we are not a collection of amaoeba
Life in the world has come a long way in its design since its beginnings and techniques of knowledge described here are older than that . What it is different about the idea of God , is fundamentally , the personality of God . If we are personal beings - so is God , but in very different way indeed . What we know of God is small , being honest , also that you do not fear the weapon , but you do fear the personality of its user

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 02:21 PM
A focus on need and what one must have is appllicable with liars . needs are so base that they are recognised everywhere by everyone . But not with liars .
Need is a motive , need is a basis for approaching liars . The policeman might pressure the suspect .. '"this is my job , now give me answers" , when his paypacket/whatever is the last thing on his mind . Need is everyone's issue , everyones share , you dont punch a homeless person for asking you for money , for example .
But liars will always be denying a need somewhere . Even if the target of the theif is rich , it doesnt stop that persons needs from being violated . He has other needs for the security of his home and family , and more. Needs are everywhere , if you look . And then again , needs , asin real actual need , is as little as it can be , the water , food and shelter of life .
Thus the abusive liars may fulfill small 'needs' here and there , but for the real of needs of life of his fellows , he has nothing , perhaps , less than nothing . Not that an honest man should be in need himself , manipulation of needs is another trait of liars .
So from small to large , significant to insignificant , the politics of need , are the territory of truth and lies.
A liar may have needs himself , which will betray his habits , or give p his real motivations . And why we do what being left up to us for so long , can have amazing or distasterous results . The truthful , will not likely ever have a reason for anything he does or says , he purely will react to circumstance . He will choose his reasons wisely . But if he encounter those who are pulling at his boundaries on purpose , whatever their reason , he will cut it short . How he will do this is by attacking their reason ? "Why are you doing this then ? Is this company policy ?"
The liar , if he offends , will need his reason , his why . As long as no violence ensues , then then honest man has ultimate protection . Forrays to enemy territories included . Becasue the washing , comes out of the mixing of water the soap and the clothes . And the thorough drying out . And no one doesnt wear clean washing .
The process never changes . Youve seen a clock go round once , you've seen it every time it does it . Thats the way of the truth , round and round . Measuring line upon measuring line upon measuring line . Command upon command upon command ,
this is existentialism . And , no , we cant beleive that , maybe not dont beleive it , as I put just before the rich mans leaf came to remerberance . He is on the list .
So gathering what can be left of our understanding s of attitudes and the code of honesty or the code_s of liars, and facing the real world becomes less of a challenge to the honest every day . As he gains experience he learns . Thus a person who is honest will take an honest approach to themselves , teaching themselves the methods of truth , or accepting mistakes fallacies or delusions .

Thus the politics of need , the who gets what and how of need , is the firmest ground of all on which faithfully fair action becomes comparative to injust behaviours . Moral honesty again , is where the liar may depart from honesty , or where the honest cashes in metaphorical cheques rightfully his . So the liar takes more than he needs to take , where the honest lets be for others . What they take as needs are not in fact then needs at all . But it was desire led the liar to the stealing of the goods , and not his needs . Thereby liars are desirous of things , and natural trait , greed , is obvious problem in the world . It becomes plainl obvious when people take more than they should , as obvious as hell , to the honest person , who can assimilate a person on their registers , very soon indeed .

In the stimulation of desires is where manipulation takes place , in that a person is led towards breaking , often their own rules , or those they would have liked to have kept . By recommendation , moral honesty allows retention of a persons self respect , and it is identifiable if this in a person is still in tact . Given conventional freedoms it remains our own choices , even if we lie to each other , or provide minor frauds . And of course a person does have personal time alone , to make those choices he has . What moral honesty allows ,is what tradionally God has allowed , God being seen as a source of moral law , and hence a source of useable enforceable law , and guarantor of such .

These systems are protected by both the religions and their subgroups (monarchy, parliaments) that propogate and use for their own purposes text containing moral law from refernced and validated historical sources , and by the honest existing withoutside of these religions , but who realise the importance of the original texts.
And they have together , not failed to protect the texts yet . Religion , or the spreading of law using sources of moral law purported to be from God or his employees , pervades through countries a

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 02:52 PM
and through histories , right up until this very day . Rome wasnt built in a day , but Rome could have been and gone twice since The Old Testament was written .
The same commandments , or some of them , you could serve many years in prison for .
The same honesty and same rules applied then as they do now , never a need to really discover them , just the need to think for yourself . Moral law and the symbolism which goes with it has pervaded the european aristocracy and the american flag , its eagle and its arrows are those of the bible . The reason for this is that moral law has taken its ghosts . It is the firmest jurisdiction , and tha is recognised by the truly immoral .

