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

Why isn’t everybody a Mystic? Part One

Expand Messages
  • dick.richardson@rocketmail.com
    Why isn t everybody a Mystic? Part One [ Why isn t everybody a Mystic and a Time Lord such that you describe? ] Intrinsically they ARE, for we are all made of
    Message 1 of 7 , Sep 25, 2010
      Why isn't everybody a Mystic? Part One



      [ Why isn't everybody a Mystic and a Time Lord such that you
      describe? ]



      Intrinsically they ARE, for we are all made of the same stuff and in
      the same way, and in the same place. Of all the manifest life forms
      that roam the earth then Man is the most wondrous of them all and of
      another order of Being. Homo Ensophicus will be even better when it
      comes. But we have to make room for them to come here. We have to get
      the place ready for them. But they are coming. A few are here now.
      But why are not all people mystics now? Well, list to me while I tell
      you. But if I tell you then you must share it with others, for it is
      not just for your ears, it is not a secret.



      We are constructed of THREE parts, three layers, three dimensions. Thus
      we are a construction in a trinity of parts. The bottom part, the
      middle part, and the top part. You are not a flat one dimensional
      thing. You are like an upside down pyramid of manifest ENERGY. Thus a
      bit like the vortex of a twister hurricane. But this vortex is
      inter-dimensional. You cannot see it with the physical eyes or touch it
      with the physical hands. Neither are you this vortex, no more so than
      you are your body. You are that which manifest up this vortex from the
      bottom to the top. You ride the waves of this vortex of energy. You
      begin at the bottom of this vortex (Eternity) and finish up at the top
      – on earth. It is all very simple, even though it is complex and
      mysterious; for I don't know how it is done. But I know why it is
      done.



      Now, you have to be careful with this and make sure you get your head
      around it. We ALL come from the CENTRE, outwards. (Paradise is
      INWARDS). How then can it be said to be at the `bottom'? Easy,
      think about it. Imagine you are sitting on top of this vortex (which in
      fact you are whilst here on earth) imagine now looking DOWN it and you
      will see that the bottom is also the CENTRE. Imagine you are sitting on
      top of high upside down pyramid and looking down. The base, the ground
      of its being, is downward but at the CENTRE. Do you see? It is a VORTEX
      of energy. It is an extended emanation of energy from the ground of
      being – OUTWARDS, and all is in orbit of it. Upwards and outwards.
      Like an explosion.



      So, what exists at the bottom of this pile? LIFE ! YOU. And
      consciousness and knowing, and understanding, and love and beauty. And
      that is all. Nothing else exists there. The rest exists in extension
      of it, in orbit of it – OUTWARDS. Those who would tell you that
      heaven is within you are fools, and they know not. Eternity is not
      inside of you. But when you are in the paradesium of Eternity then you
      are IN IT. I have told you all this before hundreds of times. But they
      don't listen, they don't hear. They all know better don't
      they. Well, they must know better because they have a PhD bestowed upon
      them due to their brilliance. So, don't ask a Mystic about all
      this, ask a scientist or a bishop :- ) They know FA about any of this
      :- ) If it was not sad and dangerous then it would be funny. But it
      isn't funny at all. It is dangerous.



      Now, think on this. When a baby comes into this world it is not
      supposed to be a mystic; for a baby has other things to do at that
      time. They have to grope their hands around and touch things to get some
      understanding of sight, touch, sound, distances, perspective, for this
      is all new to them. Babies do not remember where they came from or
      why. They have a different job here at that time – to get used to
      time and space. Their brain cells have to be knit together for this
      learning and being able to operate here. A baby cannot run across the
      road and dodge the traffic. But they can by the time they are three or
      four. And by that time they can also THINK and ask questions. And they
      do just that, and how. It is needed that they do. So, one thing at a
      time, and enough for each day.



