Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Experience vs. Proven Truth and Freedom

Expand Messages
  • Mary Jo Malo
    Here s an essay about the necessity for PROVEN TRUTH. We may be complacent, frustrated, and even convinced there is no such thing as proven truth, but we must
    Message 1 of 11 , May 28, 2003
      Here's an essay about the necessity for PROVEN TRUTH. We may be
      complacent, frustrated, and even convinced there is no such thing as
      proven truth, but we must press on to understand. - Mary Jo

      THE ETHICS OF FREEDOM - By Trinidad Cruz at Firebrand

      "We are now entering an age when basic human dignity will have to be
      vigorously defended as we redefine and refine the meaning and purpose
      of freedom. As physics and mathematics progress relentlessly toward
      modeling and producing new relative systems we must realize that the
      goal of this science is only manipulative power. Though a mastery of
      the language of the universe would undoubtedly produce apparently
      abundantly beneficial possibilities for the human race they will not
      lead to any substantial evolution of consciousness as so many
      believe. Human consciousness is stalled here on its evolutionary
      ladder because it has no comprehensive understanding of its own
      existential baseline. Like Huxley I am troubled by our inability at
      the dawn of this age to distinguish between comfort and freedom, and
      I believe that there is already evidence that this power of
      definition that would be gained from finally understanding how to
      move about in alternative relative systems would simply lead to a
      permanent bonding of human consciousness to this particular universe.
      Clearly the limitation of consciousness in any way is not freedom.
      Development would cease.

      In our universal human history we have always sought saviors.
      Unfortunately many times we have found them. Every savior ever found,
      whether they began as true saviors or not, has become a comfort
      provider with the secret answer waiting to be revealed at the right
      time. In the past this has generated and supported the political
      systems that have brought us to bloodbath after bloodbath. Though
      bloody it has been a benign phenomenon as far as threatening the
      possibility for the evolution of human consciousness. That
      serendipity is about to be ended, and the savior phenomenon is about
      to become toxic to human consciousness. Ironically it is science and
      the mastery of relative systems that will empower the manifestation
      of enslaving saviors across this world. Without a proven existential
      baseline for its own consciousness humanity will find the lure of the
      comfort offered by saviors irresistible and become, like its saviors,
      permanently bonded to this universal system. The only immunization
      against the coming disease is a dialectic of proof of existence for
      human consciousness. Our efforts for freedom must be focused there.
      All these saviors are offering is comfort.

      I have yet to discover a benevolent savior. Even Jesus threatens to
      return and destroy those who are destroying the earth. This is an
      ominous but very revealing statement. The single similar factor in
      the dogma of all saviors is the preservation of the planet. Why? For
      our own good? I don't think so. Our science is driven by a need to
      master the nature of the universe and move on, indeed even
      manufacture new planets. Obviously, for their own good. The saviors
      are all existentially trapped and rooted in this universal system.
      They are trapped for the same reason as we: they have no proven
      existential baseline for their consciousnesses. Presently the only
      difference between them and us is that they have mastered the
      manifesting language of this universe. Unfortunately we are about to
      do the same thing and become at our most elite scientific levels co-
      participants in their fiasco. It is inevitably a fiasco, because
      without a proven existential baseline for human consciousness even
      what seems to be immortality will not be real immortality. The
      universe is not immortal. Consciousness is. The universe is because
      of consciousness not vice versa. Living on and on in a universe is
      not immortality. A universe can end. Living on and on in a relative
      system is not immortality. There are an infinite number of relative
      systems and they are all produced by consciousness. I always prefer
      to err on the side of freedom. "I don't wanna work on Maggie's farm
      no more."

      As an activist for freedom I will aggressively engage any
      philosophical organization that promises to free the people from
      their suffering with secrets or esoteric knowledge. By "aggressively"
      I mean with the intent to humiliate and destroy. Any philosophical
      idea that promises to alleviate the suffering of humanity through
      participation in a new mysterious system of understanding that only
      an elite group are masters of is not benevolent. All these salvific
      organizations are mouthpieces into this place for other powerfully
      adept consciousnesses with a perverse and gluttonous agenda.
      Benevolence would be public and clearly comprehensible to the
      ordinary human. Benevolence would be proven truth. To quote Steve
      Earle, "It's snake oil y'all."

      Finally, it is our idea of what proven truth is that is the ultimate
      cause of our continued suffering here, and our vulnerability
      to "snake oil salesmen". We believe that what we experience is true.
      We really cannot prove that what we experience is true. Proven truth
      is indisputable organized logic. Whatever we experience in the human
      condition is of no ultimate educational value to us unless we have
      already defined the existential baseline for human consciousness, and
      we must define our existence with indisputable organized logic not
      based on experience. It is experience that blinds and traps us. If we
      look at ourselves without prejudice we will discover that
      consciousness perceives itself without limits. The only educational
      value of our experiences as human consciousnesses is to learn to
      communicate with other human consciousnesses. From that communication
      can come a dialectic that provides an existential baseline for us
      all; then no consciousness will ever have to be alone again. The
      entire purpose of this universe is to allow for communication
      consciousness to consciousness. Without a proven common existential
      baseline for consciousness, that communication will always be limited
      to a lifetime. Even the lifetime of a universe is not enough to
      fulfill the need of consciousness for other consciousness. We must
      set our sights higher or we will lose our freedom and limit our true
      potential. One voice for freedom is better than a universe of voices
      for comfort."

      By Trinidad Cruz
      http://www.angelfire.com/art/besidecoldwater/firebrand1/index.html
    • yeoman
      Mary Jo, All of this is meaningless mumbo jumbo. Look at the sentence: Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no ultimate educational value to
      Message 2 of 11 , May 28, 2003
        Mary Jo,

        All of this is meaningless mumbo jumbo. Look at the
        sentence:

        "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
        ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
        defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
        and we must define our existence with indisputable organized
        logic not based on experience."