Who have met their nemesis .
When is it , when is the point , that an honest man would lie ? What can he lie about ? Why on earth would that be ? An honest man who knows nature will take him down if he wasnt protected , wouldnt go out on a limb to say or do anything which didnt either help him or help someone else , likely, his family first ? An honest man would know he has suffer the consequences of making a deluded statement or even one that sounded deluded , to other people , but wasnt to him . He would not make deluded statements then
And an honest man would not lie , he has nothing to lie about , no need , no reason , no sense in that .
However when it is that someone clearly posesses good judgement , is honest , and then proceeds to explain himself rationally about something he has to explain , and does a reasonable job of it , there will be someone who doesnt like the truth he may be trying to get across . This would be those who do not accept the truth because they are deluded . Or they have had their lies crossed over .

Now when someone doesnt read a book , then they make no judgement , at all about that book , except perhaps , the title , and what ts main contents would be reputed to be about. so a liar and abuser , will fail a test , if that book is a selection which you have made in the past . A subtle difference here - have , and have not .
And tis is where the honest gets way way ahead of even the enlightened illuminati , if they so exist . Happy they are to sip the bounty of moral law as a source of their elixir to hypnotise the masses . Happy they are to pray to God and steal the coffers .

Well . surprise . No liar is a liar like these are liars , and dragged through dust by their faces shall they be. But that is if, the source of moral law , a higher source than where they found it lying , has made up his mind about it yet , and whether t is time that since he said he will , to actually do . And we will have ourselves some mutual exchange of monies , redemption , you could call it . Did the liars think justice itself could be used for injustice ? That that would ever have been allowed by life? Or that moral law was just there for them ? Even though it carried that name ? But liars , by justice questions , are well met , and never the winners . Every time the losers in fact .

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 04:39 PM
By approaching these issues from an honest and truthful perspective , only the truly honest , who as we have ween must not depart from his moral honesty or self respect , are able to make real use , of truth . False use of truth is a pale comparison , a low trick . Favoured by liars .
How much more the honest , or righteous , may gain . And this is not from the sources of the needs of others , and would be false also to come from egotistical or wanton spirit . So the honest can gain from other resources . Resources unavailable to those who do not keep the law at all times : religiously , if you like .
And discussion of these is not furthered .

By not having sidestepped an obvious incoming obstacle , the liar is completely floored . What moral as according to God is based on , is honesty , virtue , respect , in the light of manyfold choices we have available in life .
The last ground this discussion should encounter is the 2 sides . What is truth , or what is not the truth ? will it be correct action or inaction , or incorrect action or inaction ? will it be useful , or will it be useless ?

We realise that what , who , why how and when things occur is of value in our understandings - all these questions are base , and must form the logical basis of our approach in life . However , step back one or two more times . We find there are 2 choices , and this where a fundamental spltting happens in our consciousness , from a final unity , which would be the base of the entire undertanding .
The 2 choices , one or the other , come at each point in our analysis in the temporal zone of witnessing life , literaly, as it happens , at every point , not just by feature of truth . If you are looking at one thing , you necessarily are not, looking at another or any other things at the time. By recognising honesty as at the departure point in decision making , your weighed values as stand , at the point you are estimating incoming information , preocessing who, how, why etc , you are only on one thing at a time .
So what is being led to is that having honesty , truth , as a temporal choice , which is actually an automatic choice given some 'faith' in the method , then noting gets missed , and you actually live in the moment , rather than just behind it .
And going further with truth - become who you are . Because when you are that person , then we acheived that purpose to life . You will then become assimilated via just and honest respect for the truth , with the truth. And that is the truth of life , not any other truth , but I still cant beleive that , sorry .

A liar will not become who he is , and a deluded person will not be happy or develop properly . From where we have just been , into 'now' , then how far down the temporal scale to the past does the deluded soul think ?
Is he attached to the past ?

