Philosophy



Philosophy is NOT about reading books, nor inventing ideas and then
letting them rip on to the world. It is about studying yourself for many
years (psychology) and the world (physics and phenomenology) and then
writing your own books and essays of your life understanding thus far.
And folks can do with that what they will; for they are not all at the
same place at the same time in the learning process; which is
evolutionary. Folks who pick up a few philosophy books who call
themselves philosophers are the biggest joke on earth.



If one wants to study the history of human understanding and philosophy
in purely academic terms without getting involved in writing your own
(because it is an evolutionary process) then begin with Plato (or
earlier) and then work forward, one step at a time.  And there is no
damned point in writing what has already been written by somebody. Even
if just reading then one day something may hit you and you know damn
well that you can add something new to that – then go for it; for
that is what philosophy IS. But don't waste your time and effort on
inventing the wheel, for it has been done.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Poetry



Without any shadow of doubt rhyming verse is one of the best ways of
reaching deep into many people; whilst without reams of prose writing;
which may be boring for many in this day and age of all rush and instant
gratification. How this is done and how it works then don't know.
Maybe it is something to do with short musical stances, metres, with
words (meaning) attached to the rhythm – which is ingrained deep
into the psyche plainly enough. The rhythm opens the gate and the words
carry the message down deep there inside.



So, if you have something to say, and if short of time for saying it,
then try rhyming verse. It is quick, easy, and very effective, and it
can and does sow seeds in fertile ground. And maybe even in cracks in
rocks at times :- )



That it works is not a matter of conjecture. It does work. I never had
any interest in poetry, let alone writing it; but just another of those
things which life inflicts on one at times. It would have been the very
last thing on my mind – ever. But there you go. It is said by many
that poetry does not go down well in this day age, and to some extent
that is true in consensus terms in the boozer. But there IS a big
audience for it nonetheless, and maybe growing. Also, given what life is
like today with so little time to oneself, then there is a good chance
of it becoming more popular over the next century at least. So, give it
some thought. I know well enough that it can have one hell of a reaction
and effect. If you say that you cannot do it then my reply is rubbish.
Just start doing it and work at it; it will come and fall into place. It
also gets ones brain working and keeps it fit; as well as other peoples.
You may cause waves in time to come. You don't know until you try.
Never give up.  Well, not whilst alive here anyway.



rwr





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bill,

You wrote a while back.

  Ten percent of the workers are slipping into the lower class. Bush destroyed
their middle class lives. Some who think they are rich, or might become rich,
slip over to the dynastic side. They like to be called blue dogs or conservative
democrats. The administration has finally redefined the health care part of
change as Insurance reform.Let the physcal conservatives cleave to their
pocketbooks and forget the ideologue rhetoric . Most of the kings are gone
because change eroded their systems. Those who sided with them because of
monitary or racist or religous grounds might look to the diminished middle class
and position themselves for survival. Bill

Reagan expanded the base of the Republican Party by adding the Christian right.
Before Reagan, many of them had avoided politics, thinking correctly that
politics is evil, and some voted Democratic. Politics makes strange
bedfellows.When Goldwater retired from the senate in late 80s, he said his party
was being taken over by kooks. However, those kooks made the difference between
his big defeat in 64 and Reagan's big wins in 80 and 84, You have the fiscal
conservatives, the social conservatives, and the pro war conservatives. Before
ww2, Republicans were the ones wanting to avoid a European conflict. Bob Taft
was the opposite of a DickCheney regarding war.

Peace,
Tom


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Louise,

I think you and I have differing ideas of the typical feminist.

You find the feminist a threat to your existence as a solitary. Perhaps you see
the feminist as a person trying to force you to join in playing games you do not
want to play.

For myself, I see the feminist as a Nietzschean free spirit – a person who is
her own woman and who has escaped her shackles of tradition roles of obedient,
silent child, devoted wife and mother, knowing her place in the home and not
outside it.

The feminist free spirit creates her own values which steal the `masculine'
virtues of strength, independence, free-thinking, unpredictable behaviour,
irreverence and risk-taking.

Jim



--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
>
> Jim,
>
> Sorry to hear that your health is below par.  Looking forward to reading your
comments, should you wish to make response.
>
> Louise
>

Tom, Your delineation of three republican  types has merit. There is great irony
in that political alliance.  Eisenhower , the top warrior of the last century,
jumped ship and warned us of the existence of the military  industrial complex.
That brand of  republican remains, sucking up  our national resources at  a rate
we do not even attempt to control. They are reactionary in the most base sense
of the term.
  Robert Taft was a reaction to FDR,to his new deal. I understand  Taft's statue
is the only one of a senator in DC.  On the surface he was reacting to socialism
but he did not wish to waste money on ordinary people.
  How the hell that can be dovetailed with social conservativism escapes me. The
dumb bible pounders gore their own ox with their commitment to high defense
budgets  and crushing domestic progressive programs. They are the ignorant flux
that joined the hard capitalists  with the warrior military. Some, like 
Goldwater, saw the  error of relying on a nut fringe to hinge a major political
party. Reagan and Nixon were win at all  cost pragmatists. I applaud them as
ruthless politicians but decry them as racist and classist pigs.
  I sincerely hope the tripartite coalition is spent. The military remains
unscathed but business and the nut fringe are badly wounded by the neocon
debacle. With hope peeking around the corner reasonable progressives  need point
to the cruel usage of lower class believers. If we must wrap their welfare in
jesus bullshit so be it. We need them as a lubricant to push us back to a
reasonable center. Just hold your nose and think of better times. Bill

Jim,

I am not sure that I have any concept which would be equivalent to 'the typical
feminist', though this is not an attempt to chop logic.  Women are highly
variable individuals, like men.