        No wonder there is no such thing as "proven truth". If this
        essay is any example, then any discussion on the matter is
        pointless. I find it interesting that someone embarks on an
        essay of this type, the result is just more confusion. If
        we are to press on to understand, this certainly is not the
        path.

        eduard



        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Mary Jo Malo" <alcyon11@...>
        To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 12:46 PM
        Subject: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and Freedom


        > Here's an essay about the necessity for PROVEN TRUTH. We
        may be
        > complacent, frustrated, and even convinced there is no
        such thing as
        > proven truth, but we must press on to understand. - Mary
        Jo
        >
        > THE ETHICS OF FREEDOM - By Trinidad Cruz at Firebrand
        >
        > "We are now entering an age when basic human dignity will
        have to be
        > vigorously defended as we redefine and refine the meaning
        and purpose
        > of freedom. As physics and mathematics progress
        relentlessly toward
        > modeling and producing new relative systems we must
        realize that the
        > goal of this science is only manipulative power. Though a
        mastery of
        > the language of the universe would undoubtedly produce
        apparently
        > abundantly beneficial possibilities for the human race
        they will not
        > lead to any substantial evolution of consciousness as so
        many
        > believe. Human consciousness is stalled here on its
        evolutionary
        > ladder because it has no comprehensive understanding of
        its own
        > existential baseline. Like Huxley I am troubled by our
        inability at
        > the dawn of this age to distinguish between comfort and
        freedom, and
        > I believe that there is already evidence that this power
        of
        > definition that would be gained from finally understanding
        how to
        > move about in alternative relative systems would simply
        lead to a
        > permanent bonding of human consciousness to this
        particular universe.
        > Clearly the limitation of consciousness in any way is not
        freedom.
        > Development would cease.
        >
        > In our universal human history we have always sought
        saviors.
        > Unfortunately many times we have found them. Every savior
        ever found,
        > whether they began as true saviors or not, has become a
        comfort
        > provider with the secret answer waiting to be revealed at
        the right
        > time. In the past this has generated and supported the
        political
        > systems that have brought us to bloodbath after bloodbath.
        Though
        > bloody it has been a benign phenomenon as far as
        threatening the
        > possibility for the evolution of human consciousness. That
        > serendipity is about to be ended, and the savior
        phenomenon is about
        > to become toxic to human consciousness. Ironically it is
        science and
        > the mastery of relative systems that will empower the
        manifestation
        > of enslaving saviors across this world. Without a proven
        existential
        > baseline for its own consciousness humanity will find the
        lure of the
        > comfort offered by saviors irresistible and become, like
        its saviors,
        > permanently bonded to this universal system. The only
        immunization
        > against the coming disease is a dialectic of proof of
        existence for
        > human consciousness. Our efforts for freedom must be
        focused there.
        > All these saviors are offering is comfort.
        >
        > I have yet to discover a benevolent savior. Even Jesus
        threatens to
        > return and destroy those who are destroying the earth.
        This is an
        > ominous but very revealing statement. The single similar
        factor in
        > the dogma of all saviors is the preservation of the
        planet. Why? For
        > our own good? I don't think so. Our science is driven by
        a need to
        > master the nature of the universe and move on, indeed even
        > manufacture new planets. Obviously, for their own good.
        The saviors
        > are all existentially trapped and rooted in this universal
        system.
        > They are trapped for the same reason as we: they have no
        proven
        > existential baseline for their consciousnesses. Presently
        the only
        > difference between them and us is that they have mastered
        the
        > manifesting language of this universe. Unfortunately we
        are about to
        > do the same thing and become at our most elite scientific
        levels co-
        > participants in their fiasco. It is inevitably a fiasco,
        because
        > without a proven existential baseline for human
        consciousness even
        > what seems to be immortality will not be real immortality.
        The
        > universe is not immortal. Consciousness is. The universe
        is because
        > of consciousness not vice versa. Living on and on in a
        universe is
        > not immortality. A universe can end. Living on and on in a
        relative
        > system is not immortality. There are an infinite number of
        relative
        > systems and they are all produced by consciousness. I
        always prefer
        > to err on the side of freedom. "I don't wanna work on
        Maggie's farm
        > no more."
        >
        > As an activist for freedom I will aggressively engage any
        > philosophical organization that promises to free the
        people from
        > their suffering with secrets or esoteric knowledge. By
        "aggressively"
        > I mean with the intent to humiliate and destroy. Any
        philosophical
        > idea that promises to alleviate the suffering of humanity
        through
        > participation in a new mysterious system of understanding
        that only
        > an elite group are masters of is not benevolent. All these
        salvific
        > organizations are mouthpieces into this place for other
        powerfully
        > adept consciousnesses with a perverse and gluttonous
        agenda.
        > Benevolence would be public and clearly comprehensible to
        the
        > ordinary human. Benevolence would be proven truth. To
        quote Steve
        > Earle, "It's snake oil y'all."
        >
        > Finally, it is our idea of what proven truth is that is
        the ultimate
        > cause of our continued suffering here, and our
        vulnerability
        > to "snake oil salesmen". We believe that what we
        experience is true.
        > We really cannot prove that what we experience is true.
        Proven truth
        > is indisputable organized logic. Whatever we experience in
        the human
        > condition is of no ultimate educational value to us unless
        we have
        > already defined the existential baseline for human
        consciousness, and
        > we must define our existence with indisputable organized
        logic not
        > based on experience. It is experience that blinds and
        traps us. If we
        > look at ourselves without prejudice we will discover that
        > consciousness perceives itself without limits. The only
        educational
        > value of our experiences as human consciousnesses is to
        learn to
        > communicate with other human consciousnesses. From that
        communication
        > can come a dialectic that provides an existential baseline
        for us
        > all; then no consciousness will ever have to be alone
        again. The
        > entire purpose of this universe is to allow for
        communication
        > consciousness to consciousness. Without a proven common
        existential
        > baseline for consciousness, that communication will always
        be limited
        > to a lifetime. Even the lifetime of a universe is not
        enough to
        > fulfill the need of consciousness for other consciousness.
        We must
        > set our sights higher or we will lose our freedom and
        limit our true
        > potential. One voice for freedom is better than a universe
        of voices
        > for comfort."
        >
        > By Trinidad Cruz
        >
        http://www.angelfire.com/art/besidecoldwater/firebrand1/index.html
        >
        >
        > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
        Sponsor ---------------------~-->
        > Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's
        Important Questions.
        > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/ACsqlB/TM
        > ----------------------------------------------------------
        -----------~->
        >
        > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
        >
        > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
        > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • maryjo malo
        eduard, You re obviously the victim of a poor education. If you need the sentence translated it would be thus: We can t learn anything as human beings until
        Message 3 of 11 , May 28, 2003
          eduard,

          You're obviously the victim of a poor education. If you need the sentence translated it would be thus: We can't learn anything as human beings until we understand what we are, and what we are must be proven with logic not only by experience.