The future for liars , of any sort , will not be kind . Does the liar have any debts ?
The present , is the only time that liars wish to live , but it is the only time , in which , they are not allowed to live , not in true happiness, anyway .

Death , will it meet the liar with a smile ? Or shall the liar fear it , as if Death , was the source of moral law ? Life he still has for him to learn of Life , and Life is his punisher , and the forgiver of him , not Death . Generous life , is the source of the moral law. And then both things he has made hard for himself , and spoiled for himself , and others . When the cards were on the table , would he take or leave the bet ?

There is no justice to extract from death , no gain for anyone , in life in the long term . Nobody . All you can gain from causing it is your own suffering . For the truth will make a man suffer should he not be its friend . A man will cut himself with his tongue if he sharpen it too well . And that can happen at funerals . A mock show of respect at a funeral is one of the deepest insults to humanity . Liars or those possessed by delusion about death , will react in varying arrangements , and display of filthying perspectives takes place at funerals . A study in these environments would be a potential source of truth to the true seeker. Life 's end will evoke a person to declare where they really are at in understanding life , even if it is not them who met it they might like to leave a comment , as we know .
Nonapplicable on ats when users collate info and use speculation , in a moral manner/ to solve crimes

You cannot extract justice from death , but death is a bountiful provider of balanced , honest truths , as much as life is. Death is a provider then of justice in life , but on its own terms. A partner to life , if like , as in good cop , and bad cop. The fundamental equality we share , which is an un-do-able truth is that we all live , and we all die . In this manner we are all given the same , and have the same taken away . Its an absolutely level start and finish . Neither life or death can be cheated of justice.

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:23 PM
Life and death represent the two choices , the answers to the question , "when is a person wrong ?" has two choices - 1 When he is wrong 2 Not when he is not wrong

Only two , but two , not only one . When is a person dead ?
Answer ,
1When he is dead
2 Not when he is not dead .

Now , if you wanted to answer a question and decide , absolutely , for certain , on one answer , you would use a format such as this . Given all of the forgoing about judgement , attitude , honesty , truth , when we make our minds up , seeing the evidence and fact , sing our knowledge of knowns and unknowns , what is it we really decide is the answer to this question, when is a person dead?

And every time an honest answer of anyone , dead or not , is _ not when he is not dead .

This may seem a simple double negative , unproductive conclusion , but is it ? Because what came before him being dead was him not being dead . The two , dont cancel each other out but equate to one solution only - no one is dead . The answer coming behind resurrected the person who was dead - the same person , who cant be swopped in for another person . He might be dead but it doesnt mean he is still dead . The reverse is the meaning in fact. When a person is not dead he is not dead .
And when he is not wrong he is not wrong .
Its about the time you took to make the judgement , and the honesty with which you credit life , or not .

You're down to 2 choices , and you dont have credible evidence he is dead , bar a body , which does not form evidence of the death of a _person. The question was When is a _person dead ?
The person was not his body , and not his brain , or his mind he was the person using those tools . None of these his tools can be considered wrong , but the person , in use of his tools for judgement , can be wrong.
Or not wrong if he is not wrong , or not dead if he is not dead . His tools are dead , spent , however the person who used them cannot then be logically assessed to be dead. He is not his body (Prabhupada)

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 06:22 PM
Of the two choices , which do we take ? We side with life , who is giving th chances , or with death , who is taking them away ? Are we eternal optimists who bringout the positive if we can ? But we are looking for it .
We are ready to accept as soon as it comes . And we found there that the source of life is in the future , and that the stream we have followed like fish to the source , is cleaner the further up you go . Thankfulness is a reward of a sort in life , not that it brings you rewards . Its what comes after you receive , while you receive it and before it came . In life , man can have powerful protectors , or he can be left to his own devices .
Lies and liars were never under protection , but they have to provide their own . If cheats and thieves are well armed with knowledge how uch more the intecessors on the behalf of victims .Will we psychologise , with the masters of psychology ? Or shall we have to play catch up , all day every day.
The future is an indescribable phenomenon , but that has been described to those allowed the trust to scribe it to us . Where would be the point of drawing up the minds of all to pay homage to this ? Where it would be , this point , is at a warning . All must pay heed to warning s , and he who slips into sin would not . It was with his tongue that he sinned , in the necessary outpouring of untruth . The exact point the liar is caught .