      This is getting a bit long so I had better do the rest in part two. But
      NOTE everything that has been said here so far, and DON'T forget
      it. THREE parts, a TRINITY, a Vortex of Emanation from the bottom and
      the dead centre of BEING. And you come up the pipe-line. To remember
      and KNOW where you came from and what you are then you have to go back
      DOWN that pipe-line back to where you came from, and then when back
      there then you RE-UNITE with what you ARE. A RE-UNION with your SELF in
      its Primordial condition of BEING. In that great eternal love in
      Elysium, before time encroached upon your encompass. Watch this space
      for part two. No money, donations or thanks needed. Just tell me to
      piss off, for I am used to it and I am a warrior because of it.



      Merlin





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • fictiveparrot
      There is nothing so annoying as someone who thinks they know something. I have trimmed a bubbling diatribe in my editorial fashion to the following few
      Message 2 of 7 , Oct 2, 2010
        There is nothing so annoying as someone who thinks they know something. I have trimmed a bubbling diatribe in my editorial fashion to the following few absurdities, which suggest a knowing, a mysticism beyond knowing, or a mysteriously mystic mystique mistake.

        > Man is the most wondrous of them all

        > they are coming.

        > We are constructed of THREE parts, three layers, three dimensions.

        > We ALL come from the CENTRE, outwards. (Paradise is
        > INWARDS).

        > Those who would tell you that
        > heaven is within you are fools

        > A baby cannot run across the
        > road and dodge the traffic. But
        > they can by the time they are three or
        > four. And by that time they can also
        > THINK and ask questions.

        > No money, donations or thanks needed. Just tell me to
        > piss off, for I am used to it and I am a warrior because of it.

        > Merlin

        Money or donations. Ha.
        Hahaha haha.

        There are so many inconsistencies and circularities of contradiction in the "thought" of these words so as to make it a humor worth paying for... if that is the humor of the type you enjoy. I find my interest in comedians changes. I used to love Emo Phillips... but I don't find him funny anymore. I think juxtaposition is funny, and in studying myself, it always seems humor comes from an essence of the unexpected. At some point, Phillips became predictable. The mannerism and the same old stories were not funny anymore. I do not pay the price of listening as I can find so much more humor here. It may not last, and likely it will get old.

        We recently adopted 2 cats, as reward for having withstood the departure of two others whose physical entity lies below the dirt in our yard, illegally. The new beasts bring new wonders, sometimes to the side door -- sometimes alive, and sometimes not. But one interesting comparison I was derived to make was a comparison between man's 'brilliance', and that of a cat's. I had a daughter who walked at 6 months, and another who with stubborn insistence on a different means of locomotion (technically known as 'skootching'), did not walk till she was 2 (years). The former is something of an athlete (with a disinterest in athleticism) and the latter not an athlete (with an interest in athleticism). Whether interested or not, or capable or not, neither were walking or running or even killing and eating on their own at 4 months, let alone climbing to the top of the swingset and strolling there well above the ground while waving mercilessly at passing flies and the modicum of potential meals dangling in the branches above their heads. The physical feat of roughhousing play and acrobatics the two young felines can muster leaves one in awe of the fact that at the same age the human is advanced of the curve in raising and holding aloft their own unbearably fat heads. It may make one wonder just how wondrous that wondrous being is, or how such self-perceived importance in a tiny achievement of lifting a terribly fat head leads to the idea of superiority and mysticism.

        "Merlin" Dickdick, who has called me out in the past over the indifference to my own name, has adopted another himself, perhaps the right of the 'mystic' which apparently he has presumed to become (and don't deny it, Dickyboy, you think you are smarter than the lot of us no matter what version of hyperbole you choose to dismantle your own thoughts with). Yet the amateurish rantings (that is, unconvincing) are so much like the 'great' voices that have passed through this virtual hall -- namely leDuard and Trinnydad to name but two -- who ranted and raved and rotated and ruined their own ravenous rage in regular riffs of rot. The blathering and meandering and claims of knowing seeping under the door to the playroom like smoke of meaning the alarm has yet to detect, and somehow never gets detected.