          Mary Jo

          yeoman <yeoman@...> wrote:
          Mary Jo,

          All of this is meaningless mumbo jumbo. Look at the
          sentence:

          "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
          ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
          defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
          and we must define our existence with indisputable organized
          logic not based on experience."

          No wonder there is no such thing as "proven truth". If this
          essay is any example, then any discussion on the matter is
          pointless. I find it interesting that someone embarks on an
          essay of this type, the result is just more confusion. If
          we are to press on to understand, this certainly is not the
          path.

          eduard



          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Mary Jo Malo" <alcyon11@...>
          To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 12:46 PM
          Subject: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and Freedom


          > Here's an essay about the necessity for PROVEN TRUTH. We
          may be
          > complacent, frustrated, and even convinced there is no
          such thing as
          > proven truth, but we must press on to understand. - Mary
          Jo
          >
          > THE ETHICS OF FREEDOM - By Trinidad Cruz at Firebrand
          >
          > "We are now entering an age when basic human dignity will
          have to be
          > vigorously defended as we redefine and refine the meaning
          and purpose
          > of freedom. As physics and mathematics progress
          relentlessly toward
          > modeling and producing new relative systems we must
          realize that the
          > goal of this science is only manipulative power. Though a
          mastery of
          > the language of the universe would undoubtedly produce
          apparently
          > abundantly beneficial possibilities for the human race
          they will not
          > lead to any substantial evolution of consciousness as so
          many
          > believe. Human consciousness is stalled here on its
          evolutionary
          > ladder because it has no comprehensive understanding of
          its own
          > existential baseline. Like Huxley I am troubled by our
          inability at
          > the dawn of this age to distinguish between comfort and
          freedom, and
          > I believe that there is already evidence that this power
          of
          > definition that would be gained from finally understanding
          how to
          > move about in alternative relative systems would simply
          lead to a
          > permanent bonding of human consciousness to this
          particular universe.
          > Clearly the limitation of consciousness in any way is not
          freedom.
          > Development would cease.
          >
          > In our universal human history we have always sought
          saviors.
          > Unfortunately many times we have found them. Every savior
          ever found,
          > whether they began as true saviors or not, has become a
          comfort
          > provider with the secret answer waiting to be revealed at
          the right
          > time. In the past this has generated and supported the
          political
          > systems that have brought us to bloodbath after bloodbath.
          Though
          > bloody it has been a benign phenomenon as far as
          threatening the
          > possibility for the evolution of human consciousness. That
          > serendipity is about to be ended, and the savior
          phenomenon is about
          > to become toxic to human consciousness. Ironically it is
          science and
          > the mastery of relative systems that will empower the
          manifestation
          > of enslaving saviors across this world. Without a proven
          existential
          > baseline for its own consciousness humanity will find the
          lure of the
          > comfort offered by saviors irresistible and become, like
          its saviors,
          > permanently bonded to this universal system. The only
          immunization
          > against the coming disease is a dialectic of proof of
          existence for
          > human consciousness. Our efforts for freedom must be
          focused there.
          > All these saviors are offering is comfort.
          >
          > I have yet to discover a benevolent savior. Even Jesus
          threatens to
          > return and destroy those who are destroying the earth.
          This is an
          > ominous but very revealing statement. The single similar
          factor in
          > the dogma of all saviors is the preservation of the
          planet. Why? For
          > our own good? I don't think so. Our science is driven by
          a need to
          > master the nature of the universe and move on, indeed even
          > manufacture new planets. Obviously, for their own good.
          The saviors
          > are all existentially trapped and rooted in this universal
          system.
          > They are trapped for the same reason as we: they have no
          proven
          > existential baseline for their consciousnesses. Presently
          the only
          > difference between them and us is that they have mastered
          the
          > manifesting language of this universe. Unfortunately we
          are about to
          > do the same thing and become at our most elite scientific
          levels co-
          > participants in their fiasco. It is inevitably a fiasco,
          because
          > without a proven existential baseline for human
          consciousness even
          > what seems to be immortality will not be real immortality.
          The
          > universe is not immortal. Consciousness is. The universe
          is because
          > of consciousness not vice versa. Living on and on in a
          universe is
          > not immortality. A universe can end. Living on and on in a
          relative
          > system is not immortality. There are an infinite number of
          relative
          > systems and they are all produced by consciousness. I
          always prefer
          > to err on the side of freedom. "I don't wanna work on
          Maggie's farm
          > no more."
          >
          > As an activist for freedom I will aggressively engage any
          > philosophical organization that promises to free the
          people from
          > their suffering with secrets or esoteric knowledge. By
          "aggressively"
          > I mean with the intent to humiliate and destroy. Any
          philosophical
          > idea that promises to alleviate the suffering of humanity
          through
          > participation in a new mysterious system of understanding
          that only
          > an elite group are masters of is not benevolent. All these
          salvific
          > organizations are mouthpieces into this place for other
          powerfully
          > adept consciousnesses with a perverse and gluttonous
          agenda.
          > Benevolence would be public and clearly comprehensible to
          the
          > ordinary human. Benevolence would be proven truth. To
          quote Steve
          > Earle, "It's snake oil y'all."
          >
          > Finally, it is our idea of what proven truth is that is
          the ultimate
          > cause of our continued suffering here, and our
          vulnerability
          > to "snake oil salesmen". We believe that what we
          experience is true.
          > We really cannot prove that what we experience is true.
          Proven truth
          > is indisputable organized logic. Whatever we experience in
          the human
          > condition is of no ultimate educational value to us unless
          we have
          > already defined the existential baseline for human
          consciousness, and
          > we must define our existence with indisputable organized
          logic not
          > based on experience. It is experience that blinds and
          traps us. If we
          > look at ourselves without prejudice we will discover that
          > consciousness perceives itself without limits. The only
          educational
          > value of our experiences as human consciousnesses is to
          learn to
          > communicate with other human consciousnesses. From that
          communication
          > can come a dialectic that provides an existential baseline
          for us
          > all; then no consciousness will ever have to be alone
          again. The
          > entire purpose of this universe is to allow for
          communication
          > consciousness to consciousness. Without a proven common
          existential
          > baseline for consciousness, that communication will always
          be limited
          > to a lifetime. Even the lifetime of a universe is not
          enough to
          > fulfill the need of consciousness for other consciousness.
          We must
          > set our sights higher or we will lose our freedom and
          limit our true
          > potential. One voice for freedom is better than a universe
          of voices
          > for comfort."
          >
          > By Trinidad Cruz
          >
          http://www.angelfire.com/art/besidecoldwater/firebrand1/index.html
          >
          >
          > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
          Sponsor ---------------------~-->
          > Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's
          Important Questions.
          > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/ACsqlB/TM
          > ----------------------------------------------------------
          -----------~->
          >
          > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
          > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
          >
          > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
          > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >


          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
          (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

          TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
          existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


          "There is no beginning or end to being, only an endless becoming and manifestation." - Madoc Owen, "The Blue Rose Project"



          ---------------------------------
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • yeoman
          Mary Jo, Yes, you have seen through me. Darn, that poor education always does me in. I note that you have added the words not only by experience . The
          Message 4 of 11 , May 28, 2003
            Mary Jo,

            Yes, you have seen through me. Darn, that poor education
            always does me in.

