Certainly away from the maddening crowd . So must the individualist be an
isolationist? One place where Dick seemed  modernist was in his relative 
isolationism. He did not give a damn what others thought about his ideas and
that hard kernal of self tied him to his atheism and stark individuality.

Were Mary male I think she would be much the same but her gender leads her to a
commensuality typical of women.
I really cannot figure Irvin out. He sometimes sounds  like  an old time FN guy
but has Ann Rand tendancies that are not contempoary but more like post war US
industrialist ideas.
I know I am becomming more isolationist but that is my time of life, less
involved, more quiet  and less intense. It is younger peoples turn to  lead in
action. I am anxious to see the election results  and voter demographics. Then 
I will be able to see where these young people will take us.
I am most thanfful to be in a democracy where my vote counts as much as that of
a twenty something. Should  the young show a trend toward self reliance and
indivualism I would gladly follow them into  a better future. In a couple of
weeks  I hope to make plans for the retirement  portion of my life. I would like
to have a general idea of the directions that the younger people might take.
Bill

Certainly away from the maddening crowd . So must the individualist be an
isolationist? One place where Dick seemed  modernist was in his relative 
isolationism. He did not give a damn what others thought about his ideas and
that hard kernal of self tied him to his atheism and stark individuality.

Were Mary male I think she would be much the same but her gender leads her to a
commensuality typical of women.
I really cannot figure Irvin out. He sometimes sounds  like  an old time FN guy
but has Ann Rand tendancies that are not contempoary but more like post war US
industrialist ideas.
I know I am becomming more isolationist but that is my time of life, less
involved, more quiet  and less intense. It is younger peoples turn to  lead in
action. I am anxious to see the election results  and voter demographics. Then 
I will be able to see where these young people will take us.
I am most thanfful to be in a democracy where my vote counts as much as that of
a twenty something. Should  the young show a trend toward self reliance and
indivualism I would gladly follow them into  a better future. In a couple of
weeks  I hope to make plans for the retirement  portion of my life. I would like
to have a general idea of the directions that the younger people might take.
Bill

Bill,

I've learned to live with paradox; we are autonomous and interrelated.
Modernism, your sanitized word for Existentialism, must embrace both. The world
is shrinking and what comprises a community has changed. No one is independent
of environment and community, and the more one communicates with others, even if
only to convince them to be isolationist, the more they prove the contrary. As I
try to convince others of solidarity I betray my isolation from all but a select
few. Philosophically, as well as scientifically, all life is interconnected. We
are a community of individuals, not one or the other. Existlist is an internet
community, including those who mostly read here. A unity of difference, a
totality of totalities. One asserts their individual rights on the basis of or
in opposition to a community or constitutional standard. Limits are an impasse
meant to be sublated; truth is sometimes wrong and lies are often right.
Contradiction, opposition, and negation are not only how life proceeds, they are
how speculative thought develops. I need both isolation and community because
that is what we are, individual and connected. Think this is our natural
structure and this is how we think--alone and together.

Keep writing; I'm reading.

Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@...> wrote:
>
> Certainly away from the maddening crowd . So must the individualist be an
isolationist? One place where Dick seemed  modernist was in his relative 
isolationism. He did not give a damn what others thought about his ideas and
that hard kernal of self tied him to his atheism and stark individuality.
>
> Were Mary male I think she would be much the same but her gender leads her to
a commensuality typical of women.
> I really cannot figure Irvin out. He sometimes sounds  like  an old time FN
guy but has Ann Rand tendancies that are not contempoary but more like post war
US industrialist ideas.
> I know I am becomming more isolationist but that is my time of life, less
involved, more quiet  and less intense. It is younger peoples turn to  lead in
action. I am anxious to see the election results  and voter demographics. Then 
I will be able to see where these young people will take us.
> I am most thanfful to be in a democracy where my vote counts as much as that
of a twenty something. Should  the young show a trend toward self reliance and
indivualism I would gladly follow them into  a better future. In a couple of
weeks  I hope to make plans for the retirement  portion of my life. I would like
to have a general idea of the directions that the younger people might take.
Bill
>

We need every one and every body. Only women can help us from going backwards,
and the young will indicate what's going forward. As far as I can tell, young
people are fed up with gridlock and the two party system. I know several who
will vote for candidates from other parties and I disagree with their vote; they
disagree with my defensive voting. We'll see.

Mary

Mysticism is not a chosen path



[ If somebody rejects their way of life they can choose to alter it. If
somebody rejects the religion which they were brought up in they can
choose another path. If they choose to learn another language from the
one they were brought up in then they can do so.  You mention that some
people reject or run away from mystical experience, therefore those who
don't must have chosen it. ]



Oh dear, you really are confusing issues here. Most of what you say
above is indeed true, but then you throw in a bogy. I think they call
this fogging the issue don't they? Best keep your thinking in line
with the facts sir.



Yes, I did choose another life style from the one I was born in and
moved away from it and also educated myself. Yes, I did once choose to
learn another language but found it pointless so I quit it. Yes, some
people do reject their religion and jump on the bandwagon of another
one; how about the protestant revolution for example; how about the
North American `gnostics' who were christian fundamentalists?
How about all those in the west who switched to buddhism and meditation?
How about all the Japanese who switched to christianity? All this is
obvious isn't it. Some people may well hear about mysticism and jump
on the band wagon. But they are not mystics.



However mystical experience and that way if life is not a religion and
one does not choose it. One is presented with it just as one is
presented with eyesight or lungs. One does not choose to have mystical
experience at the age of three, or any of them. Neither does one choose
to have psychic experiences. You cannot just switch this stuff on no
more than you can choose to fall in love with somebody, or not fall in
love with them. Also, you can choose what you look at in daily life but
you cannot choose to see; and you cannot choose what is there when you
do use your eyes.



Also, you make an analogy with learning another language. Think about
it. Theoretically learning another language is much easier than learning
your native language was. For you can hear or read that this word means
the same as `above'. But when learning your first language there
was no other word to indicate what this one means.  You had to have it
explained to you what it means (or look it up in a  dictionary and try
to work it out) and then you had to grasp the concept or phenomena. But
in learning a second language you are just translating from one word to
another word and then substituting it. No sir, mystical experience is
not a chosen path and it is not a religion.  It just comes. Hells Bells
I ought to bloody well know.



And yes, some people  do initially try to forget it, turn away from it.
But they did not choose to have it in the first place did they. You
imply that I chose to continue with it. But I didn't. I simple did
not run away from it. There is a difference. Nor did I ever try to
encourage any of it. So, you have got this all wrong. You have taken
some truths and then bending it for your purpose. The Roman religion did
that. And they also offered to extricate people from hell and put them
in heaven for a price.  What a wonderful mob eh. But they could only
fool the people if the people were up for being fooled. That is religion
for you. Mystical experience and the mystical way of life is not a
religion. It is about what we are and then encountering those facets of
being. Ipso bloody well facto. Argue when you know something for sure.
Not until.



Dick Richardson







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

The Effect of Writing it



[ I am in complete agreement with these conclusions (of Dick) through my
study etc. in which the terminologies only are difference: What M.
Muslim and I call "objectless space" the "plane", in Dick Richardson's
terminology it is the "Eternal Ground of Being". What we call
fractionalization and transfocation from timeless, infinite "objectless
space" (which is not "nothing"), Dick Richardson calls "vortex of
emanation" and "valves".



