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

Re: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?

Expand Messages
  • carol
    Comments? Yes Durward, (is this OK with you?) The main reason I was obliged to abandon regular television viewing was to allow my soul the opportunity to
    Message 1 of 12 , Aug 25, 2008

       "Comments?"

      Yes Durward,  (is this OK with you?)

      The main reason I was obliged to abandon 'regular' television viewing was to allow  my soul the opportunity to return to 'believing' in the presence of the  genuine personality and recognizing the immense value of such.

      Therefore,  televised fiction has, a long while ago,  become  something for me to avoid, and  when I  can't, I  try not to pay too much attention; I remind myself to not 'get too close' to what's going on in it.  

      The 'real thing' for me is so important because I know that my 'inner soul' really WANTS it like this.

      In televised/cinema fiction,  one always finds before one's view the situation of  a truly  genuine individual  posessing a multitude of soul qualities (as well as an active private life),  and then he/she is simultaneously  portraying a fictitious personae.  The tendency is to 'believe' that the fictitious  'individual' and the situation being portrayed is really ALL that is present before one's view.

      Then,  after the fact,  the viewer is left vulnerable to retaining the image of the actors, the scenerio-  within his/her soul-  with an association that the   'life circumstances'  portrayed were real when they were in fact fictitious.

      Personally, I find that this phenomena leads to a condition of the soul being  'stuck' with a nebulous experience to deal with- (confusion)-  a  'condition' which I see leading to a growing number of  souls not being able to appreciate 'real life', not being able to 'take on' the real thing, but instead,  tending more towards a state of  inner isolation, lethargy and a tendency to become easily frustrated.

      Television is bigger than life,  some say, and I think,  a lot more people than we realize, actually live this as fact,   in reality.  Television 'reality' is 'cleaner' and 'easier' than real life.

      That's just a little bit of what I know on the subject of televised cinema/sit com etc. from my 'anthroposophic perspective'.

      note: I can quite easily handle viewing programs where the people expressing themselves - do so as real people.

      carol.


      --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the three levels of the soul, since it's here in a series of posts.
      >
      > The body is that through which you experience the world, the soul is your inner world where you make a reflection or copy of the outer. At first, the inner soul is directed only to the senses. When it also directs its attention to itself, it becomes aware of itself as a 'personality'. The first level is the sentient soul and the second is the intellectual or mind soul. But we are not yet capable of realizing ourselves completely, or our outer world, until we develop the third and highest part of the soul, the consciousness soul. As the lowest level of soul turns its attention to the body, this highest part turns towards the eternal spirit that is our true essence and the external world's as well. Experiencing it completely transforms your consciousness, hence the name.
      >
      > Anthroposophy teaches that modern man has reached the point where everyone should be developing this. What helps it and what hinders it?
      >
      > First, I see any technology as neutral in itself. It can be put to high or low use. So, when looking at our civilization, Dr. Steiner (in his book "Theosophy" and many other places), in surveying what we use our thinking-power to create, says, Most of it serves the sentient soul. This is only natural, that when we became able to construct great transportation systems they would first be used to move food, clothing, and other things that bring comfort to the body. Similarly, our communication systems were first used for shipping, distribution of commodities, etc. But then entertainment and educational information began to be distributed via radio, and silent film, then film with sound, then television brought this into the home without need of going to a theater. Along with the "play" were the commercials, a reminder of the first use. A 'show' with commercials---intelectual and sentient souls. The emphasis on what was beautiful to the eye and ear was the strong connection to the sentient soul (glamour, musicals).
      >
      > It's a time-honored tradition to deplore television and Hollywood. But the technology is neutral, and the business gives us what we as consumers want. No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror! But what we can ask is, if Man is supposed to wake up, are these things helping or putting us back to sleep?
      >
      > I think a good case can be made that television and the other media have helped keep us focussed only on the sentient and intellectual souls, on daily trivia, gossip, mindless fluff. Same with newspapers and talk radio with their presenting one side of questions to appeal to a biased audience. But the internet, I think, is different from these other media because it is INTERACTIVE. TV programs, well, someone else decides what to put on and you can take it or leave it. But the internet and the easy availability of video and audio tools has made it more and more possible for people to not just receive passively. I think it's having a positive effect, more than the earlier media. It's only in its infancy, and at first it is used by distributors of commodities to appeal to the sentient soul, then "personalized" to appeal to the intellectual soul. The only reason there's little to appeal to the Consciousness Soul is, as we've just demonstrated here, because few people have had an experience of it or even have a clue it exists or what it is. But if things are produced that speak of it, the internet is almost certainly how they'll first spread, because it enables individuals to be pro-active. If you're taking in nothing but "Dukes of Hazzard" instead of "My Dinner With Andre", we can't blame it on the TV business anymore.
      >
      > So I don't see anything negative about the internet in relation to people waking up, and in fact I see more positive in it than the older TV and radio. Comments?
      >
      > Starmanwww.DrStarman.com
      > _________________________________________________________________
      > Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find out how.
      > http://www.windowslive.com/explore/messenger?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger_yahoo_082008
      >

