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

C & E = Reality?

Expand Messages
  • Mathew Morrell
    JZ Knight bases her philosophy upon a simple, but rather powerful, axiom. This axiom states that consciousness and energy creates the nature of reality, or
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 22, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      JZ Knight bases her philosophy upon a simple, but rather powerful,
      axiom. This axiom states that consciousness and energy creates the
      nature of reality, or C&E=R. Wherever you place your consciousness,
      energy follows and the product is reality.

      If you think negative thoughts you'll create a negative reality, if
      you think of a rock you'll create a rock, if you imagine world peace
      there'll be world peace. There's a cleanness and simplicity to the
      C&E axiom that makes it seem invulnerable to criticism. After all,
      who could deny that our thoughts and attitudes don't in some way
      influence our reality? Thoughts are the mechanical movements of
      intelligent perception and, indeed, produce circuit-like connections
      with reality on the quantum level.

      But let's not be deceived, here. Thoughts also produce "mechanical
      connections" with realities that exist solely in ones' own head and
      have absolutely no reality outside the mind. The realities existing
      in ones' own mind are simply thoughts. They're eidiolon that have
      their existence in the astral realm of the imagination. The
      shortcoming of JZs philosophy is that is makes no distinction
      between these astral connections with false realities (illusions)
      and connections made with objective reality (truth).

      Although this might seem like a minor flaw in JZs philosophy, it
      isn't. JZ is an extreme relativist who believes that there is no
      reality outside the self and that reality is merely an illusion
      produced by the mind. In fact, in her philosophy, the self is
      itself an illusion. (Her brand of relativism makes Einstein's
      relativism seem downright Newtonian in comparison.) This is why you
      so often hear JZ chanting "Burn the image!" The image is our
      existence in reality, which is an illusion according to her
      subjectivist doctrine: something that has no spiritual value and
      impedes mystical oneness with the universe.

      But surely there is a difference between the world of dreams and the
      world that indicates a known and definable totality called reality.
      Surely, the thoughts in our head are different in some way from the
      reality that all of us live in: reality being "the ground of all
      things", as Eckhardt called it; a universal field that responds to
      the movement of intelligent perception, capable of revealing itself
      on ever-deeper levels of beingness. It isn't until we achieve a
      slightly more concise definition of reality that the "JZ axiom"
      begins to weaken---cracks under strain of philosophical analysis.

      It doesn't mean that JZs axiom is wrong, necessarily. C&E does
      equal reality. But reality and fantasy are two entirely different
      spheres and any kind of distinguishment goes un-noted. They're
      constructed from different dynamics and involve different forces
      that shape the way reality is experienced as opposed to the way a
      fantasy is produced and experienced. To lump them together under
      the same axiom is ignorance of the wealth of understanding that
      exists at our fingertips as universal-objective truth.
    • Mathew Morrell
      JZ Knight bases her philosophy upon a simple, but rather powerful, axiom. This axiom states that consciousness and energy creates the nature of reality, or
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 22, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        JZ Knight bases her philosophy upon a simple, but rather powerful,
        axiom. This axiom states that consciousness and energy creates the
        nature of reality, or C&E=R. Wherever you place your consciousness,
        energy follows and the product is reality.

        If you think negative thoughts you'll create a negative reality, if
        you think of a rock you'll create a rock, if you imagine world peace
        there'll be world peace. There's a cleanness and simplicity to the
        C&E axiom that makes it seem invulnerable to criticism. After all,
        who could deny that our thoughts and attitudes don't in some way
        influence our reality? Thoughts are the mechanical movements of
        intelligent perception and, indeed, produce circuit-like connections
        with reality on the quantum level.

        But let's not be deceived, here. Thoughts also produce "mechanical
        connections" with realities that exist solely in ones' own head and
        have absolutely no reality outside the mind. The realities existing
        in ones' own mind are simply thoughts. They're eidiolon that have
        their existence in the astral realm of the imagination. The
        shortcoming of JZs philosophy is that is makes no distinction
        between these astral connections with false realities (illusions)
        and connections made with objective reality (truth).

        Although this might seem like a minor flaw in JZs philosophy, it
        isn't. JZ is an extreme relativist who believes that there is no
        reality outside the self and that reality is merely an illusion
        produced by the mind. In fact, in her philosophy, the self is
        itself an illusion. (Her brand of relativism makes Einstein's
        relativism seem downright Newtonian in comparison.) This is why you
        so often hear JZ chanting "Burn the image!" The image is our
        existence in reality, which is an illusion according to her
        subjectivist doctrine: something that has no spiritual value and
        impedes mystical oneness with the universe.