The future cannot sustain lies , or any activity associated with lies . This is a natural fact , unfightable.
Do not even entertain the fact that this might be the case , or it will be your damnation , not your blessing .

so here we are , at two choices . - damnation , or blessing ?
Is God offering these , or Life , Death or both ? Is it the truth , because its an honest appraisal ? A factual one ?
A deluded pessimist will answer , "only death matters , all bets are off" . And how useless a person was he to his fellows or the future ? What use is he to life ?

he has chosen damnation in an instant . His attitude bought him only death . He wrote off the word 'future' , as meaning nothing at al to him . And that he cant change his future is likely his view . And so he suffers having underestimated a tiny equation , will he be honest or not ? lazy or slow ? foolhardy or dead ?
And critically his life is suffering , the deluded pessimist . And who is he ? In reality he is almost all of mankind.

The future , is so important to life , that in fact stop everything , to assess the weight of its definite impact .
Out of the future comes existence , and out of existence comes the future . You are now on the level or plane which is pure . We are now able to draw in forces to life which were not previously available to us . Now , without respect for telepathic functions , or the observation you are currently or tempoarally undergoing , by necessity of this observation , then you will not gain access . If you do not have an honest opinion , you will not understand what has been told you about the future and existence in full . You will not be able to use it . If your attitude is such that you are capable of misuse of facts you may know , you will not get to know them . Such is life .

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:59 PM
The thought process involved in lies has been shown to involve patterns that a person undertakes subconsciously , without their ability to control . One example is eye movement upwards . When an honest person perceives things presently as it has been shown they are faster at preceiving acceptable statements questions or commands . Like the buddha may have relied on intuition , intuitive skills happen ,'in the moment' , s this should clarify that an _automatic mind state of a clean consciousness (devoid of attatchment delusion or untruth) is a _ faster mindstate .
An open mind , receives thoughts , and new thoughts, when they are available , at the actual moment . A closed mind , on receipt of new information which explodes old myths , may find themselves reeling . But if facts were under debate then answers can now be gained , more easily .
We have seen how moral honesty , cleans up a persons entire future , should they allow and trust the value of such . And in something such as this there must be value . We have seen how having faith in the truth , as in what it will briing in us the future , as being relying on the absolutely reliable , and not depending on any external factor , but our very own action , our own . We cant expect to change others , but we can maximise benefits to oursselves . We can onl recommend to others , simpler tha us - when it comes to it you have 2 choices, at any point - the wrong one and the right one . This is a case of that you must now take up the challenge of being honest , and stick by the truth and moral correctness as being your key to everything in life . Your attitude will determine what you get , and your strength of character will build on good judgement .
Not taking the way of the liar and deluded should near silence the world . not that it shall do , perhaps , quite yet. Not having made our minds up yet, was the point of not getting lied to about whats on mars or not . Bt the symptom of delusion and those who will tell you lies about how to beleive lies , is that they have made their minds up . We need to see that that choice they made was not the honest option , despite the circumstances , and in response to any challenge , they will be bitter . Where does the honest man need bitterness ? Yet it was the delusion of buddha , or what haunted his view .
Bitter honesty and moral honesty are not the same . Responsibleness does bring safety to the situation . But bitter honesty is a sore tempter of men . especially in the mornings. An itcher at the moral fibres. A grasper of the patience . And this , nasty delusion , seems to be irritating God . Its not for no good reason that the bible contains the most edifiying material and also the darkest vitriol and hate . For that bitter honesty , that painful sister of moral honesty , is sometimes a tool of the wise. And she has to be , when they are sitting in dust, wearing sackcloth and ashes. The gates being smitten with destruction . The suckling child bereft of its mother lost in the street . Bitter honesty tempts a man to wake up his fellows from slumber , to quicken and warn them , to say , "if I were moral and fair , I would warn you , and since you are an idiot , I will warn you again!"
Because what goes on behind the palace walls , or in the chambers where the lights of candles cannot escape from . What goes on in the public street for the lewdness and the sicking up of the heathen ? Will the reverend answer these at the alter, or offer up his confessions to having led them ?