    • Durward Starman
      *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that s about it for me. Have you noticed how many young
      Message 2 of 12 , Aug 26, 2008
        *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that's about it for me.
         
          Have you noticed how many young people refer to fictitious characters as if they were real? How the distorted fictional peoples' behavior starts being imitated as if real people would ever behave that way? (After awhile, they DON'T anymore. I mean, real people imitate unreal people from television who never really lived and thought or acted that way, but rather were behaving the way a tiny clique of people in Hollywood script characters to act.)
         
           That's what I mean by the internet being better than the previously-existing TV & radio in that it's interactive. This is more like having a telephone conversation than listening to the radio, to draw a comparison; it's two-way communication, not just one-way. If an image is false it can be critiqued, an intelligent discussion can be had as to what the reality is, like in real life.
         
           A few years ago a survey was done about what is present, and NOT present, on "sitcoms", how they present the world. There are no babies or young children. There are no old people. No one ever sits and watches television, no one ever goes to church, and so on. Distorted fictional world. Then there's the overall cynical, flippant attitude almost everyone displays. The sound of a television being on has become so generally annoying to me that I have to shut it off. I suspect I'm not entirely alone.
         
           Similarly, the muck from the semi-conscious that spews out on most of the "communication" on the internet is pretty depressing. But just as television evolved to Masterpiece Theaters, this infant medium may generate something worthwhile. It's a reflection of what we human beings put into it... influenced by our better or worse angels, as the case may be.
         
        Durward 

        www.DrStarman.com




        To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
        From: organicethics@...
        Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:54:39 +0000
        Subject: [steiner] Re: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


         "Comments?"
        Yes Durward,  (is this OK with you?)
        The main reason I was obliged to abandon 'regular' television viewing was to allow  my soul the opportunity to return to 'believing' in the presence of the  genuine personality and recognizing the immense value of such.
        Therefore,  televised fiction has, a long while ago,  become  something for me to avoid, and  when I  can't, I  try not to pay too much attention; I remind myself to not 'get too close' to what's going on in it.  
        The 'real thing' for me is so important because I know that my 'inner soul' really WANTS it like this.
        In televised/cinema fiction,  one always finds before one's view the situation of  a truly  genuine individual  posessing a multitude of soul qualities (as well as an active private life),  and then he/she is simultaneously  portraying a fictitious personae.  The tendency is to 'believe' that the fictitious  'individual' and the situation being portrayed is really ALL that is present before one's view.
        Then,  after the fact,  the viewer is left vulnerable to retaining the image of the actors, the scenerio-  within his/her soul-  with an association that the   'life circumstances'  portrayed were real when they were in fact fictitious.
        Personally, I find that this phenomena leads to a condition of the soul being  'stuck' with a nebulous experience to deal with- (confusion)-  a  'condition' which I see leading to a growing number of  souls not being able to appreciate 'real life', not being able to 'take on' the real thing, but instead,  tending more towards a state of  inner isolation, lethargy and a tendency to become easily frustrated.
        Television is bigger than life,  some say, and I think,  a lot more people than we realize, actually live this as fact,   in reality.  Television 'reality' is 'cleaner' and 'easier' than real life.
        That's just a little bit of what I know on the subject of televised cinema/sit com etc. from my 'anthroposophic perspective' .
        note: I can quite easily handle viewing programs where the people expressing themselves - do so as real people.
        carol.