            I note that you have added the words "not only by
            experience". The original said "not based on experience".
            Your higher education makes for a better translation.

            But it is still mumbo jumbo. I am sure that someone who
            does not understand who he is can still learn a few things.
            For example, I should think that a person would learn not to
            touch a hot iron the second time, without knowing what they
            are.

            eduard

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "maryjo malo" <alcyon11@...>
            To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 6:10 PM
            Subject: Re: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and
            Freedom


            > eduard,
            >
            > You're obviously the victim of a poor education. If you
            need the sentence translated it would be thus: We can't
            learn anything as human beings until we understand what we
            are, and what we are must be proven with logic not only by
            experience.
            >
            > Mary Jo
            >
            > yeoman <yeoman@...> wrote:
            > Mary Jo,
            >
            > All of this is meaningless mumbo jumbo. Look at the
            > sentence:
            >
            > "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
            > ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
            > defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
            > and we must define our existence with indisputable
            organized
            > logic not based on experience."
            >
            > No wonder there is no such thing as "proven truth". If
            this
            > essay is any example, then any discussion on the matter is
            > pointless. I find it interesting that someone embarks on
            an
            > essay of this type, the result is just more confusion. If
            > we are to press on to understand, this certainly is not
            the
            > path.
            >
            > eduard
            >
            >
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "Mary Jo Malo" <alcyon11@...>
            > To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 12:46 PM
            > Subject: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and
            Freedom
            >
            >
            > > Here's an essay about the necessity for PROVEN TRUTH. We
            > may be
            > > complacent, frustrated, and even convinced there is no
            > such thing as
            > > proven truth, but we must press on to understand. - Mary
            > Jo
            > >
            > > THE ETHICS OF FREEDOM - By Trinidad Cruz at Firebrand
            > >
            > > "We are now entering an age when basic human dignity
            will
            > have to be
            > > vigorously defended as we redefine and refine the
            meaning
            > and purpose
            > > of freedom. As physics and mathematics progress
            > relentlessly toward
            > > modeling and producing new relative systems we must
            > realize that the
            > > goal of this science is only manipulative power. Though
            a
            > mastery of
            > > the language of the universe would undoubtedly produce
            > apparently
            > > abundantly beneficial possibilities for the human race
            > they will not
            > > lead to any substantial evolution of consciousness as so
            > many
            > > believe. Human consciousness is stalled here on its
            > evolutionary
            > > ladder because it has no comprehensive understanding of
            > its own
            > > existential baseline. Like Huxley I am troubled by our
            > inability at
            > > the dawn of this age to distinguish between comfort and
            > freedom, and
            > > I believe that there is already evidence that this power
            > of
            > > definition that would be gained from finally
            understanding
            > how to
            > > move about in alternative relative systems would simply
            > lead to a
            > > permanent bonding of human consciousness to this
            > particular universe.
            > > Clearly the limitation of consciousness in any way is
            not
            > freedom.
            > > Development would cease.
            > >
            > > In our universal human history we have always sought
            > saviors.
            > > Unfortunately many times we have found them. Every
            savior
            > ever found,
            > > whether they began as true saviors or not, has become a
            > comfort
            > > provider with the secret answer waiting to be revealed
            at
            > the right
            > > time. In the past this has generated and supported the
            > political
            > > systems that have brought us to bloodbath after
            bloodbath.
            > Though
            > > bloody it has been a benign phenomenon as far as
            > threatening the
            > > possibility for the evolution of human consciousness.
            That
            > > serendipity is about to be ended, and the savior
            > phenomenon is about
            > > to become toxic to human consciousness. Ironically it is
            > science and
            > > the mastery of relative systems that will empower the
            > manifestation
            > > of enslaving saviors across this world. Without a proven
            > existential
            > > baseline for its own consciousness humanity will find
            the
            > lure of the
            > > comfort offered by saviors irresistible and become, like
            > its saviors,
            > > permanently bonded to this universal system. The only
            > immunization
            > > against the coming disease is a dialectic of proof of
            > existence for
            > > human consciousness. Our efforts for freedom must be
            > focused there.
            > > All these saviors are offering is comfort.
            > >
            > > I have yet to discover a benevolent savior. Even Jesus
            > threatens to
            > > return and destroy those who are destroying the earth.
            > This is an
            > > ominous but very revealing statement. The single similar
            > factor in
            > > the dogma of all saviors is the preservation of the
            > planet. Why? For
            > > our own good? I don't think so. Our science is driven
            by
            > a need to
            > > master the nature of the universe and move on, indeed
            even
            > > manufacture new planets. Obviously, for their own good.
            > The saviors
            > > are all existentially trapped and rooted in this
            universal
            > system.
            > > They are trapped for the same reason as we: they have no
            > proven
            > > existential baseline for their consciousnesses.
            Presently
            > the only
            > > difference between them and us is that they have
            mastered
            > the
            > > manifesting language of this universe. Unfortunately we
            > are about to
            > > do the same thing and become at our most elite
            scientific
            > levels co-
            > > participants in their fiasco. It is inevitably a fiasco,
            > because
            > > without a proven existential baseline for human
            > consciousness even
            > > what seems to be immortality will not be real
            immortality.
            > The
            > > universe is not immortal. Consciousness is. The universe
            > is because
            > > of consciousness not vice versa. Living on and on in a
            > universe is
            > > not immortality. A universe can end. Living on and on in
            a
            > relative
            > > system is not immortality. There are an infinite number
            of
            > relative
            > > systems and they are all produced by consciousness. I
            > always prefer
            > > to err on the side of freedom. "I don't wanna work on
            > Maggie's farm
            > > no more."
            > >
            > > As an activist for freedom I will aggressively engage
            any
            > > philosophical organization that promises to free the
            > people from
            > > their suffering with secrets or esoteric knowledge. By
            > "aggressively"
            > > I mean with the intent to humiliate and destroy. Any
            > philosophical
            > > idea that promises to alleviate the suffering of
            humanity
            > through
            > > participation in a new mysterious system of
            understanding
            > that only
            > > an elite group are masters of is not benevolent. All
            these
            > salvific
            > > organizations are mouthpieces into this place for other
            > powerfully
            > > adept consciousnesses with a perverse and gluttonous
            > agenda.
            > > Benevolence would be public and clearly comprehensible
            to
            > the
            > > ordinary human. Benevolence would be proven truth. To
            > quote Steve
            > > Earle, "It's snake oil y'all."
            > >
            > > Finally, it is our idea of what proven truth is that is
            > the ultimate
            > > cause of our continued suffering here, and our
            > vulnerability
            > > to "snake oil salesmen". We believe that what we
            > experience is true.
            > > We really cannot prove that what we experience is true.
            > Proven truth
            > > is indisputable organized logic. Whatever we experience
            in
            > the human
            > > condition is of no ultimate educational value to us
            unless
            > we have
            > > already defined the existential baseline for human
            > consciousness, and
            > > we must define our existence with indisputable organized
            > logic not
            > > based on experience. It is experience that blinds and
            > traps us. If we
            > > look at ourselves without prejudice we will discover
            that
            > > consciousness perceives itself without limits. The only
            > educational
            > > value of our experiences as human consciousnesses is to
            > learn to
            > > communicate with other human consciousnesses. From that
            > communication
            > > can come a dialectic that provides an existential
            baseline
            > for us
            > > all; then no consciousness will ever have to be alone
            > again. The
            > > entire purpose of this universe is to allow for
            > communication
            > > consciousness to consciousness. Without a proven common
            > existential
            > > baseline for consciousness, that communication will
            always
            > be limited
            > > to a lifetime. Even the lifetime of a universe is not
            > enough to
            > > fulfill the need of consciousness for other
            consciousness.
            > We must
            > > set our sights higher or we will lose our freedom and
            > limit our true
            > > potential. One voice for freedom is better than a
            universe
            > of voices
            > > for comfort."
            > >
            > > By Trinidad Cruz
            > >
            >
            http://www.angelfire.com/art/besidecoldwater/firebrand1/index.html
            > >
            > >
            > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
            > Sponsor ---------------------~-->
            > > Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's
            > Important Questions.
            > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/ACsqlB/TM
            >
            > ----------------------------------------------------------
            > -----------~->
            > >
            > > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
            > > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
            > >
            > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
            > > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > >
            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
            > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
            >
            > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
            > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
            of Service.
            >
            >
            > "There is no beginning or end to being, only an endless
            becoming and manifestation." - Madoc Owen, "The Blue Rose
            Project"
            >
            >
            >
            > ---------------------------------
            > Do you Yahoo!?
            > Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
            Sponsor ---------------------~-->
            > Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's
            Important Questions.
            > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/ACsqlB/TM
            > ----------------------------------------------------------
            -----------~->
            >
            > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
            > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
            >
            > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
            > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
          • maryjo malo
            eduard, That s certainly what I m here for - to learn that an iron is hot and I shouldn t touch it. It s easy to dismiss something as mumbo-jumbo when you
            Message 5 of 11 , May 28, 2003
              eduard,