        Paradise is within, but heaven is not. We are made of three wonderous parts, all of which are unable to meet the physical prowess of a cat.

        How is it that we see a miracle and mystique when we finally lift our fat heads from the carpet to look around at the cats running physical circles around us, and we claim by that wee gesture some type of superiority and then mysticism? It is my charge that some blithering blatherers (this one included) would perhaps assume incorrectly that their divine self-indulgence and self-centered self-induced self-deluded self-ridiculing selfisms are myopic misanthropes of the morphically mythical type... ahem, that the delusions of grandour affected by their own mouth affect their ability to perceive their own error.

        I habitually balance on the edge of my perch to look over the edge of the nest and peer down at the waiting jaws of the cat into whose belly I will likely stumble. I know it is dangerous to abandon the safety and solitude of the nest, and yet I consider it for whatever unknown advantage I may imagine lies beyond. And when I do take that step, which I may do with some conviction or not, or on the other hand may stumble, trip or be pushed, it is then I may either find I have talent or not for flying and save myself from the jaws as they approach me and I them. Either I will learn from the fall that it wasn't a good idea to depart at that moment, or that I can fly. Most likely it is one chance, and I best make the most of it, or die trying.

        I submit to you my original interpretation of a mystic:

        http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/160003/sn/171633442/name/schlitzie_whats-the-point.jpg

        Why is it that a mystic is not so smart as a falling bird?

        Tayking D. Hint
      • dick.richardson@rocketmail.com
        Your views on mysterious conscious events have been noted. But whether you like it or not, agree with it or not – THEY HAPPEN. That is why some people study
        Message 3 of 7 , Oct 3, 2010
          Your views on mysterious conscious events have been noted. But whether
          you like it or not, agree with it or not – THEY HAPPEN. That is why
          some people study consciousness and BEING. But you go play with your
          cats and birds, that is your choice. Others choose to study other
          things. It is not obligatory to study anything at all. But some are
          curious about this or that. I am and always was very curious about the
          nature of the human mind and consciousness – Due to mysterious
          conscious events, and all of which were spontaneous not self induced.
          And they were fun as well as being very illuminating. Not your ball
          park? Fine. But it interests many thousands if not millions of people.
          QED. Given what you say then folks can only conclude that you don't know
          anything. Do you not know when you want a shit?


          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "fictiveparrot" <knott12@...> wrote:
          >
          > There is nothing so annoying as someone who thinks they know
          something.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • tom
          Louise, I recall a while back when Dick was saying at 3 and a half he had knocked another somewhat older child out cold. I expressed my doubt as to the truth
          Message 4 of 7 , Oct 3, 2010
            Louise,

            I recall a while back when Dick was saying at 3 and a half he had knocked another somewhat older child out cold. I expressed my doubt as to the truth of it, and you tended to believe him. The one statement he made a few months ago that I do believe was that he had only met a few people in his life for whom he had respect. When Dick first came here, I was on his side as a mystic being attacked by dogmatic materialists, and even joined his group for a while. I left after his group changed where only he could post. Dick speaks of how he has been ridiculed etc. as if he is a victim, omitting the insults and condecension he has expressed towards others. He would have us believe that he is beseiged by famous scientists etc. for his wisdom.

            I put him on my block list about a month ago, and no longer have my inbox littered with his postings. Some of his things are interesting, but if being like Dick is the result of mystic experiences, that is not a strong selling point for them.

            Peace,
            Tom
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: fictiveparrot
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 1:42 AM
            Subject: [existlist] Re: What is a Mystic's Mistake? (or, How Birds Do It)



            There is nothing so annoying as someone who thinks they know something. I have trimmed a bubbling diatribe in my editorial fashion to the following few absurdities, which suggest a knowing, a mysticism beyond knowing, or a mysteriously mystic mystique mistake.

            > Man is the most wondrous of them all

            > they are coming.

            > We are constructed of THREE parts, three layers, three dimensions.

            > We ALL come from the CENTRE, outwards. (Paradise is
            > INWARDS).