Yes, I have often in practice found the feminist woman to be a threat to my
existence as a solitary, and the feminist man as one who utterly fails to see
that he does not understand my own quest as a woman.

The idea of the woman in her "traditional role of obedient silent child" is not
one that has obtruded much in my own existence, though this may be due to a lack
of experience or reading.  There may be parts of the world where such a role is
expected of women, but the phrase does sound rather contrived to me.

I also find it a little contradictory to suggest that the feminist free spirit
creates her own values by stealing masculine virtues.

Anyway, it seems to me that I failed to make my case adequately because I lost
focus and subjectivity, abstraction having confused the picture entirely.  I am
very passionate in my opposition to feminism, but I often like women very much. 
The fact is, that I have come to hate living in modern times, which is not a
good recommendation for my writing at a contemporary forum.  I need time off. 
There are sound philosophical reasons for my opposition to feminist ideas, but
you would not think so to read my meanderings.

Louise

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
>
> Louise,
>
> I think you and I have differing ideas of the typical feminist.
>
> You find the feminist a threat to your existence as a solitary. Perhaps you
see the feminist as a person trying to force you to join in playing games you do
not want to play.
>
> For myself, I see the feminist as a Nietzschean free spirit – a person who is
her own woman and who has escaped her shackles of tradition roles of obedient,
silent child, devoted wife and mother, knowing her place in the home and not
outside it.
>
> The feminist free spirit creates her own values which steal the `masculine'
virtues of strength, independence, free-thinking, unpredictable behaviour,
irreverence and risk-taking.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > Sorry to hear that your health is below par.  Looking forward to reading
your comments, should you wish to make response.
> >
> > Louise
> >
>

Before Creation Was



Before creation WAS, I was there. I AM.  Conscious of existing. But I
was there in nothing created; ONLY I was brought forth and extant. But I
existed in nothing. No created thing was there, and only me brought
forth. Thus I existed in a void; an emptiness; and with only myself
alone to know it.  Then there came upon the blackness small dots of
white light, and I could see them all about me; in front of me, both
sides of me, and behind me; all around me these dots of light existed.
Coming and going, coming and going.  Then they amalgamated into a union
which brought forth constructed visions manifest to my consciousness.
And my consciousness was no longer empty of content – there were
other things manifest – thus I and Thou. IT and Me.  We danced for a
duration, and we danced both separate and in union. Part and counter
part becoming as one. IT was I and I was IT, and in so doing there was
no I and no IT; only WE. And it was good that there were TWO. I was no
longer alone with NO THING CREATED.



But still at this point creation had not become permanent; and I knew
this. After which transience ended, and Eternal Paradesium came upon the
scene. And I was there, like the first watchman at the gates of dawn,
and ever in delight, and love, and wisdom. But I knew nothing of things,
only the Essence and deepest Principle of all things. And after a
duration of no duration it came to pass that Eternity, for needs must,
had to be gone from my consciousness of IT, and I was projected into
Time and Space, and changing events. And wherein I learned about things.
But I discovered that all things contained the Principle and Essence of
Eternity within them, and they were all made of little dots of light. As
it was in NO THING, and also as it was in the Paradesium of the eternal
NOW, then so too was it in EVERYTHING extant. Consummated in form, in
Time and Space. And the dance goes on, from Eternity for this purpose;
in Time, as it is in Eternity. And I AM the first child of both Time and
Eternity, and brought forth to know this Symphony by being a part of it.
The part that KNOWS. The Lover of the Loved. The Knower of the Known.
And I AM Eternal; and I will be with you unto the end of Time and
Beyond; and I will never let you go; for you are Mine.  Let us make Man
on Earth in the temporal reflection of what we are in Eternity. It will
be so done.





Sell this to the Priests of Darkness – for this is true !!!!



Come along you Mystics, tell of it; explain it, paint the picture for
them. If you cannot then question the depths of what you are yet aware
of – before judging others. And when becoming aware that there are
things of which you are not yet aware of, then with dignity and
humility, go in search of them – for they are already yours. There
and waiting for you. Those who cry will one day laugh; and those who
laugh at this will one day cry. Wait and see.



Merlin of Exmoor.









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have read similar things in native American creation myths. The Hopi and
Navajo have oral traditions that show  similar mystical renderings. I am not
fearful of accepting or rejecting your personal birth saga. If that is how you
were one with your mommy I am happy it gives you comfort.
  Creation is another matter. You have created an agnostic prayer, chant or
vesper. It could be viewed as pre big bang with all those  dancing lights and
coalescence. That however would  make your  creation  the model of all creation.
  It could be  a story of the birth of  consciousness, a turning on of the brain
in a developing individual.
I might  enjoy  it more if it did not have  the creator lurking behind it. Are
you the creator? Did you create yourself? Why should I care ?
  You might have finished that bottle of red and went psychedelic. The  Hopi did
better on stronger substances.  A few  huge, wildly feathered  eagles and of
course a coyote would have juiced it up a bit. I will beat my Taos medicine drum
and wait for inspiration. Bill