        --- In steiner@yahoogroups .com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@.. .> wrote:
        >
        >
        > *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the three levels of the soul, since it's here in a series of posts.
        >
        > The body is that through which you experience the world, the soul is your inner world where you make a reflection or copy of the outer. At first, the inner soul is directed only to the senses. When it also directs its attention to itself, it becomes aware of itself as a 'personality' . The first level is the sentient soul and the second is the intellectual or mind soul. But we are not yet capable of realizing ourselves completely, or our outer world, until we develop the third and highest part of the soul, the consciousness soul. As the lowest level of soul turns its attention to the body, this highest part turns towards the eternal spirit that is our true essence and the external world's as well. Experiencing it completely transforms your consciousness, hence the name.
        >
        > Anthroposophy teaches that modern man has reached the point where everyone should be developing this. What helps it and what hinders it?
        >
        > First, I see any technology as neutral in itself. It can be put to high or low use. So, when looking at our civilization, Dr. Steiner (in his book "Theosophy" and many other places), in surveying what we use our thinking-power to create, says, Most of it serves the sentient soul. This is only natural, that when we became able to construct great transportation systems they would first be used to move food, clothing, and other things that bring comfort to the body. Similarly, our communication systems were first used for shipping, distribution of commodities, etc. But then entertainment and educational information began to be distributed via radio, and silent film, then film with sound, then television brought this into the home without need of going to a theater. Along with the "play" were the commercials, a reminder of the first use. A 'show' with commercials- --intelectual and sentient souls. The emphasis on what was beautiful to the eye and ear was the strong connection to the sentient soul (glamour, musicals).
        >
        > It's a time-honored tradition to deplore television and Hollywood. But the technology is neutral, and the business gives us what we as consumers want. No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror! But what we can ask is, if Man is supposed to wake up, are these things helping or putting us back to sleep?
        >
        > I think a good case can be made that television and the other media have helped keep us focussed only on the sentient and intellectual souls, on daily trivia, gossip, mindless fluff. Same with newspapers and talk radio with their presenting one side of questions to appeal to a biased audience. But the internet, I think, is different from these other media because it is INTERACTIVE. TV programs, well, someone else decides what to put on and you can take it or leave it. But the internet and the easy availability of video and audio tools has made it more and more possible for people to not just receive passively. I think it's having a positive effect, more than the earlier media. It's only in its infancy, and at first it is used by distributors of commodities to appeal to the sentient soul, then "personalized" to appeal to the intellectual soul. The only reason there's little to appeal to the Consciousness Soul is, as we've just demonstrated here, because few people have had an experience of it or even have a clue it exists or what it is. But if things are produced that speak of it, the internet is almost certainly how they'll first spread, because it enables individuals to be pro-active. If you're taking in nothing but "Dukes of Hazzard" instead of "My Dinner With Andre", we can't blame it on the TV business anymore.
        >
        > So I don't see anything negative about the internet in relation to people waking up, and in fact I see more positive in it than the older TV and radio. Comments?
        >
        > Starmanwww.DrStarma n.com
        > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ________
        > Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find out how.
        > http://www.windowsl ive.com/explore/ messenger? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ messenger_ yahoo_082008
        >




        Get ideas on sharing photos from people like you. Find new ways to share. Get Ideas Here!
      • Durward Starman
        *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that s about it for me. Have you noticed how many young
        Message 3 of 12 , Aug 26, 2008
          *******I agree completely. I watch the Weather Channel to see the radar map when a storm is coming, and that's about it for me.
           