As I have been banging my head against the wall to explain to
scientists, philosophers, 'religious people' etc. over the last ten
years, (and am now at the point of not continuing to do so but just
finalize a few more writings/books and post them on the internet - and
then take a 'vacation') this is the solution to the mind/body problem
and answers what consciousness is and where it comes from (and in my
writings where it will go too). Dick has had 'access' from an
experiential point of view and then also assessed using reason part of
this Reality - I mean he has had an experiential behind-the-scenes
'view'. There are a few others who have had the same experience too -
one of them being M. Muslim, my co-author who is at large in Africa,
where aside from the logical conclusions this was experienced through a
mode where rationality is intact but it is not imaginary or hallucigenic
etc. - i.e. the person is not crazy but totally sane and awake. (In a
sense most of humankind is asleep because they don't understand this
point). It also co-incides as I have said before with the kernel of the
beliefs that some major prophets and sages have talked about, especially
from the period between 500 BC and 600 A.D. (or C.E.) as the latest
wave; there were at least two more periods before this - the first being
the paleolithic era (that Dick mentions) and there was another one
shortly after the ice-age period (I have written a 21 page article on
this in Huping's journal). However, it appears that the point is being
missed by even the current experts on the current fossilized religions
that mutated from the pristine view of these (human) luminaries.



If you want to go west where a destination lies then you must travel
west. You cannot arrive at your western destination if you are
travelling north no matter how hard you try. This is the whole current
problem with both athiests and even anti-atheists; part of the reason of
them being at loggerheads with each other is that they are both
erroneous about this fundamental issue! So first you must check your
compass and see if you are really going west. Then change your course if
you realize that you are travelling in the wrong direction - it should
have nothing to do with false pride. Indeed, there will be many signs
along the way that you are going in the wrong direction. But it also has
to do with one's will and desire. Do you really want to reach the
destination? I mean what if the destination means having to change your
behaviour which is harmful in so many ways? Is that why you are
travelling north? Others - who know - can only guide you but you must
travel on your own and there can be no compulsion.

Once most of humankind realizes this point things will change all things
because this is the basis of everything and our relational view of the
self recursively with the self, the self with other 'selves' and the
self with inanimate objects and processes/changes. But things will not
change until there's a critical mass of human beings realizing this
point. Once a critical mass is achieved then things will accelerate. But
I don't see  this full 'life-cycle' happening in the short run. It will
happen but much later on.  So for now I will stop banging my head and
prepare for that 'vacation'. Regards, Nadeem ]



I mentioned about the frustration of yelling into a vacuum. However, the
real effect of documenting these things is when folks have come to begin
experiencing them for themselves. So in talking about it and writing it,
one is NOT teaching one is affirming it. The affirmation IS very helpful
to people because initially they feel so alone and confused. This is why
I try to get more mystics to write. And by that I don't mean shmystics.
The more writing that is done then the less power the mind benders and
sharks will have over people. So, as I said before, for the large part
one is not writing for today but for tomorrow and even generations yet
to come. If one gets dealt this stuff then one should use it, and use it
effectively and tell it AS IT IS. This will also help segregate the
mystical and Essential (metaphysical) from the psychic phenomena and
potentials.



There must have been thousands of ancient belief systems, and no doubt
there still are. But most of them were based on psychic phenomena; and
which is very common. Thousands of people have written to me who's
understanding and beliefs were based on psychic stuff, not metaphysical
stuff.  All the psychic stuff is fine, but it does not go deep enough
into the vortex of emanation. NO psychic stuff revels what we are, where
we come from, and where we are going. THAT is the preserve of the
Mystical  and Transcendent stuff. NB, your `critical mass of folk' is
what I call the social tipping point. That generates a new paradigm when
it happens, or a new zeitgeist.



rwr





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

Assessing the truth of something?



[ The question of what is truth must be as old as any other question.
How would you negotiate this problem? ]



I don't see it as being a problem; I see it as a fascinating quest.  But
this itself raises a few questions doesn't it. The question of are you
telling the truth is not the same question as to what is true about
something. There is also the question of as to what is being used as the
yardstick, measure, or criteria as to knowing the truth of this or that.
If you were the only person to witness a murder then only you and the
guilty party would know the truth of who committed it. Your testimony
would only be hearsay to a third party.  So hearsay may be true or may
not be true as far as the third party is concerned.  Then there is the
question of what credence the third party gives to the testimony and
character of both the accuser and the accused. But, is that criteria
good enough? Is it good enough in all cases?



The answer to the question `What is true' is much easier to answer than
the question `What is the truth of this or that claim'. True is that
which IS SO about something.  If you know what is true about something
then one does not need any further evidence or hearsay or being told,
for you already know it.  But if you don't know as to what is true about
something then how are you to assess the truth of a claim made regarding
it?



Then there is the question of only that which you can know. Do you like
ice cream? Nobody else can know that, only you. How can you reveal the
fact that you like ice cream if you really do like ice cream?  You
cannot. You might be seen eating ice cream every day of your life which
might indicate that you do like it; but you might be a masochist. You
might say that you like it a million times every day; but saying it does
not reveal that you do like it.



What was it that Descartes said – `I think, therefore I am'. As to
why he should need rational proof of his existence beats me, but
Descartes did not know that thinking  was not a criteria of existing and
that we can and do exist in a mode where we cannot think at all. I know
that but he did not know that. So, what do we each assess the truth of
something by?



Is it or is it not true that on the surface of this planet apples fall
off a tree in the direction of the ground and not in the direction of
the sky? If it is so then the question of as to why is another question.
It is sometimes the case that finding one truth leads on to many more
questions. Where, in temporal existence, do questions ever end?  I doubt
that they do ever end. One can always find something to ask a question
about. How much money is spent each year the world over on religious
broadcasting? That alone could feed all the people who go hungry the
world over. If the godo of this or that belief system is almighty and
all powerful then why does it require religious broadcasting?



Many people claim that human experience, or this or that human
experience, is not true, not real. There is NO human experience which is
not real experience. But what is the sum of what exists to be
experienced? Or even forgetting the word `sum' then simply what exists
to be experienced at all? How do you assess the justification of a
particular question? Have you stopped beating your wife?  Finding
answers to this or that event or this or that phenomenon is somehow
satisfying. And in doing so a small degree of ignorance is no more.
Knowing just one thing would be more satisfying than believing in ten
billion things. Then there are the questions of what do you do with it
and why. There is damn all you can do with ignorance, but you can do so
much with knowledge and understanding. The point, the moment, the event,
of understanding something is a very mysterious one. How much time and
effort is required to understand something? When, in the Eternal mode of
consciousness, how long does it take to understand what you are? Do you
know?



rwr







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

A Continuum of Manifestation?



[ People speak of mind and matter as though they were two separate
entities, the same as some people do with spirit and form and life and
death. But you speak of a vortex of emanation as though it were all one
thing in a progression, in a continuum. Have I got it right? ]



Yes. A continues unbroken progression of emanation; a continuum. If you
want to think of it in terms of spirit, soul, and body; or essence,
psyche, and form; or spirit, psyche and matter, or whatever names you
want to give to these three continuous modes or dimensions of emanation
from the Point of No Duration through to the all that is manifest. Thus,
all one connected thing through these various modes. I do not find
Eternity and Time to be two separate unconnected things but two modes of
the same thing. Just as your childhood and adulthood and old age are
three modes of the same entity – you.



And by virtue of this you can have mystical (spiritual) experience;
psychic experience; and `normal' daily experience. You can have Eternal
experience, the Bridge experience, and Temporal experience. This could
not happen if they were not a continuum of the parts. They are all
connected within one thing; one vortex of emanation. But within this
vortex I do see what one can call valves, or doors, or curtains which
`separate' one part from another part. Just like the floors in a
building separate the room above from the room below. But these valves
can open and consciousness can pass through them. All one journey
through one thing. But nothing else can pass through these valves; only
that which is consciousness. The Material forms of Time cannot go into
Eternity. So, no, I do not see mind and matter as two separate and
isolated things in this temporal mode of being. But due to it being a
Double Vortex of Emanation consciousness experiences the distinction of
mind and matter as the I and the THOU. An established Symmetry of
Emanation.  But there is no I and Thou in the Eternal Ground of Being;
but ONLY the I AM. There is of course the duality of I AM and the place
which it exists in, and which is seen as the the first manifestation
from the Point of NO Duration.  Thus I AM the first brought forth from
NO structured  thing. That is how I experienced it to be and understood
it to be. Just as Homo Ensophicus is not something different from Homo
Sapiens but simply a continuum from it evolving from one state to the
next state of emanation in the temporal mode. Homo Ensophicus has all
that which Homo Sapiens has, but more. And it is the more which makes
the difference. Do you want to go on further?