We visited the native American museum in DC.I would say the government views 
the tribes with less enthusiasm than  most of the tribes themselves. The
location of the  museum , east of the Mississippi slants  the display  toward
the forest tribes of the east coast with less emphasis on the planes tribes .
The building itself is most remarkable with a sandstone construction that mimics
the natural in a way that conflicts with the classical renderings of the rest of
the mall. Stone age man  could have little but a head on collision with modern
man.
  The theme is one of natural simplicity. We were invited to  look back ,into a
past that drifts  back to the hunter gatherers. I understand there are many
theories as to how  the primal people arrived on this  hemisphere. The real
feeling of the place lies before Europeans  brought all the inventions of early
modernity.  Stone tools were the limit of technology. Native plants surround the
building with beans,squash,peppers and maze growing all over the grounds. It
makes  for a wild, unruly  patch in the middle of  a great modern city.
  It seems the curators cared a great deal for the inventions  of Europe  as the
swords of conquistadors, smooth bores and rifled long guns and bayonets and
daggers of cold steel fill drawer after drawer .  Were this a museum of Japanese
history  they might have hung the Enola  Gay from the rafters. The federalist
view of native Americans is that they are a conquered people that has been
assimilated. Most of the   Indian peoples I have met beg to differ.
  It is said that history is the story of the winners but  our five hundred years
of conquest  is only a moment  compared to the multi millenia these people
existed here.
  The museum is one of contrast and a meaningful attempt to show  multiple
cultures as they seem to have been. Gone,gone,no more,no more . Bill

Louise,

Hopefully at some point you will be able to articulate your objections to
feminism. As you suggest, perhaps they are connected to your dislike of
modernity.

As for the "silent, obedient child", did you never hear the saying "Children
should be seen and not heard"? That was an idea that was still current when I
was a child in the fifties and early sixties.

Jim

It sounds like you need some inspiration sport. But never mind, study
yourself and you will find it in abundance. And then you can tell mummy
all about it. The less they know the more they assume that they know
– and it is all pissing and farting into the wind.



--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...>
wrote:
>
> I have read similar things in native American creation myths. The Hopi
and Navajo have oral traditions that show similar mystical renderings. I
am not fearful of accepting or rejecting your personal birth saga. If
that is how you were one with your mommy I am happy it gives you
comfort.
> Creation is another matter. You have created an agnostic prayer, chant
or vesper. It could be viewed as pre big bang with all those dancing
lights and coalescence. That however would make your creation the model
of all creation.
> It could be a story of the birth of consciousness, a turning on of the
brain in a developing individual.
> I might enjoy it more if it did not have the creator lurking behind
it. Are you the creator? Did you create yourself? Why should I care ?
> You might have finished that bottle of red and went psychedelic. The
Hopi did better on stronger substances. A few huge, wildly feathered
eagles and of course a coyote would have juiced it up a bit. I will beat
my Taos medicine drum and wait for inspiration. Bill
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

One Comment



One comment on that `before creation' email from some guy was
that he had read North American Indian creation myths much like that;
and bade me good luck living in my creation myth. It seemed to fly over
his cuckoos nest that one was talking about a conscious experience; and
which gives food for thought; not a belief. And that is what one is up
against for much of the time (not all of it) if you mention anything.
His consciousness has probably never focused on anything but his dinner
plate and his bank balance. By and large (not that I am on any of them
now) it brought zero comment from fifteen groups. Well, it wouldn't
would it. But that was not really the object – there are is often
one on a group who's ears prick up on reading something.



Sorry, the number you just rang is busy, for ring back please press
five. Sorry, the number you dialled does not accept ring back calls.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "dick.richardson@..." <dick.richardson@...>
wrote:
>
>
> One Comment
>
>
>
> One comment on that `before creation' email from some guy was
> that he had read North American Indian creation myths much like that;
> and bade me good luck living in my creation myth. It seemed to fly over
> his cuckoos nest that one was talking about a conscious experience; and
> which gives food for thought; not a belief. And that is what one is up
> against for much of the time (not all of it) if you mention anything.
> His consciousness has probably never focused on anything but his dinner
> plate and his bank balance. By and large (not that I am on any of them
> now) it brought zero comment from fifteen groups. Well, it wouldn't
> would it. But that was not really the object – there are is often
> one on a group who's ears prick up on reading something.
>
>
>
> Sorry, the number you just rang is busy, for ring back please press
> five. Sorry, the number you dialled does not accept ring back calls.
>
> Obscure ,Dick, very obscure. Your  Mummy.Bill
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@...> wrote:
>
> Louise,
>
> Hopefully at some point you will be able to articulate your
> objections to feminism. As you suggest, perhaps they are connected to
> your dislike of modernity.

I hope so too.  Not that I do dislike modernity, though.  Maybe I will be able
to explain that too, when I have had sufficient time to recover.

>
> As for the "silent, obedient child", did you never hear the
> saying "Children should be seen and not heard"? That was an idea that
> was still current when I was a child in the fifties and early sixties.

Yes, I have heard the saying, though not in connection with feminism.  Is there
a connection?  L.