              That's certainly what I'm here for - to learn that an iron is hot and I shouldn't touch it. It's easy to dismiss something as mumbo-jumbo when you can't understand it. Not every author writes on the 4th grade level. Not every reader wants to read the same old drivel. I am. eduard is. That's all there is to it. I was born. I'm going to die. People don't invent words in order to confuse, nor do intelligent thinkers sabotage the concepts they're trying to convey. What do you intend with your words?

              Some of the best minds in physics are working to develop quantum computers using vector polynomials. Do I understand any of this? No, but that doesn't stop me from trying to. They believe in the concept of infinity. It's not just a mumbo-jumbo word.


              Mary Jo

              yeoman <yeoman@...> wrote:
              Mary Jo,

              Yes, you have seen through me. Darn, that poor education
              always does me in.

              I note that you have added the words "not only by
              experience". The original said "not based on experience".
              Your higher education makes for a better translation.

              But it is still mumbo jumbo. I am sure that someone who
              does not understand who he is can still learn a few things.
              For example, I should think that a person would learn not to
              touch a hot iron the second time, without knowing what they
              are.

              eduard

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "maryjo malo" <alcyon11@...>
              To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 6:10 PM
              Subject: Re: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and
              Freedom


              > eduard,
              >
              > You're obviously the victim of a poor education. If you
              need the sentence translated it would be thus: We can't
              learn anything as human beings until we understand what we
              are, and what we are must be proven with logic not only by
              experience.
              >
              > Mary Jo
              >
              > yeoman <yeoman@...> wrote:
              > Mary Jo,
              >
              > All of this is meaningless mumbo jumbo. Look at the
              > sentence:
              >
              > "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
              > ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
              > defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
              > and we must define our existence with indisputable
              organized
              > logic not based on experience."
              >
              > No wonder there is no such thing as "proven truth". If
              this
              > essay is any example, then any discussion on the matter is
              > pointless. I find it interesting that someone embarks on
              an
              > essay of this type, the result is just more confusion. If
              > we are to press on to understand, this certainly is not
              the
              > path.
              >
              > eduard
              >
              >
              >
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: "Mary Jo Malo" <alcyon11@...>
              > To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
              > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 12:46 PM
              > Subject: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and
              Freedom
              >
              >
              > > Here's an essay about the necessity for PROVEN TRUTH. We
              > may be
              > > complacent, frustrated, and even convinced there is no
              > such thing as
              > > proven truth, but we must press on to understand. - Mary
              > Jo
              > >
              > > THE ETHICS OF FREEDOM - By Trinidad Cruz at Firebrand
              > >
              > > "We are now entering an age when basic human dignity
              will
              > have to be
              > > vigorously defended as we redefine and refine the
              meaning
              > and purpose
              > > of freedom. As physics and mathematics progress
              > relentlessly toward
              > > modeling and producing new relative systems we must
              > realize that the
              > > goal of this science is only manipulative power. Though
              a
              > mastery of
              > > the language of the universe would undoubtedly produce
              > apparently
              > > abundantly beneficial possibilities for the human race
              > they will not
              > > lead to any substantial evolution of consciousness as so
              > many
              > > believe. Human consciousness is stalled here on its
              > evolutionary
              > > ladder because it has no comprehensive understanding of
              > its own
              > > existential baseline. Like Huxley I am troubled by our
              > inability at
              > > the dawn of this age to distinguish between comfort and
              > freedom, and
              > > I believe that there is already evidence that this power
              > of
              > > definition that would be gained from finally
              understanding
              > how to
              > > move about in alternative relative systems would simply
              > lead to a
              > > permanent bonding of human consciousness to this
              > particular universe.
              > > Clearly the limitation of consciousness in any way is
              not
              > freedom.
              > > Development would cease.
              > >
              > > In our universal human history we have always sought
              > saviors.
              > > Unfortunately many times we have found them. Every
              savior
              > ever found,
              > > whether they began as true saviors or not, has become a
              > comfort
              > > provider with the secret answer waiting to be revealed
              at
              > the right
              > > time. In the past this has generated and supported the
              > political
              > > systems that have brought us to bloodbath after
              bloodbath.
              > Though
              > > bloody it has been a benign phenomenon as far as
              > threatening the
              > > possibility for the evolution of human consciousness.
              That
              > > serendipity is about to be ended, and the savior
              > phenomenon is about
              > > to become toxic to human consciousness. Ironically it is
              > science and
              > > the mastery of relative systems that will empower the
              > manifestation
              > > of enslaving saviors across this world. Without a proven
              > existential
              > > baseline for its own consciousness humanity will find
              the
              > lure of the
              > > comfort offered by saviors irresistible and become, like
              > its saviors,
              > > permanently bonded to this universal system. The only
              > immunization
              > > against the coming disease is a dialectic of proof of
              > existence for
              > > human consciousness. Our efforts for freedom must be
              > focused there.
              > > All these saviors are offering is comfort.
              > >
              > > I have yet to discover a benevolent savior. Even Jesus
              > threatens to
              > > return and destroy those who are destroying the earth.
              > This is an
              > > ominous but very revealing statement. The single similar
              > factor in