            > Those who would tell you that
            > heaven is within you are fools

            > A baby cannot run across the
            > road and dodge the traffic. But
            > they can by the time they are three or
            > four. And by that time they can also
            > THINK and ask questions.

            > No money, donations or thanks needed. Just tell me to
            > piss off, for I am used to it and I am a warrior because of it.

            > Merlin

            Money or donations. Ha.
            Hahaha haha.

            There are so many inconsistencies and circularities of contradiction in the "thought" of these words so as to make it a humor worth paying for... if that is the humor of the type you enjoy. I find my interest in comedians changes. I used to love Emo Phillips... but I don't find him funny anymore. I think juxtaposition is funny, and in studying myself, it always seems humor comes from an essence of the unexpected. At some point, Phillips became predictable. The mannerism and the same old stories were not funny anymore. I do not pay the price of listening as I can find so much more humor here. It may not last, and likely it will get old.

            We recently adopted 2 cats, as reward for having withstood the departure of two others whose physical entity lies below the dirt in our yard, illegally. The new beasts bring new wonders, sometimes to the side door -- sometimes alive, and sometimes not. But one interesting comparison I was derived to make was a comparison between man's 'brilliance', and that of a cat's. I had a daughter who walked at 6 months, and another who with stubborn insistence on a different means of locomotion (technically known as 'skootching'), did not walk till she was 2 (years). The former is something of an athlete (with a disinterest in athleticism) and the latter not an athlete (with an interest in athleticism). Whether interested or not, or capable or not, neither were walking or running or even killing and eating on their own at 4 months, let alone climbing to the top of the swingset and strolling there well above the ground while waving mercilessly at passing flies and the modicum of potential meals dangling in the branches above their heads. The physical feat of roughhousing play and acrobatics the two young felines can muster leaves one in awe of the fact that at the same age the human is advanced of the curve in raising and holding aloft their own unbearably fat heads. It may make one wonder just how wondrous that wondrous being is, or how such self-perceived importance in a tiny achievement of lifting a terribly fat head leads to the idea of superiority and mysticism.

            "Merlin" Dickdick, who has called me out in the past over the indifference to my own name, has adopted another himself, perhaps the right of the 'mystic' which apparently he has presumed to become (and don't deny it, Dickyboy, you think you are smarter than the lot of us no matter what version of hyperbole you choose to dismantle your own thoughts with). Yet the amateurish rantings (that is, unconvincing) are so much like the 'great' voices that have passed through this virtual hall -- namely leDuard and Trinnydad to name but two -- who ranted and raved and rotated and ruined their own ravenous rage in regular riffs of rot. The blathering and meandering and claims of knowing seeping under the door to the playroom like smoke of meaning the alarm has yet to detect, and somehow never gets detected.

            Paradise is within, but heaven is not. We are made of three wonderous parts, all of which are unable to meet the physical prowess of a cat.

            How is it that we see a miracle and mystique when we finally lift our fat heads from the carpet to look around at the cats running physical circles around us, and we claim by that wee gesture some type of superiority and then mysticism? It is my charge that some blithering blatherers (this one included) would perhaps assume incorrectly that their divine self-indulgence and self-centered self-induced self-deluded self-ridiculing selfisms are myopic misanthropes of the morphically mythical type... ahem, that the delusions of grandour affected by their own mouth affect their ability to perceive their own error.

            I habitually balance on the edge of my perch to look over the edge of the nest and peer down at the waiting jaws of the cat into whose belly I will likely stumble. I know it is dangerous to abandon the safety and solitude of the nest, and yet I consider it for whatever unknown advantage I may imagine lies beyond. And when I do take that step, which I may do with some conviction or not, or on the other hand may stumble, trip or be pushed, it is then I may either find I have talent or not for flying and save myself from the jaws as they approach me and I them. Either I will learn from the fall that it wasn't a good idea to depart at that moment, or that I can fly. Most likely it is one chance, and I best make the most of it, or die trying.