>
> Jim
>

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...> wrote:
>
> I have read similar things in native American creation myths. The Hopi and
Navajo have oral traditions that show  similar mystical renderings. I am not
fearful of accepting or rejecting your personal birth saga. If that is how you
were one with your mommy I am happy it gives you comfort.
>  Creation is another matter. You have created an agnostic prayer, chant or
vesper. It could be viewed as pre big bang with all those  dancing lights and
coalescence. That however would  make your  creation  the model of all creation.
>  It could be  a story of the birth of  consciousness, a turning on of the
brain in a developing individual.
> I might  enjoy  it more if it did not have  the creator lurking behind it. Are
you the creator? Did you create yourself? Why should I care ?
>  You might have finished that bottle of red and went psychedelic. The  Hopi
did better on stronger substances.  A few  huge, wildly feathered  eagles and of
course a coyote would have juiced it up a bit. I will beat my Taos medicine drum
and wait for inspiration. Bill
>
Nothing much as yet for me to say, Bill, even in regard to this post of yours,
which keeps alive in me the will to breathe.  And all that goes with it.  The
British really are not mad.  It is an illusion never to be explained.  Who knows
what fun we may extract from the mystery.  Louise

Louise, It seems Dick writes to many sites. This strange post may have been
aimed at a wizard  site. I do not mind  eccentric posts and have  put some
strange  content out there myself.
  When something odd pops up it can be ignored or refuted. I found some similar
material in a most non English place. So I decided to compare and contrast Dicks
dream.
  Because he usually reacts like a pit bull guarding a transmission I expected to
get blasted when I pulled his chain. At least he  wrote the  post in the present
and did not resort to his lexicon of prior opinion.
  I think he understands existentialism and  his extrapolations sometimes are
embedded with little jewels.
  The  western Indians were a highly mystical lot and used many substances to
heighten their other worldly experiences. Coca,marijuana, mushrooms, and peyote
come to mind. That English Dick likes the magical mystery   tour interests me. 
Perhaps he has a stash of goodies from South America that fuel his temporary
madness. I will read it and I will comment if it merits reply. His barbs are  as
dull as an ancient phallus and so Old Dick seems appropriate. Old, mad,English
Dick is just too long. Bill

WANTED: People To Work From Home. Must Have Computer

* Just fill simple surveys. Start today.

  Online Companies Will Pay YOU $5 to $125 for Each Survey!
  Get Paid to Participate in Online Focus Groups At $50 to $150 Per Hour!
  Get Paid to Try New Products - Keep The Products For FREE and Get Paid Too!
  Get Paid to Watch Movie Trailers $4 to $25 Per Hour!
  Get Paid $5 to $95 Per Hour to Take Surveys Offline!
  Get Paid to Travel! Earn $100's Each Month Just for Traveling!
  Get Paid to Drive Your Car $1000 to $3000 per month! Plus They Pay For Your
Gas!


Click here :
http://microsoft-office-live.blogspot.com/2009/07/wanted-people.html

Re Comment on Before Creation was.



Even though I am much behind now reading everything here...the post
"Before Creation" was one of the most excellent things I have ever had
the honor to read!!!  I will attempt, when I can find some time, to post
this in various other places also.  Thanks so much for expressing this
writing with such depth and descriptiveness!  I am still reading on the
"Darsinian Inheritance" also and it is good!



Love,



DeLana



I doubt that you will get much feed-back on it DeLana because that one
is too way-out. I was in a pissed off way-out mood when I wrote it. So I
just did an AS IS lay-it-on-line WHAM, and containing much Synetic
Dialogue. I bet you that there aint many who are going to see the
significance of that one. You are a rarity – ssshhhhh. But it will
also act as a good test – if you know what I mean.



Regards Dick.



Hi Merlin and All,



Today I posted to various places the "Before Creation Was"  e-mail that
you wrote and I will let you know if it  gets any comments.   I even
posted it where all my friends and relatives could see so I may get a
lot of feedback either positive or negative...We shall see.  I may get
none!   Hope there is feedback though.



Love,



DeLana





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> The less they know the more they assume that they know – and it is all pissing
and farting into the wind.

You also, right?

Mary

Has been involved in so many misadventures.  Was tracked across several
continents by government agents supplied with a coded message, divided in two in
an effort to shake off a couple determined amateur sleuths who learned their
trade in a series of all-night TV and video sessions, fuelled by cheap lager. 
Questioned by police in adjoining cells at a makeshift holding camp on the
Mongolian-Siberian border.  Reintegrated by remote shamanic influence secretly
commissioned by Sufi activists in exile, acting under orders from their
spiritual masters in Tehran, the name persisted in its wanderings.  Erroneously
reported as crucifed in Ulan-Bator, then re-emerged into the full glare of local
publicity at an undisclosed location in Uttar Pradesh.

Meanwhile, back in prosaic climes, accepted, with surname, on application forms
and cheques, yet proving a recurrent liability at an existential site in which
the controversy of mental illness has seemingly always resisted due
philosophical enquiry.  Reported to have survived a prescribed dose of hemlock,
an extra-judicial hanging, and an apparent suicide attempt foiled by men
claiming to be police constables acting on a tip-off.  Counsellors are currently
advising the name on how to divide in three for maximal self-protection.  The
explanatory key is with-held for the protection of the innocent.

L
OUI
SE

What use, after all, is a name, in the midst of a controversy about race which
is side-tracked into issues of skin-colour and differential modes of
persecution?

I AM a European, gazing toward Russia.  Geryon roars at my back.  Desist.  In
silence is the fulfilling of the Law.

Ardent Fantasist
... questing for Sophia

There once was a wizard called Dick,
Who fell for a fetching broom`stick.
He declared, "I am I,
And now we may fly",
That strange London wizard called Dick.