As to what academics, theologians, and physicists, THINK and deduce from
their thinking, or what they believe, then I am not interested. Thinking
does not reach these other modes of being. Only consciousness does. And
I do. Before you study what you are not study what you are. And then
study what you are not once you know what you are. For you know what is
observing it that way. If you do not know what you are you will be like
a ship lost on a chaotic sea looking for its rudder to steer it by. That
may be OK for a while, and while the sea is calm. But the sea can get
rough.



Dick Richardson





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

A Continuum of Manifestation?



[ People speak of mind and matter as though they were two separate
entities, the same as some people do with spirit and form and life and
death. But you speak of a vortex of emanation as though it were all one
thing in a progression, in a continuum. Have I got it right? ]



Yes. A continues unbroken progression of emanation; a continuum. If you
want to think of it in terms of spirit, soul, and body; or essence,
psyche, and form; or spirit, psyche and matter, or whatever names you
want to give to these three continuous modes or dimensions of emanation
from the Point of No Duration through to the all that is manifest. Thus,
all one connected thing through these various modes. I do not find
Eternity and Time to be two separate unconnected things but two modes of
the same thing. Just as your childhood and adulthood and old age are
three modes of the same entity – you.



And by virtue of this you can have mystical (spiritual) experience;
psychic experience; and `normal' daily experience. You can have Eternal
experience, the Bridge experience, and Temporal experience. This could
not happen if they were not a continuum of the parts. They are all
connected within one thing; one vortex of emanation. But within this
vortex I do see what one can call valves, or doors, or curtains which
`separate' one part from another part. Just like the floors in a
building separate the room above from the room below. But these valves
can open and consciousness can pass through them. All one journey
through one thing. But nothing else can pass through these valves; only
that which is consciousness. The Material forms of Time cannot go into
Eternity. So, no, I do not see mind and matter as two separate and
isolated things in this temporal mode of being. But due to it being a
Double Vortex of Emanation consciousness experiences the distinction of
mind and matter as the I and the THOU. An established Symmetry of
Emanation.  But there is no I and Thou in the Eternal Ground of Being;
but ONLY the I AM. There is of course the duality of I AM and the place
which it exists in, and which is seen as the the first manifestation
from the Point of NO Duration.  Thus I AM the first brought forth from
NO structured  thing. That is how I experienced it to be and understood
it to be. Just as Homo Ensophicus is not something different from Homo
Sapiens but simply a continuum from it evolving from one state to the
next state of emanation in the temporal mode. Homo Ensophicus has all
that which Homo Sapiens has, but more. And it is the more which makes
the difference. Do you want to go on further?



As to what academics, theologians, and physicists, THINK and deduce from
their thinking, or what they believe, then I am not interested. Thinking
does not reach these other modes of being. Only consciousness does. And
I do. Before you study what you are not study what you are. And then
study what you are not once you know what you are. For you know what is
observing it that way. If you do not know what you are you will be like
a ship lost on a chaotic sea looking for its rudder to steer it by. That
may be OK for a while, and while the sea is calm. But the sea can get
rough.



Dick Richardson





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

Evolution and Instant Conscious Existence?



[ All different aspects of scientific investigation seeks evidence for
the beginning of life, from searching in stagnant ponds and into fossils
to that of going back in time to the production of  material particles
taking on mass in the early universe. You say that in the ground of
conscious existence consciousness just instantaneously pops up. How do
you equate evolution with that? ]



First, I do not say that Consciousness just pops up from the point of no
duration and no extension. What I say is that it is experienced to just
pop up instantaneously.  But even that consciousness is nothing like
what we have here in daily experience. So how did it get from that to
what it is now in daily life?  Evolution. But all this is still within
you to experience. They call it Mysticism.  I don't give a ducks
arse what they call it. Or what they think when they hear it.   It is
LIFE. And it is coming to know what we are and where we come from. We
come to know it because we need to know it. I am not looking for
agreement or confirmation from you are any man. IT IS LIFE and I AM
LIFE. I am not something was HAS life.



However, think about it. When you wake up every morning Consciousness
just pops up. A shift from no consciousness to some kind of
consciousness just pops up from the experiential point of view, and we
ARE the observer. Nothing can be conscious of what goes on before
consciousness pops up. So the Point of NO duration and no conscious
existence cannot be known by a conscious being, an observer.
Consciousness in the Ground of Being, although it can be known and
experienced will always be a mystery. There will always be mystery.



Now, scientists are NOT going to find this. They will not find it in
ponds or in rocks or by going back in physical time; they are not going
to find it in material particles EVER. IPSO. Science CANNOT find out
what life is and where it comes from. They might find the first signs of
life on earth however.



How does evolution come about?  By WAR. Not peace. Take a look inside a
single cell; it is one long war with viruses which are trying to destroy
the cell every second of its existence. One is evolving to overcome the
other all the time.  To the virus the cell is like a giant universe. We
call the cell the good guys and the virus the bad guys. But without the
bad guys we would not evolve. Look at the war between organised systems
(using cyberspace) and that of hackers trying to bring it all down?
Same thing. The good guys and the bad guys. All the time this war goes
on we learn more and understand more and can do more – EVOLUTION.
NOT stagnation. Take a look at the complexity of human civilisations, it
is always a war. Look what we learned and did during WW2.



This is not about gods and demons at war it is about organised energy
unfolding from the point of no duration and no extension. Take a look at
your own physical body and brain (it is our spacetime machine, we could
not be here without it) it is the most amazing and complex machine in
the known universe.  But the body and brain is not YOU, it is not
Consciousness and it does not produce life and consciousness. It
MEDIATES it. It conducts it like a wire conducts electricity. The brain
and body is not simply a transmitter it is also a receiver. But I AM the
driver at the helm. I AM the rudder of the boat. How the deuce can
consciousness exist in Time and then change?  It is a struggle. It is
EMENATION and THEN Evolution. Something cannot emanate from nothing, and
something cannot BE nothing. There is no such things as NOTHING.
NOTHING cannot EXIST. Only SOMETHING can exist. The physical universe
does not come from NOTHING. I do not come from NOTHING.  Also time
BEGINS when consciousness comes on the scene. Hence I AM the Watcher at
the Gates of Dawn. The first thing to be brought forth from the point of
no duration in the Ground of Being (the GOB). FACT. And it is
experienced to be a FACT. Empiric  evidence. I always demand evidence of
something. Don't you? The evidence is within you and all around you.
Do you see it?  When you look do you see?



Listen to scientists and then judge for yourself. Listen to religionists
and priestcrafty and judge for yourself. Listen to a Mystics and judge
for yourself. Then carry on experiencing and see which mob was right.
But best of all – look to yourself and study that. For you are life.
But have you seen it all yet?  There is always tomorrow you know, you
ain't done yet. Tell your grandchildren that you walked some of the
way with a mystic. You will not find many of them as yet. One day maybe.
A New Man is coming in consensus terms; but not yet.



Oh, by way. The New Homo will not simply know what it is and where it
comes from (which you learn in GOB)  but it will also know where it is
going and WHY (which you DONT learn in the GOB) you learn that another
way. But that is a bridge too far as yet.



Dick Richardson






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

Shooting the Messenger?