            I submit to you my original interpretation of a mystic:

            http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/160003/sn/171633442/name/schlitzie_whats-the-point.jpg

            Why is it that a mystic is not so smart as a falling bird?

            Tayking D. Hint





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • louise
            Tom and all, It is a matter of instinct, I think - that on the question of whether or not Dick at three and a half knocked out another small boy, who was
            Message 5 of 7 , Oct 3, 2010
              Tom and all,

              It is a matter of instinct, I think - that on the question of whether or not Dick at three and a half knocked out another small boy, who was bigger than himself, I have found myself believing and you do not believe. Neither of us can establish the truth, and Dick cannot provide any evidence, except his own memory, so there it is. Dick does not respect the consensual feeling of the group, regarding quantity of posts, and often flies off the handle when his mystical posts do not receive the interest or intelligent questioning he thinks they deserve, and I am rather tired of all this, but still I think Dick is a reliable witness, in the sense of telling the truth about his own life and perceptions. I differ from Dick (and from Bill) in regard to how I think about religious faith, but otherwise many of Dick's opinions are soundly based in life experience, whether or not others might agree with him about the opinions or their topicality to this list. The religious faith opinions are absurdly generalised and fanatical. Whilst I am here busy with agreements and differences, I also agree with Bill that there are just too many helpings of mystic wisdom per day, and I would ask that the communal feeling be respected. Mary, Tom, Peter and Wil have all recently offered their opinions about excessive or unreasonable posting, and the moderator has apparently given up after repeated attempts to moderate have been flouted. Please, Dick, respect the site. We are only being democratic.