So we can see that biblically put , the truth is a beautiful thing when fashioned to words , that bitter honesty and moral honesty are fair ladies , just that one has a very dangerous nature . unless you can control her . We all should know these things , that temper and derivations of meanings will affect us and those around us , and that we limit them.

posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 09:18 PM
To get the finest strains , what we are talking about is how to guarantee good perception . Good , substituting symbolically for fast , accurate , reliable , useful , protective , intuitively correct , information gathering .
The liar makes codes for himself to use and analyses facts against these possibllities for someone else to perceive lies or his behaviours
The future is the base of boilings down
is the future .
What is gathered at a yet to arrive at point .
That the correct choice between two options at any given point is critically linked to the consequences of that choice . And that given this there is a method of making correct choices at all points - moral honesty.
Therefore it is declared that moral honesty is the only option of those who can benefit in any way shape or form , from the future .

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 08:55 AM
The truth an ones knowledge of it can vary a persons social standing maximally , not simply via gossip or control or money .

Once in the street I found myself having a conversation with a grandee . Not unusual for me .
And what I found was that since he instantly knew who I was , and I of course , instantly recognised him , we began to have the most frank conversation . . so the point here is that , whether or not that huge lies are held away from people by folk such as this man , if a person , even an outright liar knows , that you would never , ever , not in the world , suffer his untruth , for the sake of it being untrue , and you knowing that , absolutely certainly , without question to facts or evidence , simply you. Your persona . Lies then become the un-necessary means. And no matter what a bank account (theoretically) stands at , a person can reveal things about themselves , that you never knew they might come out with : surprising things , can happen ,with a little faith .
So you need the attitude : dont bother lying to me . He took his due warning , from myself which was due at the time . This was after he tried to tell me , or rather beg me , "Please dont be saying what you are saying .." . We both knew that having to warn him was not my fault , and that he walked away knowing that the interaction we had exchanged was genuine , and that it had happened like that for a very good reason . He knew neither of us could change the facts . He wished I didnt have to tell him what he knew that I had to say to him , I admit I was I was slightly bitter about having to be honest , enough to be fair on him , given the circumstances . But the exchange was a historical triumph , by its end . We both knew well we would both soon walk away from it in tact , just having exchanged some 'facts' . Its no good to be gleeful saying "Sorry about that ... " Or your words are false again . He was paid his respect from the master of respect , and where is a blunted tool ?

Which leads on to ownership of truth , within social standing , or not , who owns it ? Its not good to use examples of yourself , because fueling ego is last thing a person should do , the very last . People try to get a quick-fix to being someone . But while not honest and therfore factual in its approach , you even get people say these days "images is everything" "so and so is my idol" , "this I fashioned is my own device" , "put up a statue to me"

So where the bible leads us on is saying to the pretenders of history , long gone from this debate hopefully , those poor deluded animals , that to say "You dont own the truth " "You are not the truth " "You are the representation of falsehood" , "You are the liars"

Who then are honest ? And the honest will be careful inthe ways they own the truth . They will do justice to life , according to the facts , as is wise . It is wise to become the truth which you are - the person - because you will everyting you need to in life . Practise , will lead to further unburdenment . But I am not saying there is bliss in the end , but I am sayng Use the Future .

Using the future , works in a multitude of ways . Set in place mechanisms that you know the future can sustain , including from your own efforts to maintain your systems . Lower the necessary future inputs which come from your effort . Do not waver from moral choices . If you do , you have not been honest , and you have set in place offence to honesty , and therefore you shall not retain the benefits of honesty , in the future . You may delude you self you can, but you WILL not . Move your attitude on . Set back work upon decided goals until entirely certain that such a goal is sustainable . At some companies , at top levels , this is how they do business Moral choices , and strict honesty , very strict , from everyone . Because business is unsustainable without it . Both morality , and sustainability , then inextricably linked , as per nontheoretical reality .

