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

Re: Transcendental flights

Expand Messages
  • louise
    Dick, There is nothing outrageous at all about my comments. What I am saying is that the way you have presented your case here does not convince me that you
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 9, 2009
      Dick,

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

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

      Louise

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