[ You mentioned that some years before the internet existed that you
were told by book publishers that what you were writing would not want
be heard by their readers, so they squashed it, and even though they
read it themselves. You have also mentioned much about the abuse and
ridicule which you received on many discussion forms. This sort of thing
has permeated all civilisations throughout time. You call it the
suppression of knowledge, some call it shooting the messenger. It still
goes on. ]



Yes, indeed so. Moreover, it goes on in all walks of life. As for the
book publishes it was not only the organisation but on a number of
occasions it was the actual owner of the publishing company. I was told
it over the phone on some occasions and direct to my face on another
occasion. So, there was a vested interest at work. MONEY and or
credulity.



However this raises two issues not one.  Folks on discussions forums
were not ridiculing for the vested interest of money but simply due to
their ignorance of it and their failure and refusal to try and listen to
something which they did not know. This is very different to the
deliberate suppression of knowledge and information by large well know
established organisations for vested interests.  Take for example an
established church with millions of subscribers; their head people know
what is what don't they, and none of their staff could ever do any
wrong :- )))) And as for saints, well they are untouchable :- ) They
know well enough what they don't want to hear or what they don't
want their flock to hear.  You also get the same thing in science and
psychology when you have just one or two lone voices who have found
something    new.  You get it in all fields.  So, there is a big
different between individuals incredulity and that of a direct cover up
by large organisations. Two different things altogether. But shooting
the messenger is as good a name as any for it.



But one must not fail to see another problem here also; it is the
problem of TESTIMONY. If you have ONE person making claims which do not
fit with the establishments zeitgeist then his or her testimony is
dubious and often goes ignored. And yes, they may well be a crank. But
it you have thousands of testimonies from many different people and even
that is hushed up then you have a big human social problem. This is why
I have always encouraged others to speak up and write. One voice yelling
into a vacuum is no good at all. But you try getting them to speak up in
the face of what they know will happen to them. So, that barrier of fear
has to be eliminated socially. We do not live in open societies. Not yet
anyway. Will the planet last long enough for that to happen?  I
don't know. But I hope so. Mystical experience does not reveal as to
how long a planet will last. But if it does not then life still goes on.



Dick Richardson







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

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
>
> We need every one and every body. Only women can help us from going backwards,
and the young will indicate what's going forward. As far as I can tell, young
people are fed up with gridlock and the two party system. I know several who
will vote for candidates from other parties and I disagree with their vote; they
disagree with my defensive voting. We'll see.
>
> Mary
>
Mary, I am rewatching the third debate and am amased at Romney`s escape back to
the center. He  agrees with Obama over and over. Were I in his base I would be
angry. All those republican debates and the emergent candidate  disavows  all
they postulated  in  a last minute rush to the center. I suspect that Romney 
would govern  from  a position much like Bush . Mc Govern`s . death reminds me
of my volutility during that time. Were I young ,now , I fear I would be in the
streets. I hated Nixon and  his hard hat constituancy  were stupid goons. As I
watched my friends dragged off to Nam my distaste for the government was huge.
It is not that bad today  and the young have a reasonable president with
Obama.The economy is coming back and the young will find jobs to pay down their
student debts. I agree with you that supporting a third party  would only allow
the right to get back in power.
The democratic ground game is very strong here with volunteers,most young, at
our door . No Republicans have showed up. perhaps it is the Obama sign in the
front that  shoos them away.
I can trace my modernism and its evolution from those College days  and see it
as rational and contiguous. The right remains the war party and as a dove Obama 
has  talons. Ask Osama. Romney refuses to cut defense and that alone  puts him
out of bounds for me. You know I am not against killing our enemies when all
else fails. A sequestration may be the only way we can get the cuts we need .
Obama`s comment about horses and bayonetts is sharp but true. The Admirals and
Generals will not back down off the obscene spending  and our population will
remain hostage to them as long as  we maintain the huge defense budgets. It is
the same old game ,guns or butter. For you and I this is pretty much a done
deal. The cola increase in Jan will be welcomed but it will not set me off on an
extended world tour. The seamless  adhesion to a modernist life style is
unchagned but evolving. I will keep writing  as I see it as a duty. I do not
think it unseemly to be repetative when right so if I bore some , so be it. Read
Dick if it gets too bad. The volunteers want me to vote early  but i want to
eyeball the mean old republican women at  my voting place. As Willy says"Roll me
up and smoke me when I die. And if they don`t like it just look them in the eye"
Bill

I am watching the big  stock market drop. I think there may be a reason  beyond 
poor earnings from three dow components. I think the money right  just  figured
out that Romney is not going to make it. All but the hard right agree that Obama
won the debate and  more stringent forms  of Dodd ,Frank and defense cuts are on
the way. The money  men are pissed and when they are scared they sell. I quote
the great Gordon Gecko, "Bulls win,bears win, pigs get slaughtered" . Bill

A Productive Life Span?



[ Hope you are keeping reasonably well Merlin given what you have got.
No doubt society or the paradigm  would have a set age for a productive
life span but life always proves the boffins wrong :)) ]



:- ) I was written off as useless on my sixtieth birthday when they put
me out to graze and gave me a pension which would not feed our animals.
That was fourteen years ago before the internet days here. Somebody
could spend their life in a wheelchair and still be productive and
produce something useful to somebody if not society as a whole.



I am glad that IPN set in in the feet and the bottom of the legs and not
in the head and arms at the top. So I can still operate for a while :-
))) Yes, other than that (and which will only get worse a bit at a time)
I am keeping well enough thanks. I cannot hump sacks of coal around but
I can do other things. They might be useful to some people. No matter
what one gets and at what age, so long as they have still got their
marbles about them then they can do something productive even if they
are a hundred.  There are those who never do anything productive; and no
matter how fit they are. Question is as to what society deems to be
useful and productive :- )



My son and his lady have gone to live in the French Alps, at least for a
year (he can still operate his business from there while his staff are
in the office in Avon). They sent some pictures yesterday; the place
looks spectacular and it was in full warm sunshine; they were cycling in
T shirts and shorts and sitting outside a place in a tiny hamlet near
the Swiss boarder having a beer. All the trees there were in their
autumnal glory of colours.  This morning here there was a typical
November type Exmoor grey bleak morning mist, and quite a chill, and I
love it to bits :- )  Oh well, it takes all kinds of tastes does it not.
Had lots of logs delivered here yesterday for the first part of the
winter at least up to Yuletide and a little beyond; the cats and dogs
will like that. Birthday next week so there should be some whisky
arriving; I always look forward Halloween :- ))) Did you know that
society deems Scorpios to be romantics, stubborn and very mysterious?  I
am NOT mysterious but I plead guilty to being resolute and a perennial
romantic :- ))) There are some things about us which never change :- )
Have a nice winter. And as they say, keep your woman in the bed and the
wolves away from the door.  Oh yeah, and have a productive life; and
make sure that your kids get the opportunity to do the same.



TTFN.



Merlin von Exmoor.







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

Bill,

My favorite post debate quip by Obama this morning was "third stage Romnesia"
but not to worry because pre-existing conditions are covered by ObamaCare.

The COLA is a measure of progress which would probably disappear under Romney's
Congress. I hope to survive election night in order to enjoy the gesture come
January.

A strong youth turnout is necessary. I'm still working on them. They all
threaten to move to Canada, but I've heard that bluster before.