Ownership is the difference between having and not having , and a protective function comes from honesty , in the future . By assertion of respectability , and this only really comes with genuine interaction , and honest recognition of it , then no one attempts to lie to you . Much as before , one thing you can trust is morals . "We are not doing business with you , we dont trust your morals , and so we do not trust your money or your word." "We will make thorough investigations into your assets and proceed with the matter according to our council with the county court"
Morals , cannot be beaten , and if these , critically , are proved , how much else is proved for a person? Everything else , bar the level of his honesty . Which bar can only be raised ? Moral standards .
So now , all socialite trash aside , who owns the truth ? Has has , the biscuits ? Pass them over . And the wine .

edit on 9-8-2012 by ZIPMATT because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:27 AM
Owner-ness , is a slightly harder concept to elucidate the meaning from , than owner - ship . Ship being something would add goods to , and '-ness' being a describer of a state of affectation .
This relates to the point of view you are taking as the observer of yourself , or others . Begin with yourself , and clean yourself out thoroughly . The proverbial plank in both eyes . This should serve as a reminder .
When you have been somewhere , like the antarctic perhaps , then owner-ness begins to develop - a person feels changed by their experiences , and hence a state of affectation may build up . The parallel giving perspective is , owner-ness of lies . And sometimes delusions people had never happened , given their underdevloped view of what other around them might actually know or not . But any lair deludes hinself , as we know , via the world he has to live in , this world regulates him at every step it checks his behaviours .
Thus owner-ness from the state and by the owners of position and authority within the state , is a totally ugly and disgusting phenomneon , at times . Ususally before they walk away and climb into a 12 plate car . Back to 'paradise'

They ought to be ashamed of themselves , they would put 'moral' ideas of their own' on the public , when the public doesnt understand the pressures involved at all . Not at all . But these things have not gone missing .
And where we were worried about advancing liars any , we are now punishing them thoroughly . In a generalised kind of way . While they thought they were sliming their ways back to the safety of the nest .
The entire nest , of them .

So the point of view of the honest , is that he is just honest . This is because he cannot form logical binding s or illogica bindings with truth , because 'existence' and the 'future' are untouchable to him . The wise can only join with them , become them , become who he is in the world , and then give as he _should do this is his owner-ness . He celebrates that he does justice to life , and when he is truly celebrating is when his truth comes home , directly so . This should be the same for all in life , and that would concur with or parody a literal orgasm .

The overspilling of owner-ness cannot be helped , or taken away from situations by the owners of any spills , or the leavers there. So then , dna is in the argument over truth . But enough of that , we can't beleive it .

Solidity , is when something has literal , physical , emotional , scientifically verifiable , educated and thoroughly appraised , factual nature. So solidity is tyed with symbolism. The path we have gone up to here has been beaten before , by many a shoe , but certainly not , the whole world. Lets look at the symbols we have been left .
One of the oldest , is the Brahminical symbol from Indian Subcontinent , the reversed swastika , which of course , did not come first . And what it represents , is a reversal of the philosphy and political use , originally , of Brahminism . Gives the facts , complete reversal . So if you put the knowledge here into reverse , Nazism or Fascism is something you might end up with . Not nice .
4 arms leads to a single unity , linking them all .

In Taoist countries , or those where te philosophy of Tao has its origins , we have the yin yang . Two diametrically opposed opposites , form a single unity .

In Indian culture the "ohm' is the sanskrit symbol written for "the absolute"

So here these symbols of the same destination , belie that that same approaches, or recognition of them , are necessary . One must weigh and balance opposing forces . Thereby he will gain the solidity that both offer him .
And that one is , a person . Not his body his brain or his mind . So who reaches here will know that , both belong to him , he can choose any path from here he wish , now he has found the truth . A solidity on which he can base his person on , his house , his family , and everything else he might have neglected in the meantime .

One who reaches the solid end , he has gained his soul , in effect , because he will know when to never make wrong choices , and that he cant do everything he 'd like in life , either . But hes got plenty of time to make up his mind ? How long ? Who knows ? Its an unknown unknown , entirely up to nature . And nature when it was asked, did answer , as did death , just _in its own time . And _when it made it made its mind up .

So we take away the symbol from enlightenment - this is ours , absolutely , ours for ever . _Our world .

What sourced the symbols were men . What sourced the men , and the symbol , has no name .

During the course of this discussion we have encountered several connected concepts , and shown how they aer interchangeable with each other in many ways , more connections with each other than can be numbered on th page . Our attitude is that we have determined and resolved to be honest . The teachers of us are not the attitude we take to them..