              > > the dogma of all saviors is the preservation of the
              > planet. Why? For
              > > our own good? I don't think so. Our science is driven
              by
              > a need to
              > > master the nature of the universe and move on, indeed
              even
              > > manufacture new planets. Obviously, for their own good.
              > The saviors
              > > are all existentially trapped and rooted in this
              universal
              > system.
              > > They are trapped for the same reason as we: they have no
              > proven
              > > existential baseline for their consciousnesses.
              Presently
              > the only
              > > difference between them and us is that they have
              mastered
              > the
              > > manifesting language of this universe. Unfortunately we
              > are about to
              > > do the same thing and become at our most elite
              scientific
              > levels co-
              > > participants in their fiasco. It is inevitably a fiasco,
              > because
              > > without a proven existential baseline for human
              > consciousness even
              > > what seems to be immortality will not be real
              immortality.
              > The
              > > universe is not immortal. Consciousness is. The universe
              > is because
              > > of consciousness not vice versa. Living on and on in a
              > universe is
              > > not immortality. A universe can end. Living on and on in
              a
              > relative
              > > system is not immortality. There are an infinite number
              of
              > relative
              > > systems and they are all produced by consciousness. I
              > always prefer
              > > to err on the side of freedom. "I don't wanna work on
              > Maggie's farm
              > > no more."
              > >
              > > As an activist for freedom I will aggressively engage
              any
              > > philosophical organization that promises to free the
              > people from
              > > their suffering with secrets or esoteric knowledge. By
              > "aggressively"
              > > I mean with the intent to humiliate and destroy. Any
              > philosophical
              > > idea that promises to alleviate the suffering of
              humanity
              > through
              > > participation in a new mysterious system of
              understanding
              > that only
              > > an elite group are masters of is not benevolent. All
              these
              > salvific
              > > organizations are mouthpieces into this place for other
              > powerfully
              > > adept consciousnesses with a perverse and gluttonous
              > agenda.
              > > Benevolence would be public and clearly comprehensible
              to
              > the
              > > ordinary human. Benevolence would be proven truth. To
              > quote Steve
              > > Earle, "It's snake oil y'all."
              > >
              > > Finally, it is our idea of what proven truth is that is
              > the ultimate
              > > cause of our continued suffering here, and our
              > vulnerability
              > > to "snake oil salesmen". We believe that what we
              > experience is true.
              > > We really cannot prove that what we experience is true.
              > Proven truth
              > > is indisputable organized logic. Whatever we experience
              in
              > the human
              > > condition is of no ultimate educational value to us
              unless
              > we have
              > > already defined the existential baseline for human
              > consciousness, and
              > > we must define our existence with indisputable organized
              > logic not
              > > based on experience. It is experience that blinds and
              > traps us. If we
              > > look at ourselves without prejudice we will discover
              that
              > > consciousness perceives itself without limits. The only
              > educational
              > > value of our experiences as human consciousnesses is to
              > learn to
              > > communicate with other human consciousnesses. From that
              > communication
              > > can come a dialectic that provides an existential
              baseline
              > for us
              > > all; then no consciousness will ever have to be alone
              > again. The
              > > entire purpose of this universe is to allow for
              > communication
              > > consciousness to consciousness. Without a proven common
              > existential
              > > baseline for consciousness, that communication will
              always
              > be limited
              > > to a lifetime. Even the lifetime of a universe is not
              > enough to
              > > fulfill the need of consciousness for other
              consciousness.
              > We must
              > > set our sights higher or we will lose our freedom and
              > limit our true
              > > potential. One voice for freedom is better than a
              universe
              > of voices
              > > for comfort."
              > >
              > > By Trinidad Cruz
              > >
              >
              http://www.angelfire.com/art/besidecoldwater/firebrand1/index.html
              > >
              > >
              > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
              > Sponsor ---------------------~-->
              > > Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's
              > Important Questions.
              > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/ACsqlB/TM
              >
              > ----------------------------------------------------------
              > -----------~->
              > >
              > > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
              > > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
              > >
              > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
              > > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              > >
              > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              > >
              > >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
              > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
              >
              > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
              > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
              of Service.
              >
              >
              > "There is no beginning or end to being, only an endless
              becoming and manifestation." - Madoc Owen, "The Blue Rose
              Project"
              >
              >
              >
              > ---------------------------------
              > Do you Yahoo!?
              > Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
              Sponsor ---------------------~-->
              > Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's
              Important Questions.
              > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/ACsqlB/TM
              > ----------------------------------------------------------
              -----------~->
              >
              > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
              > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
              >
              > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
              > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >


              Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

              Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
              (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

              TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
              existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


              "There is no beginning or end to being, only an endless becoming and manifestation." - Madoc Owen, "The Blue Rose Project"



              ---------------------------------
              Do you Yahoo!?
              Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • yeoman
              Mary Jo, I think that if you need to be here on this list [I presume that is what you mean] in order to learn things like not touching a hot iron, then the
              Message 6 of 11 , May 28, 2003
                Mary Jo,

                I think that if you need to be here on this list [I presume
                that is what you mean] in order to learn things like not
                touching a hot iron, then the issue is bigger than that of
                Existentialism.

                But really ... think about it for a moment. The statement
                was that had to understand what you are before you can learn
                anything. I repeat the statement below:

                "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
                ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
                defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
                and we must define our existence with indisputable organized
                logic not based on experience."

                You have translated this statement and added the words, "not
                only by experience". To me, that significantly changes the
                meaning.

                Yes, a discussion on quantum computers is complex and takes
                a while to understand. But I would bet that you will not
                find flat statements such as made in the above quote.

                You still have not answered my question as to why the victim
                of a crime will mimic death.

                eduard

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "maryjo malo" <alcyon11@...>
                To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 7:44 PM
                Subject: Re: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and
                Freedom


                > eduard,
                >
                > That's certainly what I'm here for - to learn that an iron
                is hot and I shouldn't touch it. It's easy to dismiss
                something as mumbo-jumbo when you can't understand it. Not
                every author writes on the 4th grade level. Not every reader
                wants to read the same old drivel. I am. eduard is. That's
                all there is to it. I was born. I'm going to die. People
                don't invent words in order to confuse, nor do intelligent
                thinkers sabotage the concepts they're trying to convey.
                What do you intend with your words?
                >
                > Some of the best minds in physics are working to develop
                quantum computers using vector polynomials. Do I understand
                any of this? No, but that doesn't stop me from trying to.
                They believe in the concept of infinity. It's not just a
                mumbo-jumbo word.
                >
                >
                > Mary Jo
              • Mary Jo Malo
                eduard, You re kidding right? You brought up the hot iron in the CONTEXT of learning and experience. Obviously, in that context, I m not looking to learn that
                Message 7 of 11 , May 28, 2003
                  eduard,

                  You're kidding right? You brought up the hot iron in the CONTEXT of
                  learning and experience. Obviously, in that context, I'm not looking
                  to learn that infantile lesson "here" at the "existlist".

                  The author of the essay is expressing his belief that it's necessary
                  to understand what we are (our existential baseline) before whatever
                  we experience has any lasting meaning for our being. You are picking
                  straws with my paraphrase and taking the statement out of context.

                  I did answer your question about death and mimicry. My question to
                  you is: why would death be exempt from the process of mimicry?

                  Mary Jo

                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, yeoman <yeoman@v...> wrote:
                  > Mary Jo,
                  >
                  > I think that if you need to be here on this list [I presume
                  > that is what you mean] in order to learn things like not
                  > touching a hot iron, then the issue is bigger than that of
                  > Existentialism.
                  >
                  > But really ... think about it for a moment. The statement
                  > was that had to understand what you are before you can learn
                  > anything. I repeat the statement below:
                  >
                  > "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
                  > ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
                  > defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
                  > and we must define our existence with indisputable organized
                  > logic not based on experience."
                  >
                  > You have translated this statement and added the words, "not
                  > only by experience". To me, that significantly changes the
                  > meaning.
                  >
                  > Yes, a discussion on quantum computers is complex and takes
                  > a while to understand. But I would bet that you will not
                  > find flat statements such as made in the above quote.
                  >
                  > You still have not answered my question as to why the victim
                  > of a crime will mimic death.
                  >
                  > eduard
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: "maryjo malo" <alcyon11@y...>
                  > To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                  > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 7:44 PM
                  > Subject: Re: [existlist] Experience vs. Proven Truth and
                  > Freedom
                  >
                  >
                  > > eduard,
                  > >
                  > > That's certainly what I'm here for - to learn that an iron
                  > is hot and I shouldn't touch it. It's easy to dismiss
                  > something as mumbo-jumbo when you can't understand it. Not
                  > every author writes on the 4th grade level. Not every reader
                  > wants to read the same old drivel. I am. eduard is. That's
                  > all there is to it. I was born. I'm going to die. People
                  > don't invent words in order to confuse, nor do intelligent
                  > thinkers sabotage the concepts they're trying to convey.
                  > What do you intend with your words?
                  > >
                  > > Some of the best minds in physics are working to develop
                  > quantum computers using vector polynomials. Do I understand
                  > any of this? No, but that doesn't stop me from trying to.
                  > They believe in the concept of infinity. It's not just a
                  > mumbo-jumbo word.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Mary Jo
                • yeoman
                  Mary Jo, No, actually I am not kidding. That is exactly what you said: That s certainly what I m here for - to learn that an iron is hot and I shouldn t
                  Message 8 of 11 , May 29, 2003
                    Mary Jo,

                    No, actually I am not kidding. That is exactly what you
                    said:

                    "That's certainly what I'm here for - to learn that an iron
                    is hot and I shouldn't touch it".

                    Perhaps you said it with tongue in cheek.

                    As to your translation of the essay you now have it as,
                    "that it's necessary to understand what we are (our
                    existential baseline) before whatever we experience has any
                    lasting meaning for our being". That is not what the author
                    said in:

                    "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
                    ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
                    defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
                    and we must define our existence with indisputable organized
                    logic not based on experience."

                    There is noting in that statement about, "lasting being for
                    our being". If that what he meant, then perhaps he should
                    have said so. But more specifically, he is saying that "we
                    must define our existence with logic and not experience". I
                    should think that is very clear, although I don't agree with
                    it. Yet you have changed it to say, "not only experience".
                    You see, either the author knows what he is writing about or
                    he doesn't. I grant that this is only one sentence out of
                    the essay, yet it is an important statement. I could have
                    picked some other sentence, but we would be here all night.