            Have you noticed how many young people refer to fictitious characters as if they were real? How the distorted fictional peoples' behavior starts being imitated as if real people would ever behave that way? (After awhile, they DON'T anymore. I mean, real people imitate unreal people from television who never really lived and thought or acted that way, but rather were behaving the way a tiny clique of people in Hollywood script characters to act.)
           
             That's what I mean by the internet being better than the previously-existing TV & radio in that it's interactive. This is more like having a telephone conversation than listening to the radio, to draw a comparison; it's two-way communication, not just one-way. If an image is false it can be critiqued, an intelligent discussion can be had as to what the reality is, like in real life.
           
             A few years ago a survey was done about what is present, and NOT present, on "sitcoms", how they present the world. There are no babies or young children. There are no old people. No one ever sits and watches television, no one ever goes to church, and so on. Distorted fictional world. Then there's the overall cynical, flippant attitude almost everyone displays. The sound of a television being on has become so generally annoying to me that I have to shut it off. I suspect I'm not entirely alone.
           
             Similarly, the muck from the semi-conscious that spews out on most of the "communication" on the internet is pretty depressing. But just as television evolved to Masterpiece Theaters, this infant medium may generate something worthwhile. It's a reflection of what we human beings put into it... influenced by our better or worse angels, as the case may be.
           
          Durward 

          www.DrStarman.com




          To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
          From: organicethics@...
          Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:54:39 +0000
          Subject: [steiner] Re: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


           "Comments?"
          Yes Durward,  (is this OK with you?)
          The main reason I was obliged to abandon 'regular' television viewing was to allow  my soul the opportunity to return to 'believing' in the presence of the  genuine personality and recognizing the immense value of such.
          Therefore,  televised fiction has, a long while ago,  become  something for me to avoid, and  when I  can't, I  try not to pay too much attention; I remind myself to not 'get too close' to what's going on in it.  
          The 'real thing' for me is so important because I know that my 'inner soul' really WANTS it like this.
          In televised/cinema fiction,  one always finds before one's view the situation of  a truly  genuine individual  posessing a multitude of soul qualities (as well as an active private life),  and then he/she is simultaneously  portraying a fictitious personae.  The tendency is to 'believe' that the fictitious  'individual' and the situation being portrayed is really ALL that is present before one's view.
          Then,  after the fact,  the viewer is left vulnerable to retaining the image of the actors, the scenerio-  within his/her soul-  with an association that the   'life circumstances'  portrayed were real when they were in fact fictitious.
          Personally, I find that this phenomena leads to a condition of the soul being  'stuck' with a nebulous experience to deal with- (confusion)-  a  'condition' which I see leading to a growing number of  souls not being able to appreciate 'real life', not being able to 'take on' the real thing, but instead,  tending more towards a state of  inner isolation, lethargy and a tendency to become easily frustrated.
          Television is bigger than life,  some say, and I think,  a lot more people than we realize, actually live this as fact,   in reality.  Television 'reality' is 'cleaner' and 'easier' than real life.
          That's just a little bit of what I know on the subject of televised cinema/sit com etc. from my 'anthroposophic perspective' .
          note: I can quite easily handle viewing programs where the people expressing themselves - do so as real people.
          carol.