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 11:26 AM
Who are the teachers of us ? Who did we call in to offer their insight to their debate ? Shall we ascribe them , personal attributes ?
What the teachers have made us is morally honest , just and fair - in effect , not liars , and to give 'us' a social standing , we are going by various names and guises and abilities also . With various hats on . What we ahve been given then , is names such as 'the righteous' 'saints' (not sinners) ' saviours' , 'prophets' . 'the truthful' , the 'honest' , the 'just and moral'
Some of us the names of 'Judge ' and ' King ' . Some of us 'Priests' And other names too.

So we can have various names , and (the) I am , in separation , non-attachment , and thereby multi-availabilty is possible . Without problems . So we are careful we dont attach names , and we reverse that something may not have a name that fully describes or completes its description . What on earth would we be talking about then / ?

So to name the un-nameable , we must identify the teachers of us , as used in this treatise , as distinct from the names we might give ourselves .
These are in no order ,
Nature/ the unnatural
God / atheism
Truth / Lies
Facts / Non-facts /delusion
Life / Non-life
Reality / Unreality
Existence / Non-existence
Death /Non-death
The person / the non-person
The future / the past
Reason / Unreason
Logic / Non-logic
The Precedent/the anticident
Creation/ Destruction
The Seen / The Unseen
The Known / The Unknown
The results / The lack results
The causes / The non-causes
The effects / The non-effects
The affects / the non affects
The Absolute / the non-absolute
The dominator / The subservient
The transcendent / the non transcendent
The signals / the non-signals
The over-riders / the non-over-riders
The symbols . the non-symbols
The Two / the one
The Law / The unlawful
The moral / the immoral
The name-able / The Un- name able

How will we scroll them together as one word and ay we have found the meaning of them all? If we were honest , we may not . For what is a combination of these things , but life ? So if you give it any other name , you gave it a faux-pas . And if you said to someone , straight off - Life will teach us lessons .. he wouldnt have any idea what you meant . You may as well have a thick Irish accent when he is French .

"Wha?" Even this is the noise that babies make - they never stop making it either . So what is left to the , if he takes a name , the honest , who lives with babies constantly , "Wha?'
What shall he do ? Talk to himself on a computer ? But surely life never wastes a good effort , as long as it is spent on the right tasks .

The last answer is 'mu' , nothing , 'no answer' , 'neither no or yes' . The un-name-able , this was the point .
When we asked , "Who are The Teachers of Us ?
And original to that , who would thread us a lie ?

edit on 9-8-2012 by ZIPMATT because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-8-2012 by ZIPMATT because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:03 PM
The oversight left to the end , is the politics of 'should' . Now we have educated ourselves in the , some of the , cans and cants, wills and wonts , dos and donts , haves and have nots .

so we are left with - should /should not . It is worth leaving all of the foregoing before making any kind of statement as to what a person _ should do , and equally important , what they should _not do .

We argue continually round and round with each other about 'should' and 'should not' without even knowing it .
We take or board or reject information and advice given on this basis .
Should is transcendent to the first four factors , identified as defining a person's ttitude and hence his wholeness of experience in life .

The politics of experience - literally who gets what and how in terms of experience is an existentialists art , and an artform . And the basest of who getting what and how is about fighting , and not fighting .

In latter times , about arms , and disarming . So we have born here from all this should and should not , have or have not , will or will not , do or dont do have or dont have . And this is a basis for opporession and war .

We breifly touched must , and must not , and at thispoint we are reaching out for any more of these tightening sliders to exist .Must and must not - there is not any middle ground between them .

Should I ?
Must I ?
The are the simplest questions you ask every waking hour . One carries life's recommendations , it is not terminally ending provisions from Life . The other , begs the unknown in .
So while it is still not finished this - who are you going to be in Life ? The Damned?

Because you shouldnt lie , and you must not lie .
Again - you should be honest , and you must be honest

Here set are my own terms - and this way there is no exterior command works upon me . No question I cannot answer . No statement I cannot make .

Where must is as artform is in the will and wont . Willing by a person a learn . So again we take the teachers of attitude - and from me - will and wont is where the surprises come from. For few things are possible with man , but all kinds of things are possible with me .

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:42 PM
Authority is an onerous task . Authority is only needed in the world while there is a judge to seek . The first thing a plaintiff seeks is a solicitor of the judge .