This is not a surrealist poem.

A usually reliable source related that  a recent  digital photo of a big
American boomer was invisible on digital cameras. Special forces telephone has
its own rational.
  We have a deploy able laser. Others brag but we put ours on TV. If it is on TV
it has to be real. Do not bother looking for the burner, it looks like any other
searchlight.
  So back to the Akoolas. Six were built and two now lie off our east coast. Two
hundred miles to Armageddon.
  I think we have the better tech and if the Russians want to do some nihilism, I
know about that.
  Of course I would not worry about the ones I can see. It is the four that I may
not see that push the threat.
  When I get comment from long term sources Who want information out it is
interesting to me.
  I think because of technological advances we have an opportunity to advance US
interests. I would follow those opportunities and stay out in front in the race
for survival.
  Europe has its own decision about CERN. If Soviet boomers were off your shores
how would you  feel? Bill

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
>
> Has been involved in so many misadventures.  Was tracked across several
continents by government agents supplied with a coded message, divided in two in
an effort to shake off a couple determined amateur sleuths who learned their
trade in a series of all-night TV and video sessions, fuelled by cheap lager. 
Questioned by police in adjoining cells at a makeshift holding camp on the
Mongolian-Siberian border.  Reintegrated by remote shamanic influence secretly
commissioned by Sufi activists in exile, acting under orders from their
spiritual masters in Tehran, the name persisted in its wanderings.  Erroneously
reported as crucifed in Ulan-Bator, then re-emerged into the full glare of local
publicity at an undisclosed location in Uttar Pradesh.
>
> Meanwhile, back in prosaic climes, accepted, with surname, on application
forms and cheques, yet proving a recurrent liability at an existential site in
which the controversy of mental illness has seemingly always resisted due
philosophical enquiry.  Reported to have survived a prescribed dose of hemlock,
an extra-judicial hanging, and an apparent suicide attempt foiled by men
claiming to be police constables acting on a tip-off.  Counsellors are currently
advising the name on how to divide in three for maximal self-protection.  The
explanatory key is with-held for the protection of the innocent.
>
> L
> OUI
> SE
>
> What use, after all, is a name, in the midst of a controversy about race which
is side-tracked into issues of skin-colour and differential modes of
persecution?
>
> I AM a European, gazing toward Russia.  Geryon roars at my back.  Desist.  In
silence is the fulfilling of the Law.
>
> Ardent Fantasist
> ... questing for Sophia
>

It is not easy, in retrospect, to make sense of this post.  The occasion for its
writing is my continued inability to put any trust in the concept, *mental
illness*, which has always baffled my every attempt to investigate its meaning. 
Underlying the incoherence is an awareness that my confusions are rooted in the
blurring of good-natured forms of bad faith with loss of subjective care
characteristic of certain forms of dementia.  It seems to me that the academic
(psychiatric) concept of mental illness is not at all identical to mental
malfunction owing to objectively verifiable brain disorder, or to significant
loss of capacity.  In fact, I am referring to the possibility of a different
approach, with scientific rigour, toward aberrant behaviour that typically does
not fall into the category of 'criminal'.  Even purely economic considerations
might motivate such enquiry in the near future, since the incidence of
depression alone has reached epidemic proportions worldwide.  Is it not
arguable, at least, that the social intolerance and persecution of aberrant
behaviour generates psychosis, and that such a thesis does not receive serious
attention because, in cultures where science and technology flourish, religion
still endures so powerfully, even under the guises of humanism and atheism,
words which are not easy to define?  In relation to personhood, name attaches to
social identity, and the loss of identity may be traceable to various possible
causes.  The confusion of imagination with subjective belief is a common human
error, a reminder of how psychology and its related disciplines lack precision
in the absence of philosophical critique.

Louise

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
>
> There once was a wizard called Dick,
> Who fell for a fetching broom`stick.
> He declared, "I am I,
> And now we may fly",
> That strange London wizard called Dick.
>
>
> This is not a surrealist poem.
>

My impatience with the entirely nonexistential subject-matter of *psychognosis*
led me to fall into this peculiar satire.  I am extremely disturbed by the
political catastrophes of recent years, and the self-indulgence of Dick's posts
finally overcame my courtesy, my good sense, and my prejudice in favour of
'Merlin' and his interesting life narratives.  I did not understand why Wil
characterised Dick as some kind of a stalker, and the bafflement affected me.  I
have been mentally tortured for my political beliefs and patriotic sentiments,
which cannot be neatly separated from my sense of the sacred, and simply
attempted a parody of what I find to be an uncritical interpretation of unusual
brain activity.  As a confused visionary myself, who takes such a different view
from Dick of Bible-based faith, it was only a matter of time, I'm afraid, before
my patience was going to crack.  The comment underneath is an echo of the
caption of that famous painting of a pipe, 'ceci n'est pas une pipe'.   A
peculiar instance of quasi-automatic writing, which even now puzzles my memory.

Louise

Hello,



I saw this email and joined the group again simply to address this
outrageous comment from somebody who has not only not read the works (or
understood them if they have) which awarded the writer with the
scientific prize [ http://godprize.org/ <http://godprize.org/>   ] but
which is also simply Donald Duck comments.



First and foremost this remark [ "myself, who takes such a different
view
from Dick of Bible-based faith, it was only a matter of time"]
Reveals utter ignorance of what I found and then was asked to write
about by Nobel Scientific Prize winners and philosophers many decades
ago.  Let her have a go at that !