              Louise

              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
              >
              > Louise,
              >
              > I recall a while back when Dick was saying at 3 and a half he had knocked another somewhat older child out cold. I expressed my doubt as to the truth of it, and you tended to believe him. The one statement he made a few months ago that I do believe was that he had only met a few people in his life for whom he had respect. When Dick first came here, I was on his side as a mystic being attacked by dogmatic materialists, and even joined his group for a while. I left after his group changed where only he could post. Dick speaks of how he has been ridiculed etc. as if he is a victim, omitting the insults and condecension he has expressed towards others. He would have us believe that he is beseiged by famous scientists etc. for his wisdom.
              >
              > I put him on my block list about a month ago, and no longer have my inbox littered with his postings. Some of his things are interesting, but if being like Dick is the result of mystic experiences, that is not a strong selling point for them.
              >
              > Peace,
              > Tom
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: fictiveparrot
              > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 1:42 AM
              > Subject: [existlist] Re: What is a Mystic's Mistake? (or, How Birds Do It)
              >
              >
              >
              > There is nothing so annoying as someone who thinks they know something. I have trimmed a bubbling diatribe in my editorial fashion to the following few absurdities, which suggest a knowing, a mysticism beyond knowing, or a mysteriously mystic mystique mistake.
              >
              > > Man is the most wondrous of them all
              >
              > > they are coming.
              >
              > > We are constructed of THREE parts, three layers, three dimensions.
              >
              > > We ALL come from the CENTRE, outwards. (Paradise is
              > > INWARDS).
              >
              > > Those who would tell you that
              > > heaven is within you are fools
              >
              > > A baby cannot run across the
              > > road and dodge the traffic. But
              > > they can by the time they are three or
              > > four. And by that time they can also
              > > THINK and ask questions.
              >
              > > No money, donations or thanks needed. Just tell me to
              > > piss off, for I am used to it and I am a warrior because of it.
              >
              > > Merlin
              >
              > Money or donations. Ha.
              > Hahaha haha.
              >
              > There are so many inconsistencies and circularities of contradiction in the "thought" of these words so as to make it a humor worth paying for... if that is the humor of the type you enjoy. I find my interest in comedians changes. I used to love Emo Phillips... but I don't find him funny anymore. I think juxtaposition is funny, and in studying myself, it always seems humor comes from an essence of the unexpected. At some point, Phillips became predictable. The mannerism and the same old stories were not funny anymore. I do not pay the price of listening as I can find so much more humor here. It may not last, and likely it will get old.
              >
              > We recently adopted 2 cats, as reward for having withstood the departure of two others whose physical entity lies below the dirt in our yard, illegally. The new beasts bring new wonders, sometimes to the side door -- sometimes alive, and sometimes not. But one interesting comparison I was derived to make was a comparison between man's 'brilliance', and that of a cat's. I had a daughter who walked at 6 months, and another who with stubborn insistence on a different means of locomotion (technically known as 'skootching'), did not walk till she was 2 (years). The former is something of an athlete (with a disinterest in athleticism) and the latter not an athlete (with an interest in athleticism). Whether interested or not, or capable or not, neither were walking or running or even killing and eating on their own at 4 months, let alone climbing to the top of the swingset and strolling there well above the ground while waving mercilessly at passing flies and the modicum of potential meals dangling in the branches above their heads. The physical feat of roughhousing play and acrobatics the two young felines can muster leaves one in awe of the fact that at the same age the human is advanced of the curve in raising and holding aloft their own unbearably fat heads. It may make one wonder just how wondrous that wondrous being is, or how such self-perceived importance in a tiny achievement of lifting a terribly fat head leads to the idea of superiority and mysticism.
              >
              > "Merlin" Dickdick, who has called me out in the past over the indifference to my own name, has adopted another himself, perhaps the right of the 'mystic' which apparently he has presumed to become (and don't deny it, Dickyboy, you think you are smarter than the lot of us no matter what version of hyperbole you choose to dismantle your own thoughts with). Yet the amateurish rantings (that is, unconvincing) are so much like the 'great' voices that have passed through this virtual hall -- namely leDuard and Trinnydad to name but two -- who ranted and raved and rotated and ruined their own ravenous rage in regular riffs of rot. The blathering and meandering and claims of knowing seeping under the door to the playroom like smoke of meaning the alarm has yet to detect, and somehow never gets detected.
              >
              > Paradise is within, but heaven is not. We are made of three wonderous parts, all of which are unable to meet the physical prowess of a cat.
              >
              > How is it that we see a miracle and mystique when we finally lift our fat heads from the carpet to look around at the cats running physical circles around us, and we claim by that wee gesture some type of superiority and then mysticism? It is my charge that some blithering blatherers (this one included) would perhaps assume incorrectly that their divine self-indulgence and self-centered self-induced self-deluded self-ridiculing selfisms are myopic misanthropes of the morphically mythical type... ahem, that the delusions of grandour affected by their own mouth affect their ability to perceive their own error.
              >
              > I habitually balance on the edge of my perch to look over the edge of the nest and peer down at the waiting jaws of the cat into whose belly I will likely stumble. I know it is dangerous to abandon the safety and solitude of the nest, and yet I consider it for whatever unknown advantage I may imagine lies beyond. And when I do take that step, which I may do with some conviction or not, or on the other hand may stumble, trip or be pushed, it is then I may either find I have talent or not for flying and save myself from the jaws as they approach me and I them. Either I will learn from the fall that it wasn't a good idea to depart at that moment, or that I can fly. Most likely it is one chance, and I best make the most of it, or die trying.
              >
              > I submit to you my original interpretation of a mystic:
              >
              > http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/160003/sn/171633442/name/schlitzie_whats-the-point.jpg
              >
              > Why is it that a mystic is not so smart as a falling bird?
              >
              > Tayking D. Hint
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • dick.richardson@rocketmail.com
              Very well, I would be happy for everybody to be happy by not posting here any more. My reasons for initially doing so were fulfilled long ago by those lurking
              Message 6 of 7 , Oct 3, 2010
                Very well, I would be happy for everybody to be happy by not posting
                here any more. My reasons for initially doing so were fulfilled long ago
                by those lurking on this group who were interested, judging by the
                private feed-back as always happens. That is why I do it – because
                nobody else is doing it. Also I have to reiterate once again that this
                IS all a part of ones existential existence (a fuller part) and it makes
                it even more profound. That some are interested in nothing other than
                that which is revelled by the five external senses plus what they like
                to think, is no concern of mine. The things I have talked of are not
                invented, I could never do that. They are all true. So too are the bits
                I have told about my own life events. Many folks love to hear them and
                have asked for more and more, but I don't really have any more to
                give that I have not given them on a number of chat groups for a long
                time. That there are some, and for whatever reasons, who prefer not to
                accept anything one says is irrelevant and it makes not a jot of
                difference, neither does all the abuse. I know what I am doing, I know
                why I am doing it, and did long before I had decided to put pen to
                paper, for I had thought it all out and the repercussions long before. I
                don't rush into thing willy-nilly.