Peace,
Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
> >
> > We need every one and every body. Only women can help us from going
backwards, and the young will indicate what's going forward. As far as I can
tell, young people are fed up with gridlock and the two party system. I know
several who will vote for candidates from other parties and I disagree with
their vote; they disagree with my defensive voting. We'll see.
> >
> > Mary
> >
> Mary, I am rewatching the third debate and am amased at Romney`s escape back
to the center. He  agrees with Obama over and over. Were I in his base I would
be angry. All those republican debates and the emergent candidate  disavows  all
they postulated  in  a last minute rush to the center. I suspect that Romney 
would govern  from  a position much like Bush . Mc Govern`s . death reminds me
of my volutility during that time. Were I young ,now , I fear I would be in the
streets. I hated Nixon and  his hard hat constituancy  were stupid goons. As I
watched my friends dragged off to Nam my distaste for the government was huge.
> It is not that bad today  and the young have a reasonable president with
Obama.The economy is coming back and the young will find jobs to pay down their
student debts. I agree with you that supporting a third party  would only allow
the right to get back in power.
> The democratic ground game is very strong here with volunteers,most young, at
our door . No Republicans have showed up. perhaps it is the Obama sign in the
front that  shoos them away.
> I can trace my modernism and its evolution from those College days  and see it
as rational and contiguous. The right remains the war party and as a dove Obama 
has  talons. Ask Osama. Romney refuses to cut defense and that alone  puts him
out of bounds for me. You know I am not against killing our enemies when all
else fails. A sequestration may be the only way we can get the cuts we need .
Obama`s comment about horses and bayonetts is sharp but true. The Admirals and
Generals will not back down off the obscene spending  and our population will
remain hostage to them as long as  we maintain the huge defense budgets. It is
the same old game ,guns or butter. For you and I this is pretty much a done
deal. The cola increase in Jan will be welcomed but it will not set me off on an
extended world tour. The seamless  adhesion to a modernist life style is
unchagned but evolving. I will keep writing  as I see it as a duty. I do not
think it unseemly to be repetative when right so if I bore some , so be it. Read
Dick if it gets too bad. The volunteers want me to vote early  but i want to
eyeball the mean old republican women at  my voting place. As Willy says"Roll me
up and smoke me when I die. And if they don`t like it just look them in the eye"
Bill
>

Evolution without that?



[ Have you ever thought about the evolution of humanity without the
mystical link? ]



No.  Actually I do think much at all about the evolution of humanity; I
suppose I am too much of a here and now type for wild speculation and
the what if scenarios.  My only link for thinking about this at all is
due to the transforming effects of all the mystical and psychic events
and the fact of humanity gradually becoming aware of more and more, and
the sensory enhancement parts of all this. I suppose the nearest I came
to doing that was in doing the novel. I have no way of knowing the
future.  But I know and remember quite a bit of the past :- )



But without change there could be no evolution. There would just be one
long tedious boredom of THE SAME. Pick any period from the past, or now,
and where would you like to be stuck? Being stuck anywhere would not
appeal to me. But that does not happen does it. So it is going
somewhere.  So where and how?  That is the question.



I have never yet seen a futuristic movie or story which did not make me
squirm. They seem to have no imagination whatsoever and they are all
dead crass; and invariably gung ho idiocy. There is nothing exciting and
inspirational about them.  But what are the type of things which change
people and society other than the mystical and psychic events and
attributes? More and more effective technology is one of them. Attaining
a better cooperation between the intellect and emotions is another. A
better imagination is another. Even mere attitude to life and
expectations is another. Political reform and a wider and longer
educational process is another.  Eliminating much of the things which
human beings fight and squabble about is another. Developing whatever
talents a person has is another. Developing a unified world language
would be another.  Add them all together and that alone is a reasonable
package. But evolution is all very time consuming isn't it, so it
takes a while. And in a very short lifetime we do not see much evolution
do we.  But we see a bit of it, and it seems to be speeding up. But we
also play a part in it.   The outside is about done, work now depends on
the inside. Getting ourselves right and fit for purpose. There is a long
way to go in that project. When we can feel as much awe, wonder and
inspiration when we observe a human being and society as we do with
observing a sunset amid exquisite scenery then we will be getting
somewhere worth being, and worth BEING. There are things which can take
our breath way. When humanity and society can do that then we will have
arrived. There are things deep within us which can do that now.  But
they must come out on to the surface.  That will be it.



Dick Richardson





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

What Inspires?



[ Talking of inspiration, and the effect of which is motivation in so
many cases, what kinds of things inspirer a person most do you think? ]



What, apart from deep mystical experiences you mean? Well, it is hard to
say for people can be inspired by so many different things, so you would
have to ask each person and then find a short list of the most common
occurring ones; so each of us can only speak for ourselves. But I could
write a list of things which would be too long to write, and not even
mentioning the degree and lasting effect of this or that kind of
inspiring event, phenomena and experience :- ) An excellent question of
course is as to how that which inspires does inspire. But I think I will
give that one a miss :- ) Then again there is the question of its
opposite, things which discourage and depress people.



Probably one of the most common things which inspire so many people is
music and art. But there is also much music and art which can depress
people too; and encourage them to turn it off :- )  Another very common
one it seems is the natural world around us, and also the celestial
heavens, which are both spectacular and in such variety and extent.
Also, a good fictional story or play or movie can inspire.  Watching
animals can inspire. A good moving speech can inspire. One of the things
which inspired and motivated me most as a kid was ignorance. Knowing
that one was ignorant.  The void of knowing anything encouraged one to
learn.  Another was a railway line and my wondering where it went and
what it was like there. The unending complexity and variations and the
beauty in a chess position inspired me.  Watching a baby grow in a womb
is awe inspiring.  Watching some people do this or that can be
inspiring. But I found the most inspiring and moving thing of all was
being in love with something or somebody.  That never fails to work and
it never dies. But, as I say, even a hedgerow cobweb in the morning dew
can inspire, and so many other things that one could not write a list of
them all. So, damned if I know. Nor do I know HOW they inspire. But as
to the WHY they inspire then that is simple and obvious. And you said it
yourself – to motivate. A thing of beauty alone is just that, but
when it has a moving effect on one then that is something else. That is
the harmonious dance of the two. The observer and the observed in
unison. How amazing it is to be an observer. And that is the deepest and
most profound mystery of them all. How and why something observes. Maybe
many take it for granted.  I don't and never did take it for
granted. I was inspired and motivated by the fact of it for as long as I
can remember; and still am.



rwr







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

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> My favorite post debate quip by Obama this morning was "third stage Romnesia"
but not to worry because pre-existing conditions are covered by ObamaCare.
>
> The COLA is a measure of progress which would probably disappear under
Romney's Congress. I hope to survive election night in order to enjoy the
gesture come January.
>
> A strong youth turnout is necessary. I'm still working on them. They all
threaten to move to Canada, but I've heard that bluster before.
>
> Peace,
> Mary
>Mary, just looking at the latest  right winger saying god  allows rape. He
needs a few hours with bubba  and  we will see if his faith is shaken.Romney is
distancing himself from the idiot. I`m predicting a four point Obama win. It
will be a joy to have the thing over as here we have been  pestered by the
process for four years. It looks like a two billion dollar campaign which should
make us consider public financing of federal campaigns. Citizens United is  not
a first amendment  problem if both sides  have equil funds. The media is
responsible for this over spending and the people hate it. I think legislation 
is necessary to remedy the right wing court decision. For me two is the magic
number  as two court members leaving would get rid of  this right wing court. As
old as we are  I think it shows my  continuing concern  that I care about who
sits on the Scotus. . Bill
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
> > >
> > > We need every one and every body. Only women can help us from going
backwards, and the young will indicate what's going forward. As far as I can
tell, young people are fed up with gridlock and the two party system. I know
several who will vote for candidates from other parties and I disagree with
their vote; they disagree with my defensive voting. We'll see.
> > >
> > > Mary
> > >
> > Mary, I am rewatching the third debate and am amased at Romney`s escape back
to the center. He  agrees with Obama over and over. Were I in his base I would
be angry. All those republican debates and the emergent candidate  disavows  all
they postulated  in  a last minute rush to the center. I suspect that Romney 
would govern  from  a position much like Bush . Mc Govern`s . death reminds me
of my volutility during that time. Were I young ,now , I fear I would be in the
streets. I hated Nixon and  his hard hat constituancy  were stupid goons. As I
watched my friends dragged off to Nam my distaste for the government was huge.
> > It is not that bad today  and the young have a reasonable president with
Obama.The economy is coming back and the young will find jobs to pay down their
student debts. I agree with you that supporting a third party  would only allow
the right to get back in power.
> > The democratic ground game is very strong here with volunteers,most young,
at our door . No Republicans have showed up. perhaps it is the Obama sign in the
front that  shoos them away.
> > I can trace my modernism and its evolution from those College days  and see
it as rational and contiguous. The right remains the war party and as a dove
Obama  has  talons. Ask Osama. Romney refuses to cut defense and that alone 
puts him out of bounds for me. You know I am not against killing our enemies
when all else fails. A sequestration may be the only way we can get the cuts we
need . Obama`s comment about horses and bayonetts is sharp but true. The
Admirals and Generals will not back down off the obscene spending  and our
population will remain hostage to them as long as  we maintain the huge defense
budgets. It is the same old game ,guns or butter. For you and I this is pretty
much a done deal. The cola increase in Jan will be welcomed but it will not set
me off on an extended world tour. The seamless  adhesion to a modernist life
style is unchagned but evolving. I will keep writing  as I see it as a duty. I
do not think it unseemly to be repetative when right so if I bore some , so be
it. Read Dick if it gets too bad. The volunteers want me to vote early  but i
want to eyeball the mean old republican women at  my voting place. As Willy
says"Roll me up and smoke me when I die. And if they don`t like it just look
them in the eye" Bill
> >
>