When people ask what I am in the philosophical sense then for forty
years I have been telling them that I am a Pragmatic Existentialist. As
for bibles, religions and Priestcraft I would destroy the lot of them
given the chance to do so – but evolution must take care of that job
– the unfolding of the implicate nature of the cosmological innate
and primordial forces which it is all built upon. She plainly knows
nothing about physics, consciousness, the human mind and psyche,
archetypal constructs and image emanations, or philosophy and what it
really is. I was an existentialist probably when she was in diapers (I
think you call them in the USA.)



Thousands of people (academics, philosophers, scientists, psychologists;
and housewives) all over the world have read what I have found and
written about, and they download the books every day, and for some years
now. Before my own website existed many other people had my stuff on
their websites (where is her stuff I wonder). So all this childish
prattling  of hers is taken notice of only by herself and nobody else.



As for what I really am in terms of work and a chosen vocation then I am
a Psychologist; the study of the human mind and consciousness at all the
inner depths which are yet found (three layers of it) and then combine
all that (and the effects of finding it and its dynamics) with the human
existential situation on earth in day to day living. Thus, personality
and the subconscious uniting in one manifestation and Woking in harmony
and accord within conscious experience in daily life here and now, and a
foot into tomorrow.



So, where is all your stuff from life experience found ma'am, and I
will read it all. But children love to talk about things they know
nothing of and disseminate criticism of others who do say something
– like the old hags at an execution of heretics back in the middle
ages. Grow up woman.



Dick Richardson

West Somerset. UK.



--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" hecubatoher@ wrote:
> >
> > There once was a wizard called Dick,
> > Who fell for a fetching broom`stick.
> > He declared, "I am I,
> > And now we may fly",
> > That strange London wizard called Dick.
> >
> >
> > This is not a surrealist poem.
> >
>
> My impatience with the entirely nonexistential subject-matter of
*psychognosis* led me to fall into this peculiar satire. I am extremely
disturbed by the political catastrophes of recent years, and the
self-indulgence of Dick's posts finally overcame my courtesy, my good
sense, and my prejudice in favour of 'Merlin' and his interesting life
narratives. I did not understand why Wil characterised Dick as some kind
of a stalker, and the bafflement affected me. I have been mentally
tortured for my political beliefs and patriotic sentiments, which cannot
be neatly separated from my sense of the sacred, and simply attempted a
parody of what I find to be an uncritical interpretation of unusual
brain activity. As a confused visionary myself, who takes such a
different view from Dick of Bible-based faith, it was only a matter of
time, I'm afraid, before my patience was going to crack. The comment
underneath is an echo of the caption of that famous painting of a pipe,
'ceci n'est pas une pipe'. A peculiar instance of quasi-automatic
writing, which even now puzzles my memory.
>
> Louise
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dick,

There is nothing outrageous at all about my comments.  What I am saying is that
the way you have presented your case here does not convince me that you are
presenting an existentialist thesis.  I am hardly alone in that view.  If you
wish to continue trying to persuade readers here, and if you are not barred by
the moderators, I shall probably continue reading your stuff, since, as I say,
it is often very humanly interesting, cheering indeed.  Yet I do not believe it
is existential in content, and do not consider that I must read your general
oeuvre to draw that conclusion.

As for my being immature, you do not know me, and are not qualified to judge.