When bringing up children (another topic) we often make a critical mistake over sibling rivalry , in that this urge to seek the judge to settle minor disputes , not only is a symptom of early dishonesty developing , but
becomes a learned behaviour . The mistake parents make is to act as judge at all . It only ends up in
1 an inquisition
2 bad judgement without facts
3 one goes away cheated
4 the resolution took a long time
and on and on and on

And so people grow up , running to the judge , 'help me judge' 'give me moral justice' 'i cant deal with this persons dishonesty- you do it'
So children and adults must learn - you are not the judges of other people . Do not countenance their applications . Or they will never learn for themselves how to live life . They must learn how to deal in the politics of experience and the seeking of justice , for themselves . While some would 'preposerous! to this
, it is absolutely not , preposturous . For children , it is safe to let it happen . By non response to apllications for judgements , non response being declination and silence . Then watch them - they will sort it out for themselves . Often in ways you had not expected to come out . Its the magic or will and wont - you wont , they wont .
And then they will grow up being their own choosers what they do .
Or not.

Authority has no place next to or near to truth - yet we find it sticking there , in the shadows . For truth is the authority here , the truth , being the 'thing' which will chain you into hell , or set you free .
The closest to truth , are the ones who are the most jealous of it , and the writing of binding words such as constitutions has been derived with something called 'moral authority' . Its the pretence of librals , the sermon of the vicar , the ramblings of the judge . And confused a person is , if he considers himself any sort , of justice .
Necessarily so . But he will give out some shoulds and musts , just not the ones _you were looking for.

The morally honest , is he who gets to slide away from moral authority - how can it catch him up ?
It cannot . So when enemies are friends , who slips by the net ?
Liars using moral authority are again , dirtying their own carpets , and , deluded .
Making themselves look more stupid every day that goes by . Because the politics of should and must does apply to these , though they would have it applied to others . And in every facet of it s meaning , just because , some one hods a position of rank , guarantees no necessary exemption from Law as it is it remains a force of Life , not one of those who would choose to enforce law as coming from them
Unfortunately people will commit themselves to moral authority , be that of their nation or government , the priest , the teacher , and so bend around misunderstanding the sources of Law theses all are , they neglect to see , and to use , the facts effectively . Being misunderstood , they let the facts bind them . This is not the approach of the morally honest (this is his nation) who will not suffer delusion .

edit on 9-8-2012 by ZIPMATT because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-8-2012 by ZIPMATT because: (no reason given)

Since moral authority is the source of justice which is 'normally' sought , as we have seen , by the weaker members of our species , then appeals to moral authority may or may not suit the morally honest . He can choose what he does, given his circumstances. He is not in danger of faulting existing moral authorities .
As life and his choices have tutored him , the person who can use the future to his advantage , lessens and eliminates , with luck , the need to seek justice anywhere else.
He is therefore not liable to the threats from life which others may encounter , will encounter .
Can you attack the ways of the morally honest ? Can anyone? The answer is no , he is unassailable . Therfore he will not be attacked.
edit on 9-8-2012 by ZIPMATT because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 04:07 PM
Retributive payments can be rewards or punishments . They are called retributive , because of the link to the deserving of either , a reimbursement or return according to account balances and how they stand.
So in dealings 'on high' with religions , world leaders , politics , global traders , nation states , all of which are falsely proposed as being sources or users of moral authority , including 'kingdoms' , then we find the books they use , as inpart , speaking directly to them . Just as the writing on the wall came to Nebuchadnezzar , just as the Pharoah had his kingdom broken and was drowned in the red sea . So at this point with this site we have come full circle.

What is it the moral authorities are told ? Have they been accustomed to retribution ? They are not accustomed to it . They are not users of the texts for correct purposes , but they use them for wordly gain . In this way we could cal them the immoral authorities . The unjust judges , and the keepers of injustice in the world. They , as proud and sometimes mighty men , are addressed for todays sins they commit , by the bible , of yesterdays errors. And tommorow's punishment upon them , will only happen tomorrow . Yet on they go in ignorance , happy for now , of these things .
So , just for these people - "redress yourselves" . And "you have been warned"
For it was not me who wrote these things , neither will it be me who carries them out . But it was me who has read these things , and so , without terror in the face of these , I let it stand . Its a last chance .

edit on 9-8-2012 by ZIPMATT because: (no reason given)

new topics

<< 1   >>

log in