        But surely there is a difference between the world of dreams and the
        world that indicates a known and definable totality called reality.
        Surely, the thoughts in our head are different in some way from the
        reality that all of us live in: reality being "the ground of all
        things", as Eckhardt called it; a universal field that responds to
        the movement of intelligent perception, capable of revealing itself
        on ever-deeper levels of beingness. It isn't until we achieve a
        slightly more concise definition of reality that the "JZ axiom"
        begins to weaken---cracks under strain of philosophical analysis.

        Now that doesn't mean that JZs axiom is wrong, necessarily. C&E
        does, in fact, equal reality. But reality and fantasy are two
        entirely different spheres----and any kind of distinguishment goes
        un-noted by JZ. Fantasy and reality are constructed from different
        dynamics and involve different forces that shape the way reality is
        experienced as opposed to the way a fantasy is produced and
        experienced. To lump them together is ignorance of the wealth of
        understanding that exists within the Universe as universal-objective
        truth.
      • celestial_vision@comcast.net
        ... From: Mathew Morrell tma4cbt@juno.com Thoughts are the mechanical movements of intelligent perception and, indeed, produce circuit-like connections with
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 23, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
           

          -------------- Original message --------------
          From: "Mathew Morrell" tma4cbt@...

           Thoughts are the mechanical movements of
          intelligent perception and, indeed, produce circuit-like connections
          with reality on the quantum level.

          .


          ====================

          When you sit still and examine your thoughts, do you really believe what you are saying here? They most certainly are not. This is not Anthroposophy ...  read Philosophy of Freedom

        • Mathew Morrell
          Thanks for your reply. The reason I post stuff here is to get feedback on my latest ideas. All feedback is considered---even curt feedback. Like everyone
          Message 4 of 5 , Aug 23, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks for your reply. The reason I post stuff here is to get
            feedback on my latest ideas. All feedback is considered---even curt
            feedback. Like everyone here, I'm still learning and evolving.

            I have "Philosophy of Freedom" next to my bed and I can't find any
            place in the book that would contradict my statement that thoughts
            are mechanical movements of intelligent perception---once they're
            detached from the mind and become independent realities in the
            universe. I encourage people to listen to what I'm saying.

            Yes, thoughts are spiritual and yes they are produced from an
            outpouring of our soul spiritual life, and therefore are a part of
            our inner self. That I won't deny.

            However, and this is the really strange and interesting aspect of
            thought, our thoughts assume a life of their own, separate from the
            mind, the moment we think them. They assume their own independent
            reality, rather like ghosts, once they detach themselves from our
            inner being and become immersed in the intelligent matrix of the
            universe.

            At this point, thoughts assume a mechanical nature. They've
            detached themselves from the soul and become the mechanical
            (ahrimanic) movements of intelligent perception---just as I wrote.
            According to the latest science, in which mind and matter connect,
            these mechanical thoughts are capable of responding to the
            intelligent order of the universe.

            The point of my previous post was to show how JZ confuses these
            ahrimanic thoughts with the reality that is created from the
            intelligent order of the universe.













            --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, celestial_vision@... wrote:
            >
            >
            > -------------- Original message --------------
            > From: "Mathew Morrell" tma4cbt@...
            > Thoughts are the mechanical movements of
            > intelligent perception and, indeed, produce circuit-like
            connections
            > with reality on the quantum level. Recent Activity
            > 1New Members
            > Visit Your Group
            > Yahoo! Search
            > Try a shortcut
            > Find what you need
            > faster.
            > Yahoo! 360°
            > Be a Blogger
            > Do it now
            > Share with friends
            > Find Deals
            > Yahoo! Shopping
            > Find great deals
            > for Back to School..
            >
            > ====================
            > When you sit still and examine your thoughts, do you really
            believe what you are saying here? They most certainly are not. This
            is not Anthroposophy ... read Philosophy of Freedom
            >
          • Durward Starman
            *******Dr. Steiner introduced something very important almost a century ago, which some here may have already been exposed to and which would be an interesting
            Message 5 of 5 , Sep 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              *******Dr. Steiner introduced something very important almost a century ago,
              which some here may have already been exposed to and which would be an
              interesting topic to discuss. He gave a series of lectures called Human and
              Cosmic Thought (older title, Microcosmic and Macrocosmic Thought). In it he
              says that there is no one philosophical point of view which is objectively
              right for everyone but rather that different personality types lean towards
              one or another depending on their temperament. He identifies 12 and connects
              them with the signs of the zodiac (or the constellations, I'm not clear
              about which yet).

              He begins with, as his primary polarity of 2 opposite points of view,
              what can be called 'materialism' and its opposite which he names 'spiritism'
              or it could be translated 'spiritualism', not meaning doing stuff with
              mediums but rather the belief that only the inner world of our (spiritual)
              selves is real. This is what underlies every You-create-your-own-reality
              philosophy. Personalities who incline to this philosophy don't relate to the
              material world and so want to interpret it as merely a form of the spiritual
              --- which of course in a sense it is. So it's not that their philosophy is
              "wrong" but just one-sided. After all, all that may be true but what good
              does that do when you need to deal with anything material?