                Enjoy your chats in idyllic peace and quiet. Nobody ever had to read any
                of mine in the first place. That is their problem not mine. But if they
                sling shit I can sling it back, but I never sling it first and never
                have done.

                rwr


                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                >
                > Tom and all,
                >
                > It is a matter of instinct, I think - that on the question of whether
                or not Dick at three and a half knocked out another small boy, who was
                bigger than himself, I have found myself believing and you do not
                believe. Neither of us can establish the truth, and Dick cannot provide
                any evidence, except his own memory, so there it is. Dick does not
                respect the consensual feeling of the group, regarding quantity of
                posts, and often flies off the handle when his mystical posts do not
                receive the interest or intelligent questioning he thinks they deserve,
                and I am rather tired of all this, but still I think Dick is a reliable
                witness, in the sense of telling the truth about his own life and
                perceptions. I differ from Dick (and from Bill) in regard to how I
                think about religious faith, but otherwise many of Dick's opinions are
                soundly based in life experience, whether or not others might agree with
                him about the opinions or their topicality to this list. The religious
                faith opinions are absurdly generalised and fanatical. Whilst I am here
                busy with agreements and differences, I also agree with Bill that there
                are just too many helpings of mystic wisdom per day, and I would ask
                that the communal feeling be respected. Mary, Tom, Peter and Wil have
                all recently offered their opinions about excessive or unreasonable
                posting, and the moderator has apparently given up after repeated
                attempts to moderate have been flouted. Please, Dick, respect the site.
                We are only being democratic.
                >
                > Louise




                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • fictiveparrot
                ... Well, define happen . I am not sure they do. I am not sure that everything I understand is a misinterpretation fed by my ignorance. A cat meows and I
                Message 7 of 7 , Oct 4, 2010
                  > Your views on mysterious conscious events have been noted.
                  > But whether you like it or not, agree with it or not – THEY HAPPEN.

                  Well, define 'happen'. I am not sure they do. I am not sure that everything I 'understand' is a misinterpretation fed by my ignorance. A cat meows and I think it means nothing because it isn't my language. Perhaps it is more evolved than I understand. Perhaps we are all a lot more ignorant than we think.

                  > I am and always was very curious about the
                  > nature of the human mind and consciousness

                  If so, then explain to me why, if you can observe insanity, that you can be positive that you are not.

                  > But it interests many thousands if not millions of people.

                  In your personal imaginary arena.

                  > Do you not know when you want a shit?

                  I know when I have interests, but I don't know what might drive them or how and in which package they arrive. If I have interest in loosing my bowels because of a hint from my nether region it is not so much want... And while 'want' is not even the point, why don't I make it happen rather than it happening to me? Don't I get the hint that if the urge is real and it is my body that I do not control that likely there are other parts of it out of my reach? Perhaps herein lies another personality that I never get to meet...the one who takes over and does things for me in my dreams that I never would in waking consciousness... The one who muffled in frustration behind my control of consciousness runs ragged remembering to breath, and beat the heart, and adjust the iris, and digest the food.

                  no sir, I don't know a shit. I won't pretend to.


                  T. Catastrophe Interpolotta
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.