Louise

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "dick.richardson@..." <dick.richardson@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I saw this email and joined the group again simply to address this
> outrageous comment from somebody who has not only not read the works (or
> understood them if they have) which awarded the writer with the
> scientific prize [ http://godprize.org/ <http://godprize.org/>   ] but
> which is also simply Donald Duck comments.
>
>
>
> First and foremost this remark [ "myself, who takes such a different
> view
> from Dick of Bible-based faith, it was only a matter of time"]
> Reveals utter ignorance of what I found and then was asked to write
> about by Nobel Scientific Prize winners and philosophers many decades
> ago.  Let her have a go at that !
>
>
>
> When people ask what I am in the philosophical sense then for forty
> years I have been telling them that I am a Pragmatic Existentialist. As
> for bibles, religions and Priestcraft I would destroy the lot of them
> given the chance to do so – but evolution must take care of that job
> – the unfolding of the implicate nature of the cosmological innate
> and primordial forces which it is all built upon. She plainly knows
> nothing about physics, consciousness, the human mind and psyche,
> archetypal constructs and image emanations, or philosophy and what it
> really is. I was an existentialist probably when she was in diapers (I
> think you call them in the USA.)
>
>
>
> Thousands of people (academics, philosophers, scientists, psychologists;
> and housewives) all over the world have read what I have found and
> written about, and they download the books every day, and for some years
> now. Before my own website existed many other people had my stuff on
> their websites (where is her stuff I wonder). So all this childish
> prattling  of hers is taken notice of only by herself and nobody else.
>
>
>
> As for what I really am in terms of work and a chosen vocation then I am
> a Psychologist; the study of the human mind and consciousness at all the
> inner depths which are yet found (three layers of it) and then combine
> all that (and the effects of finding it and its dynamics) with the human
> existential situation on earth in day to day living. Thus, personality
> and the subconscious uniting in one manifestation and Woking in harmony
> and accord within conscious experience in daily life here and now, and a
> foot into tomorrow.
>
>
>
> So, where is all your stuff from life experience found ma'am, and I
> will read it all. But children love to talk about things they know
> nothing of and disseminate criticism of others who do say something
> – like the old hags at an execution of heretics back in the middle
> ages. Grow up woman.
>
>
>
> Dick Richardson
>
> West Somerset. UK.
>
>
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" hecubatoher@ wrote:
> > >
> > > There once was a wizard called Dick,
> > > Who fell for a fetching broom`stick.
> > > He declared, "I am I,
> > > And now we may fly",
> > > That strange London wizard called Dick.
> > >
> > >
> > > This is not a surrealist poem.
> > >
> >
> > My impatience with the entirely nonexistential subject-matter of
> *psychognosis* led me to fall into this peculiar satire. I am extremely
> disturbed by the political catastrophes of recent years, and the
> self-indulgence of Dick's posts finally overcame my courtesy, my good
> sense, and my prejudice in favour of 'Merlin' and his interesting life
> narratives. I did not understand why Wil characterised Dick as some kind
> of a stalker, and the bafflement affected me. I have been mentally
> tortured for my political beliefs and patriotic sentiments, which cannot
> be neatly separated from my sense of the sacred, and simply attempted a
> parody of what I find to be an uncritical interpretation of unusual
> brain activity. As a confused visionary myself, who takes such a
> different view from Dick of Bible-based faith, it was only a matter of
> time, I'm afraid, before my patience was going to crack. The comment
> underneath is an echo of the caption of that famous painting of a pipe,
> 'ceci n'est pas une pipe'. A peculiar instance of quasi-automatic
> writing, which even now puzzles my memory.
> >
> > Louise
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I now know more about  Hercules, about his twelve trials and his demigod
existence. As a demigod he is a myth but his importance in the ancient Greek
pantheon and in the Greek psyche is most notable. Nietzsche wrote of  superman
but his higher man was on a mental stage while Hercules  is most potent in the
physical world.You had to believe Hercules  accomplished all those wondrous
miracles. With   Nietzsche it was about knowing, not believing. Nietzsche takes
the  retreat from mysticism most seriously. The wisest of the Ancient Greeks
were beginning to consider such a world but monotheism was also seen as
progressive. How long have we pondered that branch of theism ?
  The evolution of the Greek Psyche postulates God\Men as an intermediate  step
toward an understanding of man. It has not worked very well, even to put god
back  on his Olympus. Zeus won out as god and Hercules was all but forgotten. As
an intermediate position he remains interesting to me.
  One of the great  scientific debates between string theory and big bang is in
such a dual position. Many ,many things are on the table. It seems string theory
literally sheds strange new universes much like the mythical battles of Hercules
introduced us to monsters and scenarios never seen. The parallel universes of
string theory do not seem to be directly approachable so  will not be proven or
dis proven. They will do nicely as the home of the demigods. Multi Headed
serpents can still fight Hercules in a bubble universe far far away. Bill

How much we will pay you ?

- $5 for free sign up
- $5 monthly
- $1 monthly for each member you refer
Join Now >>>
http://microsoft-office-live.blogspot.com/2009/08/rent-your-desktop.html

Bill,

There are a number of ways to interpret mythology. The fundamentalist takes
myths as exact historical reality; whereas the other extreme position is to
reject them as lies believed by primative minds. I believe the most intelligent
and creative use of myth is to realize that in all probability they are at least
partly fictional, but the historical truth or falsehood is not the most
significant aspect of the myth. Pagans then and now saw the Gods and Goddesses
as personifations of aspects of the human psyche, and various rituals were
methods of making contact with the aspect of the human psyche that is most
relevent in dealing with the situation they were confronting.. Joseph Cambell
spent most of his life studying the power of myth to transform lives. I heard
him speak at University of Memphis in the mid 80s several years before he died.
I have read from a number of sources the observation that quite similar myths
repeatedly appear in aboriginal cultures that were seperated by time and space.
It is presumed that the various witchdoctors were through psychedelic plants,
chants, meditations etc were able to come into contact with a collective aspect
of the human psyche that produces myths as means to enhance life and
conciousness. I have also heard the idea advanced that the utilization of
various god and goddess images were means used by the witchdoctors to bring out
in the tribal mind the appropriate moods for doing what was necesary for tribal
survival and well being. Primatives lack the capacity to act in opposition to
their feelings like us more civilized but also more neurotic humans. A
fundamentalist would take the Adam and Eve story as literally true. A
reductionist, materialistic skeptic would turn up his nose and skoff at the
delusions of the simple minded. Whereas a person with a more open mind might see
the Adam and Eve myth of eating from the fruit of the tree of knowledge and the
resultant exile fromn the Garden of Eden as symbolic of the split that occured
in the human psyche as it evolved from a purely instinctual animal type of
conciousness to a conciousness where rationality and instinct are often opposed,
and anxiety, guilt and regret are born. As I understand it, the Roman Catholic
Church took pagan myths and altered them to support the patriarchal culture they
were creating.Gods and Goddesses were desexualized and transformed into patron
saints. Like yourself I grew up in the Catholic school system, and assumed for
many years, even after I had renounced Catholicism that the Pope, cardinals,
bishops, priests etc were all literal believers in the official dogma. When the
Church altered paganism to create a new dogma to indoctrinate the masses, at
least the inner elite kept the original pagan mythology for themselves, and fed
the altered dogmatic brand for mass consumption. The altar boy scandals brought
out the reality that the heirarchy was not really anywhere near as puritanical
as the persona they presented  p to the masses. I recall a late cousin of mine
saying about 5 years ago that the Catholic Church had always been quite tolerant
of eccentricities as long as discretion was used and mass conciousness was not
affected. I also recall a quote by Crowley made probably in the early part of
the 20th century that latin males were basically pagans. I read in the early 80s
that traditionally in latin countries it was rare to see adult males other than
priests at church, and that latin males didnt tend to submit to the dogma but
supported the church because the church supported the patriarchal family. Of
course now Italy has one of the lowest birthrates in the world, as women have
broken free from church dogma on birthcontrol etc. Catholicism predominated in
agrarian societies where there were many advantages to a man in having many
sons, think of the Godfather. Witch burning and various means of discouraging
heresies were not to the inner elites the following of ignorant superstitions,
but a recognition that alternate views of reality tend to bring into question
the whole political, economic and social heirarchy. Dogma doesnt have to be
theistic as witness aetheistic, materialist dogma as espoused in Stalinist
Russia etc. The transformation of polytheistic paganism to theistic Catholicism
was designed to produce a mass conciousness that was in accord with patriarchy
and empire. Hitler was a strong admirer of the Catholic Church for its ability
to indictrinate people and its understanding  of human nature. If u ever read
1984, u might recall that the outer party was guilt ridden that they might fall
into "wrongthink"; whereas the inner party was secretly quite decadent. It is
often alleged that Leo Strause, who taught many of the neocons, believed that
the masses need to be kept in check by dogmas;victimless crime laws, etc 
whereas the "philosophers", a small elite, were free to see beyond good and
evil.I had an attorney friend in the early 90s who said from his observations at
social functions that of the judges and DAs that were giving hard time for drug
law offences, over half regularly used illegal drugs themselves. Of course, in
the 1920s I understand the same types were often seen in speakeasies after a
hard day of sending bootleggers to long prison terms.