                    You have not answered my other question as to why a victim
                    of a crime would mimic death.

                    Buy anyway, lets go to your question of, "why would death be
                    exempt from the process of mimicry?", and stick with it. I
                    don't understand the question. What are we talking about??
                    Is this about victims of crime?? I suppose one could mimic
                    death. Some animals do this. But why would someone be
                    mimicking death?? What is the purpose??

                    eduard



                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Mary Jo Malo" <alcyon11@...>
                    To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 10:51 PM
                    Subject: [existlist] Re: Experience vs. Proven Truth and
                    Freedom


                    > eduard,
                    >
                    > You're kidding right? You brought up the hot iron in the
                    CONTEXT of
                    > learning and experience. Obviously, in that context, I'm
                    not looking
                    > to learn that infantile lesson "here" at the "existlist".
                    >
                    > The author of the essay is expressing his belief that it's
                    necessary
                    > to understand what we are (our existential baseline)
                    before whatever
                    > we experience has any lasting meaning for our being. You
                    are picking
                    > straws with my paraphrase and taking the statement out of
                    context.
                    >
                    > I did answer your question about death and mimicry. My
                    question to
                    > you is: why would death be exempt from the process of
                    mimicry?
                    >
                    > Mary Jo
                    >
                  • maryjo malo
                    Yes eduard. It was sarcasm. Your efforts at communication have deteriorated into picking straws, or I simply don t understand your communication style. You
                    Message 9 of 11 , May 29, 2003
                      Yes eduard. It was sarcasm. Your efforts at communication have deteriorated into picking straws, or I simply don't understand your communication style. You freely admit that you don't agree with the author's premise, so why waste my time asking me to explain. That's futility. You also agree that animals mimic death. That should be enough basis to understand the concept of mimicking death. If you actually did want to comprehend anything, you'd read the source material. You don't. So why bother?

                      I'm not an absurdist. These conversations are absurd. Pointlessly provoking someone is absurd.

                      Mary Jo

                      yeoman <yeoman@...> wrote:
                      Mary Jo,

                      No, actually I am not kidding. That is exactly what you
                      said:

                      "That's certainly what I'm here for - to learn that an iron
                      is hot and I shouldn't touch it".

                      Perhaps you said it with tongue in cheek.

                      As to your translation of the essay you now have it as,
                      "that it's necessary to understand what we are (our
                      existential baseline) before whatever we experience has any
                      lasting meaning for our being". That is not what the author
                      said in:

                      "Whatever we experience in the human condition is of no
                      ultimate educational value to us unless we have already
                      defined the existential baseline for human consciousness,
                      and we must define our existence with indisputable organized
                      logic not based on experience."

                      There is noting in that statement about, "lasting being for
                      our being". If that what he meant, then perhaps he should
                      have said so. But more specifically, he is saying that "we
                      must define our existence with logic and not experience". I
                      should think that is very clear, although I don't agree with
                      it. Yet you have changed it to say, "not only experience".
                      You see, either the author knows what he is writing about or
                      he doesn't. I grant that this is only one sentence out of
                      the essay, yet it is an important statement. I could have
                      picked some other sentence, but we would be here all night.

                      You have not answered my other question as to why a victim
                      of a crime would mimic death.

                      Buy anyway, lets go to your question of, "why would death be
                      exempt from the process of mimicry?", and stick with it. I
                      don't understand the question. What are we talking about??
                      Is this about victims of crime?? I suppose one could mimic
                      death. Some animals do this. But why would someone be
                      mimicking death?? What is the purpose??

                      eduard



                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Mary Jo Malo" <alcyon11@...>
                      To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 10:51 PM
                      Subject: [existlist] Re: Experience vs. Proven Truth and
                      Freedom


                      > eduard,
                      >
                      > You're kidding right? You brought up the hot iron in the
                      CONTEXT of
                      > learning and experience. Obviously, in that context, I'm
                      not looking
                      > to learn that infantile lesson "here" at the "existlist".
                      >
                      > The author of the essay is expressing his belief that it's
                      necessary
                      > to understand what we are (our existential baseline)
                      before whatever
                      > we experience has any lasting meaning for our being. You
                      are picking
                      > straws with my paraphrase and taking the statement out of
                      context.
                      >
                      > I did answer your question about death and mimicry. My
                      question to
                      > you is: why would death be exempt from the process of
                      mimicry?
                      >
                      > Mary Jo
                      >


                      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                      Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
                      (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

                      TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
                      existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                      "There is no beginning or end to being, only an endless becoming and manifestation." - Madoc Owen, "The Blue Rose Project"



                      ---------------------------------
                      Do you Yahoo!?
                      Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • yeoman
                      Mary Jo, I don t even know what the author s premise is. But you do raise a good point in regard to straws . I agree that one could go to the source
                      Message 10 of 11 , May 29, 2003
                        Mary Jo,

                        I don't even know what the author's premise is.

                        But you do raise a good point in regard to "straws". I
                        agree that one could go to the source material. But you
                        have not provided a satisfactory answer to any of the straws
                        I have picked. If you had, then there might be reason to go
                        further. But you haven't.

                        A case in point is that of the victim of a crime mimicking
                        death. To me that is not a little straw, but rather
                        substantial. If you do not wish to explain it in discussion
                        here on the Existlist, then that is your choice.

                        I don't see this as provoking. I am simply trying to obtain
                        an answer.

                        eduard

                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: "maryjo malo" <alcyon11@...>
                        To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
                        Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:39 AM
                        Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: Experience vs. Proven Truth and
                        Freedom


                        > Yes eduard. It was sarcasm. Your efforts at communication
                        have deteriorated into picking straws, or I simply don't
                        understand your communication style. You freely admit that
                        you don't agree with the author's premise, so why waste my
                        time asking me to explain. That's futility. You also agree
                        that animals mimic death. That should be enough basis to
                        understand the concept of mimicking death. If you actually
                        did want to comprehend anything, you'd read the source
                        material. You don't. So why bother?
                        >
                        > I'm not an absurdist. These conversations are absurd.
                        Pointlessly provoking someone is absurd.
                        >
                        > Mary Jo
                      • Knott
                        ... Mare Jo, It is Duard s job to misunderstand everything every time. Pisspot Lantern
                        Message 11 of 11 , May 31, 2003
                          > You're kidding right?

                          Mare Jo,

                          It is 'Duard's job to misunderstand everything every time.

                          Pisspot Lantern
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.