              I remember many years ago I gave a lecture and afterwards a lady and her
              man friend who were very interested in it gave me a ride to my hotel. The
              man was really eloquent in speaking about the spirit and contact with the
              divine within, and we were soaring into rhapsodies of discourse as the car
              stopped at a gas station for gas. Then the lady said she couldn't get the
              gas cap off and could one of us help. Well, we stood there for 10 minutes
              stupidly pawing at the locked gas cap trying to get it off so she could get
              gas and speculating Well, maybe it works this way and maybe that way. I had
              to laugh at our being in love with our own voices in our puffed-up
              conversation when we weren't worth a darn in the world of material things.
              That's the problem with the one-sidedness of Spiritism or Spiritualism:
              useless in actually dealing with the material, egotism often drives these
              adherents into denying it exists or imagining they can deal with it by mere
              wishes alone. (As a paralegal I've done bankruptcies for many long-time
              adherents of this philosophy and gotten them out of tax troubles--- and of
              course they are utterly helpless with anything technical."So heavenly minded
              you're no earthly good", as Johnny Cash sang of some of his born-again
              Christian friends.)

              On the opposite extreme, the materialist---the mechanic, technician,
              scientist---- is great with unlocking gas caps, but they believe everything
              'spiritual' (your inner consciousness, thoughts and feelings) is just
              produced by the material. It's all just electricity in the brain. People,
              animals, plants, all simply ARE their bodies and ONLY their bodies. This
              one-sidedness is what makes materialism so destructive. It's right in its
              own sphere, as "spiritism" is in its, but neither account for all reality.
              Stretching them to do so is what distorts them.

              Starman



              www.DrStarman.com





              >From: "Mathew Morrell" <tma4cbt@...>
              >Reply-To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
              >To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
              >Subject: [steiner] C & E = Reality?
              >Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:09:21 -0000
              >
              >JZ Knight bases her philosophy upon a simple, but rather powerful,
              >axiom. This axiom states that consciousness and energy creates the
              >nature of reality, or C&E=R. Wherever you place your consciousness,
              >energy follows and the product is reality.
              >
              >If you think negative thoughts you'll create a negative reality, if
              >you think of a rock you'll create a rock, if you imagine world peace
              >there'll be world peace. There's a cleanness and simplicity to the
              >C&E axiom that makes it seem invulnerable to criticism. After all,
              >who could deny that our thoughts and attitudes don't in some way
              >influence our reality? Thoughts are the mechanical movements of
              >intelligent perception and, indeed, produce circuit-like connections
              >with reality on the quantum level.
              >
              >But let's not be deceived, here. Thoughts also produce "mechanical
              >connections" with realities that exist solely in ones' own head and
              >have absolutely no reality outside the mind. The realities existing
              >in ones' own mind are simply thoughts. They're eidiolon that have
              >their existence in the astral realm of the imagination. The
              >shortcoming of JZs philosophy is that is makes no distinction
              >between these astral connections with false realities (illusions)
              >and connections made with objective reality (truth).
              >
              >Although this might seem like a minor flaw in JZs philosophy, it
              >isn't. JZ is an extreme relativist who believes that there is no
              >reality outside the self and that reality is merely an illusion
              >produced by the mind. In fact, in her philosophy, the self is
              >itself an illusion. (Her brand of relativism makes Einstein's
              >relativism seem downright Newtonian in comparison.) This is why you
              >so often hear JZ chanting "Burn the image!" The image is our
              >existence in reality, which is an illusion according to her
              >subjectivist doctrine: something that has no spiritual value and
              >impedes mystical oneness with the universe.
              >
              >But surely there is a difference between the world of dreams and the
              >world that indicates a known and definable totality called reality.
              >Surely, the thoughts in our head are different in some way from the
              >reality that all of us live in: reality being "the ground of all
              >things", as Eckhardt called it; a universal field that responds to
              >the movement of intelligent perception, capable of revealing itself
              >on ever-deeper levels of beingness. It isn't until we achieve a
              >slightly more concise definition of reality that the "JZ axiom"
              >begins to weaken---cracks under strain of philosophical analysis.
              >
              >It doesn't mean that JZs axiom is wrong, necessarily. C&E does
              >equal reality. But reality and fantasy are two entirely different
              >spheres and any kind of distinguishment goes un-noted. They're
              >constructed from different dynamics and involve different forces
              >that shape the way reality is experienced as opposed to the way a
              >fantasy is produced and experienced. To lump them together under
              >the same axiom is ignorance of the wealth of understanding that
              >exists at our fingertips as universal-objective truth.
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.