Tom
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: bhvwd
   To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 5:01 PM
   Subject: [existlist] Hercules and string theory


     I now know more about Hercules, about his twelve trials and his demigod
existence. As a demigod he is a myth but his importance in the ancient Greek
pantheon and in the Greek psyche is most notable. Nietzsche wrote of superman
but his higher man was on a mental stage while Hercules is most potent in the
physical world.You had to believe Hercules accomplished all those wondrous
miracles. With Nietzsche it was about knowing, not believing. Nietzsche takes
the retreat from mysticism most seriously. The wisest of the Ancient Greeks were
beginning to consider such a world but monotheism was also seen as progressive.
How long have we pondered that branch of theism ?
   The evolution of the Greek Psyche postulates God\Men as an intermediate step
toward an understanding of man. It has not worked very well, even to put god
back on his Olympus. Zeus won out as god and Hercules was all but forgotten. As
an intermediate position he remains interesting to me.
   One of the great scientific debates between string theory and big bang is in
such a dual position. Many ,many things are on the table. It seems string theory
literally sheds strange new universes much like the mythical battles of Hercules
introduced us to monsters and scenarios never seen. The parallel universes of
string theory do not seem to be directly approachable so will not be proven or
dis proven. They will do nicely as the home of the demigods. Multi Headed
serpents can still fight Hercules in a bubble universe far far away. Bill





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

How futile is freedom of speech, in the absence of either (or both) moral or
intellectual conscience.  How neutralised is conscience by disturbance of
sanity.  So far as I recall, my fellow-countryman, Merlin of Exmoor, once
remarked that I was the most intelligent and polite of regular writers at this
list.  This generous statement overlooks the general inconsistency of my output,
as well as several coarsely-worded tantrums in clear breach of moderation
policy, but it can scarcely be denied that among a small assortment of
intelligent fantasists, I am the least sane.  Some here are even responsible
realists.  Frankly, now that the ordinary life of the people around me (the
visible, dithering typist) begins to take on the appearance of intelligible
behaviour, I am ready to acknowledge my lack of responsibility, and the brutal
insensibility to others' feelings which my frequent delusions involve.  History
keeps repeating itself in sickening fashion, at least in my besieged
imagination, and I have no wish to keep such pseudo-psychopathy in public view. 
There has been no change in my conviction that the BBC is engaged in a
conspiracy so bungled that even those who are hard-headed investigators of
political conspiracy would not think it worthwhile to take seriously my claims
that I am the only paranoid schizophrenic in the world who really is* being
watched by the media.  My husband knows that I am totally convinced, and we can
at least laugh together, sometimes, in synchronous good faith, at the absurdity
of it all.  Clearly I am not cut out for social adaptation, and am quite unable
to pretend effectively with strangers.  As for faith, it is a piece of mangled
wreckage.  That is not to say that I do not value more highly than I used to,
the honourable Christian institutions of the land.  Communism, however, remains
a lurking horror.  I am too weary to be capable of the hatred which would act as
some defence.  My revolutionary dreams are not of relevance to anyone else, and
concern only the authenticity of perception and will.  Nietzsche remains my
beacon of hope in a grey depressing landscape.  If I am unrepentant as I leave
the list (really, in earnest, since it is not possible to consider a return in
the short term - the change required of me will take years, not months), it is
because I must make my departure in literary form, as a pseudonymous character,
not as a self, nor even as a consciousness.

Cordelia [double agent]