The Cosmic Computer?

[ What some people might envisage as a living god others might envisage
as a cosmic computer. What, if anything, would you offer as some kind of
equivalent for this? ]

A thing or process to construct everything which exists; has existed,
and will exist? Well now, there is a thing eh. If something extant
contained all the information, and the energy, and the ability, to
envisage and then construct everything which exists then where would it
have got that information and energy to perform it from? And what kind
of a thing would it be?

One of the first things that occurred to me shortly after the mystical
transcendent event in the GOB was to wonder if anything physical really
did exist at all, or was it all constructed in the mind. But IF that
were the case then a mind had to exist with something sending it
information to experience things of form and also experienced as
objective entities to that of the perceiving mind. In roundabout ways we
have done this question before. But a short while later it occurred to
me that it would be easier for those things to actually exist than to
create the illusion of them existing and planting that illusion in every
mind that ever existed. So I did not buy that idea :- )

But the question still remains as to how all this stuff exists; and
exists to be experienced by an observer of it.  The answer is that I
don't know. But I do know that IT IS experienced by an observer. So, in
one form or another the job is done. That the job IS done denotes ORDER
as opposed to chaos and disorder. But unlike entropy I find that the
ORDER increases with the unfolding of some implicate ORDER. Experience
dictates to me that the more we evolve then the more we see, find,
experience, know, and understand of this whole fabric of existence. But
what the heck IS this Implicate Order which is unfolding and what is the
Fabric which it is unfolding upon and within? No mean question is it? :-
)))

IF everything that could be done has been done before then all that
information could be stored somewhere and then being transmitted out
from whence it is stored in order to do the job; and with more being
learned and recorded this time around. Then again all that which has
been done and is being done now, might be being stored as information
now.  But we are diving deep here into the WHAT IFS. Why bother with the
what ifs?  Why not just carry on learning and see what turns up? I
cannot even begin to imagine where all this information could be stored
and how the process of construction from that information could happen.
But I am glad that I don't have to do it :- )))) Sod that job. But as an
observer I would love to observe everything which is capable of being
observed and known by way of experience. So, for the time being I am
more interested in my own original question of what exists to be
experienced and what can I do with it. But in order to know EVERYTHING
now you had best find one of those gurus who hang out on every street
corner. They will tell you. I cannot. I am still learning.

rwr







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

Self Consciousness?

[ With all the interest these days in the phenomenon of consciousness in
the sciences and psychology, and maybe even cosmology, there seems to be
little talk and mention of self consciousness as an individuation; the
act of personalised consciousness of an individual. But I would question
as to whether there is such a thing as consciousness other than as
individualised.  How do you find this? ]

Exactly the same. But I find many things which never seem to be
mentioned. If you have been around here for a while you will know that I
use the expressions self consciousness and SELF consciousness for
simplicity. Nor do I find much talk or interest in the content of
consciousness. That is to say what people  are conscious of.

That we all share this consciousness, as we do feet and hands, then that
does not imply there is such a phenomenon as FEET or HANDS in their own
right independent of people having feet and hands.  Same too with
consciousness.  I for one have never found a phenomenon called
consciousness which we all share a little bit of, as like we can all
have a slice of one cake or a drink from one reservoir.  Exactly the
same too with life. I have never found a phenomenon called life
independent of all the manifest life forms.

Up until the age of near on my mid twenties I had always been amazed by
this incredible thing called self consciousness, it seemed to me to be
impossible on the one hand yet self evident on the other. One could not
argue it away. But at the time I knew nothing at all about SELF
consciousness. The bit that is still me but not the me here in space and
time; and in which the content of consciousness was totally different to
what it is here in space and time.  I don't hear much talk about that
bit either :- )  WHY NOT?  Because they don't know it.

But then when I did discover SELF consciousness I was amazed. Something
SO different yet it was still  me, a personalised consciousness. It was
not somebody else and it was not a collective consciousness, it was just
ME. So, perhaps you can imagine how I felt about discovering that. I
found little point in mentioning it for you would just get blank looks
or taken to be a bloody idiot. The rest I have documented and it is now
history.  Once in a while you come across somebody with whom you can
talk with about it all, but not a lot. It still floats in a vacuum of
incredulity. I tried everything within my means to argue it away. But it
would not go away. It is irrefutable as well as being axiomatic. So too
are the continuing effects of knowing it. So, that is the times we are
living in here; the state of the art of Knowledge and Understanding.
Like still being in the dark ages. So, for me at least, the phenomenon
of self consciousness, and which includes SELF consciousness (as its
root), is still the most amazing thing which I know. To try and find out
HOW being conscious arises seems to be impossible. But nonetheless one
cannot deny that it does, for I am IT. However, it is still the case
that my interest is NOT consciousness but rather the content of
consciousness, that which I can become consciously aware of and
experience. Life is extremely mysterious, exciting and fun. And nothing
illuminates the darkness as does life and being conscious. Especially in
both modes. But the mode here is more interesting for it knows and
experiences more; and it can do things of its own volition. While here I
am not the seed but the tree. Not the root but the manifestation of it.

Dick Richardson







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

Bill,

I feel the practical effect of keeping Romney Corp. out of office outweighs my
concerns for creating a more vibrant democracy. Yes, everyone needs to be
concerned about the SCOTUS. I'll be relieved when the media circus of the two
party system ends, but I will begin encouraging other parties and candidates to
challenge the present system and win a seat at the table. If there's some kind
of election Event, this will jump start this movement. The 2000 election debacle
was a missed opportunity, not because Nader took votes away from Gore, but
because the Constitution and the integrity of the entire electoral process
should have been center stage, not the candidates. The Commission on
Presidential Debates is one place to start. Young voters need to make this one
of their priorities and begin preparing for the next elections; they need to
break the two-party stranglehold.

Change is coming, democratically.

Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> >
> > My favorite post debate quip by Obama this morning was "third stage
Romnesia" but not to worry because pre-existing conditions are covered by
ObamaCare.
> >
> > The COLA is a measure of progress which would probably disappear under
Romney's Congress. I hope to survive election night in order to enjoy the
gesture come January.
> >
> > A strong youth turnout is necessary. I'm still working on them. They all
threaten to move to Canada, but I've heard that bluster before.
> >
> > Peace,
> > Mary
> >Mary, just looking at the latest  right winger saying god  allows rape. He
needs a few hours with bubba  and  we will see if his faith is shaken.Romney is
distancing himself from the idiot. I`m predicting a four point Obama win. It
will be a joy to have the thing over as here we have been  pestered by the
process for four years. It looks like a two billion dollar campaign which should
make us consider public financing of federal campaigns. Citizens United is  not
a first amendment  problem if both sides  have equil funds. The media is
responsible for this over spending and the people hate it. I think legislation 
is necessary to remedy the right wing court decision. For me two is the magic
number  as two court members leaving would get rid of  this right wing court. As
old as we are  I think it shows my  continuing concern  that I care about who
sits on the Scotus. . Bill
> > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We need every one and every body. Only women can help us from going
backwards, and the young will indicate what's going forward. As far as I can
tell, young people are fed up with gridlock and the two party system. I know
several who will vote for candidates from other parties and I disagree with
their vote; they disagree with my defensive voting. We'll see.
> > > >
> > > > Mary
> > > >
> > > Mary, I am rewatching the third debate and am amased at Romney`s escape
back to the center. He  agrees with Obama over and over. Were I in his base I
would be angry. All those republican debates and the emergent candidate 
disavows  all they postulated  in  a last minute rush to the center. I suspect
that Romney  would govern  from  a position much like Bush . Mc Govern`s . death
reminds me of my volutility during that time. Were I young ,now , I fear I would
be in the streets. I hated Nixon and  his hard hat constituancy  were stupid
goons. As I watched my friends dragged off to Nam my distaste for the government
was huge.
> > > It is not that bad today  and the young have a reasonable president with
Obama.The economy is coming back and the young will find jobs to pay down their
student debts. I agree with you that supporting a third party  would only allow
the right to get back in power.
> > > The democratic ground game is very strong here with volunteers,most young,
at our door . No Republicans have showed up. perhaps it is the Obama sign in the
front that  shoos them away.
> > > I can trace my modernism and its evolution from those College days  and
see it as rational and contiguous. The right remains the war party and as a dove
Obama  has  talons. Ask Osama. Romney refuses to cut defense and that alone 
puts him out of bounds for me. You know I am not against killing our enemies
when all else fails. A sequestration may be the only way we can get the cuts we
need . Obama`s comment about horses and bayonetts is sharp but true. The
Admirals and Generals will not back down off the obscene spending  and our
population will remain hostage to them as long as  we maintain the huge defense
budgets. It is the same old game ,guns or butter. For you and I this is pretty
much a done deal. The cola increase in Jan will be welcomed but it will not set
me off on an extended world tour. The seamless  adhesion to a modernist life
style is unchagned but evolving. I will keep writing  as I see it as a duty. I
do not think it unseemly to be repetative when right so if I bore some , so be
it. Read Dick if it gets too bad. The volunteers want me to vote early  but i
want to eyeball the mean old republican women at  my voting place. As Willy
says"Roll me up and smoke me when I die. And if they don`t like it just look
them in the eye" Bill
> > >
> >
>

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> I feel the practical effect of keeping Romney Corp. out of office outweighs my
concerns for creating a more vibrant democracy. Yes, everyone needs to be
concerned about the SCOTUS. I'll be relieved when the media circus of the two
party system ends, but I will begin encouraging other parties and candidates to
challenge the present system and win a seat at the table. If there's some kind
of election Event, this will jump start this movement. The 2000 election debacle
was a missed opportunity, not because Nader took votes away from Gore, but
because the Constitution and the integrity of the entire electoral process
should have been center stage, not the candidates. The Commission on
Presidential Debates is one place to start. Young voters need to make this one
of their priorities and begin preparing for the next elections; they need to
break the two-party stranglehold.
>
> Change is coming, democratically.
>
> Mary
> Mary, I do not know the constitutanality of the two party system. I know we
used to have  multiple parties and do not know who or what sanctions a new
party. The tea party  may have backfired on the republicans as I think a new
leftist party probably would on the democrats. The political machines will balk
at any such attempts and losing an election now can change the country for
generations.
I do think any serious glitch in american democracy would be  most serious to
world order. Bush 2 was  a miscarrage of electoral  propriety and that glitch
has certainly cost us dearly. Two wars and a deep recession are directly
attributable to the neocon scourge. I just cannot see a way to risk another take
over by the Bush / Chaney bunch. If you could  build  a left wing coalition  in
four years and get it elected you would be a super woman. I see a better chance
obliterating the neocon right wing  and letting the democrats drift  to  a soft
landing on the left. Electing Hillary might accomplish  such goals without
risking  a right wing takeover. Getting her and Bill to run the country  might
get substantial  support from moderates like me. Yes I consider myseld a
moderate and am not one to risk huge change like  throwing out well reguleted
capitalism. I do not want to end up like China under a politburo and a de facto
dictator. Bill
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > My favorite post debate quip by Obama this morning was "third stage
Romnesia" but not to worry because pre-existing conditions are covered by
ObamaCare.
> > >
> > > The COLA is a measure of progress which would probably disappear under
Romney's Congress. I hope to survive election night in order to enjoy the
gesture come January.
> > >
> > > A strong youth turnout is necessary. I'm still working on them. They all
threaten to move to Canada, but I've heard that bluster before.
> > >
> > > Peace,
> > > Mary
> > >Mary, just looking at the latest  right winger saying god  allows rape. He
needs a few hours with bubba  and  we will see if his faith is shaken.Romney is
distancing himself from the idiot. I`m predicting a four point Obama win. It
will be a joy to have the thing over as here we have been  pestered by the
process for four years. It looks like a two billion dollar campaign which should
make us consider public financing of federal campaigns. Citizens United is  not
a first amendment  problem if both sides  have equil funds. The media is
responsible for this over spending and the people hate it. I think legislation 
is necessary to remedy the right wing court decision. For me two is the magic
number  as two court members leaving would get rid of  this right wing court. As
old as we are  I think it shows my  continuing concern  that I care about who
sits on the Scotus. . Bill
> > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > We need every one and every body. Only women can help us from going
backwards, and the young will indicate what's going forward. As far as I can
tell, young people are fed up with gridlock and the two party system. I know
several who will vote for candidates from other parties and I disagree with
their vote; they disagree with my defensive voting. We'll see.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mary
> > > > >
> > > > Mary, I am rewatching the third debate and am amased at Romney`s escape
back to the center. He  agrees with Obama over and over. Were I in his base I
would be angry. All those republican debates and the emergent candidate 
disavows  all they postulated  in  a last minute rush to the center. I suspect
that Romney  would govern  from  a position much like Bush . Mc Govern`s . death
reminds me of my volutility during that time. Were I young ,now , I fear I would
be in the streets. I hated Nixon and  his hard hat constituancy  were stupid
goons. As I watched my friends dragged off to Nam my distaste for the government
was huge.
> > > > It is not that bad today  and the young have a reasonable president with
Obama.The economy is coming back and the young will find jobs to pay down their
student debts. I agree with you that supporting a third party  would only allow
the right to get back in power.
> > > > The democratic ground game is very strong here with volunteers,most
young, at our door . No Republicans have showed up. perhaps it is the Obama sign
in the front that  shoos them away.
> > > > I can trace my modernism and its evolution from those College days  and
see it as rational and contiguous. The right remains the war party and as a dove
Obama  has  talons. Ask Osama. Romney refuses to cut defense and that alone 
puts him out of bounds for me. You know I am not against killing our enemies
when all else fails. A sequestration may be the only way we can get the cuts we
need . Obama`s comment about horses and bayonetts is sharp but true. The
Admirals and Generals will not back down off the obscene spending  and our
population will remain hostage to them as long as  we maintain the huge defense
budgets. It is the same old game ,guns or butter. For you and I this is pretty
much a done deal. The cola increase in Jan will be welcomed but it will not set
me off on an extended world tour. The seamless  adhesion to a modernist life
style is unchagned but evolving. I will keep writing  as I see it as a duty. I
do not think it unseemly to be repetative when right so if I bore some , so be
it. Read Dick if it gets too bad. The volunteers want me to vote early  but i
want to eyeball the mean old republican women at  my voting place. As Willy
says"Roll me up and smoke me when I die. And if they don`t like it just look
them in the eye" Bill
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Bryan Junius" <bryan.junius@...> wrote:
>
>
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/heaven-real-says-neurosurgeon-claims-visite\
d-afterlife-213527063.html
>
BS

Nuclear war threat in 1962?

[ You must remember the nuclear war threat in 1962 well enough.  Did you
think there would be such a war? ]

No, I did not. All the time that there is a human finger on the button
of such a war then there will not be a war of that kind. If the decision
rested in the lap of a computer then there could be. Theoretically there
is more potential for such a war now than there was then, for the
proliferation is far more widespread now than it was then. If a total
and utter megalomaniac moron with no children and no family, and one
with a will to die, had their hand on such a button then that of course
would raise a theat. But even in a case like that then the fact that
they were in a position of power would surely be enough for them to live
for.

But if such a thing had of happened then so be it.  We are all going to
go sometime. But all the time we ARE here then things MIGHT improve.
They will NOT improve if we are NOT here. Not that anyone would care
about that if we were not here :- )))) But in the event of such a war as
that then I would feel very sorry for the survivors of it.  Life would
be grim indeed while it started up all over again. I use such a scenario
in my fiction novel by the way.

rwr







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

So what point are you, and or he, making with this communication? Have
you made a study of the types of human experience and the degrees of
each types?  Dear death experiences are one of the most common types of
psychic experience and they have been recorded ever since recording
began in writing; albeit not by that name. They are ALL different, but
they slot within one category of one type of human conscious experience.
All you can prove from NDE's is that people can have them when close
to death.  Also, many people have no experience at all when near to
death. They are not important and are no longer worth recording and
disseminating. The study of the self is well worth studying however.
Neither can you study consciousness devoid of content. There is no such
thing as consciousness devoid of content. If you are conscious then you
have to be conscious of something, even if it is of yourself in a void
of nothing else. This is all old hat.

Also, what difference does it make if a scientist is talking about an
NDE or Fishmonger or a Bishop?  None at all. But you are welcome to try
and chew the bones out of this.

rwr


--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "gil_serrano@..." <gil_serrano@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Bryan Junius" bryan.junius@ wrote:
> >
> >
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/heaven-real-says-neurosurgeon-claim\
s-visited-afterlife-213527063.html
> >
> BS
>



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

BS

What is mind? What is real? Can I know when they are not?

Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@...> wrote:
>
> BS
>

Developing the no belief attitude?



[ How and when did you come to develop this no belief attitude of yours?
]



Huh !  I have never been asked that question before :- )))  A far better
question would be to ask people HOW and WHY they developed a belief
attitude or symptom. See what they say.



But I never did develop a no belief attitude, I was just born that way.
Let me give you a simple example.  I don't know a damn thing about
1937. Albeit that I can hear and read a lot about 1937; but I don't
know if it is true; or which bits may be true or are true.  I don't
really know damn all about 1938, the year I was born in. But I began to
become aware of being aware of things by 1939 and certainly by 1940
– but only as those events related to me and my own experience. So,
what do YOU KNOW?



Anything which I don't know remains unknown to me until I do know
something about it. I don't see how anybody can take that as being
complicated or odd. So, how can I ever know anything about 1937?  I
can't ever know anything about it. Other than hearsay. And I do not
trust hearsay. So, I listen to it and leave it at that. Two people give
you totally conflicting reports of an event on a certain date; so what
do you do with that information?  Decide to believe one of them and
reject the other maybe? Why bother to do either? If you know both of
these people very well you might be able to get a feel of each of them,
but that is not proof that they are right or wrong.



So, ARE we born different in some ways or do we pick up ALL our
characteristics while here? Do you know?  Do you know for sure?  I
don't ever recall deciding not to hold beliefs about things. But
throughout life I have discovered that people can LIE. They can also
just get something wrong without deliberately telling a lie. But it
amounts to the same effect – they are wrong. So that has emphasised
and substantiated my holding no beliefs about hearsay or anything else.



So, for me, it is about life experience as it is found.  Now, some might
argue that life experience counts for nothing at all. OK fine, if that
is so. But life experience is ALL I HAVE. What else is there?  But then
again, life experience might not be a load of crap. But whatever it is
then it is all I have got. Ipso.  So, what correlations exist between
peoples life experience? To what degree are we the same and to what
degree are we different?  If we are the same then why?  If we are
different then why?



The other day somebody was asking me about the beauty of the autumn
leaves. I too see beauty in the autumn leaves. But they then went on to
tell me why the leaves look that way.  My reply was that I am not
interested in as to why they look that way, I am interested in that they
DO look that way, for that is the finished product and that is what I
live among. That is how IT IS and how I find it to be NOW. I have to
live in it. And I like it :- )))) They also tell me all about the big
bang. But I like it as it is NOW. I am interested in life AS IT IS for
me. I hope others enjoy it too. I live in each day as it comes. Nobody
can live it for me; only me. Some weeks ago I had a pain in the chest,
but I did not have to believe it or disbelieve it, for there it was.
Then a while later it was gone.



So, why would anybody want me to believe something?  And what exactly
would they like me to believe. And WHY?  How would it benefit them if I
did? No, I never did believe anything and I never will. But I know what
I have lived through and how I felt about various thing.  If I am
different from some of them then so be it. I am not complaining. I have
never ever asked anybody to be like me. In my childhood nobody ever told
me that I had to believe something. I was advised to get out there and
learn what I could. So I guess that helped too. I have always advised my
children to do that too. It seems to work reasonably well. If there is a
better teacher of life than life itself then fine; but I am happy enough
with life experience AS IS.  I am an AS IS ian or an AS IS ionist :-
)))) Like it or lump it. I don't think I am alone in that by the
way. So they can take all their LIEFS and stick them up a dark place
where they sun does not shine. I don't want them.



Dick Richardson







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

And to expand just a bit, I think that what are called hallucinations, altered
states, and even dreams, should challenge our standard definition of ordinary or
normal consciousness. Skepticism is necessary for scientific advance, but all
the arguments to debunk these experiences don't seem to persuade the
experiencers of the unreal nature of their experience. I won't attribute this
attitude to stubbornness or emotional attachment. It seems more that both sides
of the issue refuse to admit the paradoxical 'existence' of Nothing. The more
limits we place on experience, the more it pushes into the freedom of the
unknown.

Mary

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
>
> What is mind? What is real? Can I know when they are not?
>
> Mary
>
> --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "William" <vize9938@> wrote:
> >
> > BS
> >
>

How would you place limits on human experience?  And why would you want
to do that? Which bits would you allow and which bits would you not
allow? There is no such thing as an experience which did not happen. But
how does what happen, happen?  And why shouldn't it? There is also
the question as to what effect does this or that experience have on the
experiencer. Is it a good effect or a bad effect for them? How would
anybody else know?

rwr

--- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary" <josephson45r@...> wrote:
>
> And to expand just a bit, I think that what are called hallucinations,
altered states, and even dreams, should challenge our standard
definition of ordinary or normal consciousness. Skepticism is necessary
for scientific advance, but all the arguments to debunk these
experiences don't seem to persuade the experiencers of the unreal nature
of their experience. I won't attribute this attitude to stubbornness or
emotional attachment. It seems more that both sides of the issue refuse
to admit the paradoxical 'existence' of Nothing. The more limits we
place on experience, the more it pushes into the freedom of the unknown.
>
> Mary