          --- In steiner@yahoogroups .com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@.. .> wrote:
          >
          >
          > *******So now, anyone who wishes to participate in the discussion can look up the description in Occult Science about what anthroposophy teaches us as to the three levels of the soul, since it's here in a series of posts.
          >
          > The body is that through which you experience the world, the soul is your inner world where you make a reflection or copy of the outer. At first, the inner soul is directed only to the senses. When it also directs its attention to itself, it becomes aware of itself as a 'personality' . The first level is the sentient soul and the second is the intellectual or mind soul. But we are not yet capable of realizing ourselves completely, or our outer world, until we develop the third and highest part of the soul, the consciousness soul. As the lowest level of soul turns its attention to the body, this highest part turns towards the eternal spirit that is our true essence and the external world's as well. Experiencing it completely transforms your consciousness, hence the name.
          >
          > Anthroposophy teaches that modern man has reached the point where everyone should be developing this. What helps it and what hinders it?
          >
          > First, I see any technology as neutral in itself. It can be put to high or low use. So, when looking at our civilization, Dr. Steiner (in his book "Theosophy" and many other places), in surveying what we use our thinking-power to create, says, Most of it serves the sentient soul. This is only natural, that when we became able to construct great transportation systems they would first be used to move food, clothing, and other things that bring comfort to the body. Similarly, our communication systems were first used for shipping, distribution of commodities, etc. But then entertainment and educational information began to be distributed via radio, and silent film, then film with sound, then television brought this into the home without need of going to a theater. Along with the "play" were the commercials, a reminder of the first use. A 'show' with commercials- --intelectual and sentient souls. The emphasis on what was beautiful to the eye and ear was the strong connection to the sentient soul (glamour, musicals).
          >
          > It's a time-honored tradition to deplore television and Hollywood. But the technology is neutral, and the business gives us what we as consumers want. No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror! But what we can ask is, if Man is supposed to wake up, are these things helping or putting us back to sleep?
          >
          > I think a good case can be made that television and the other media have helped keep us focussed only on the sentient and intellectual souls, on daily trivia, gossip, mindless fluff. Same with newspapers and talk radio with their presenting one side of questions to appeal to a biased audience. But the internet, I think, is different from these other media because it is INTERACTIVE. TV programs, well, someone else decides what to put on and you can take it or leave it. But the internet and the easy availability of video and audio tools has made it more and more possible for people to not just receive passively. I think it's having a positive effect, more than the earlier media. It's only in its infancy, and at first it is used by distributors of commodities to appeal to the sentient soul, then "personalized" to appeal to the intellectual soul. The only reason there's little to appeal to the Consciousness Soul is, as we've just demonstrated here, because few people have had an experience of it or even have a clue it exists or what it is. But if things are produced that speak of it, the internet is almost certainly how they'll first spread, because it enables individuals to be pro-active. If you're taking in nothing but "Dukes of Hazzard" instead of "My Dinner With Andre", we can't blame it on the TV business anymore.
          >
          > So I don't see anything negative about the internet in relation to people waking up, and in fact I see more positive in it than the older TV and radio. Comments?
          >
          > Starmanwww.DrStarma n.com
          > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ________
          > Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find out how.
          > http://www.windowsl ive.com/explore/ messenger? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ messenger_ yahoo_082008
          >




          Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find Out How
        • Robert Mason
          ... itself. . . . No point in just criticizing the medium anymore than complaining about your appearance in the mirror!
          Message 4 of 12 , Aug 27, 2008
            To Starman, who wrote:

            >>First, I see any technology as neutral in
            itself. . . . No point in just criticizing the
            medium anymore than complaining about your
            appearance in the mirror!<<

            Robert writes:

            I’d say that, to a large degree, “the medium is
            the message”, regardless of programming
            content. (Not to deny, of course, that this
            content very largely determines the overall
            effect.) Hoffman’s ideas about this, and the
            *Atlantic* article, were what provoked me to
            start this thread in the first place. Recall
            those who, correctly in a way, opposed the
            advent of Gutenberg’s print technology. And
            recall Nietzsche and the typewriter. -- More
            recently I again came across Steiner’s remarks
            in this vein, regarding the cinema:

            "It is quite natural that the world today
            should be confronted with impulses leading
            entirely to materialism. That cannot be
            prevented, it is connected with the deep needs
            of the age. But a counterbalance must be
            established. One very prominent means of
            driving man into materialism is the
            cinematograph. It has not been observed from
            this standpoint; but there is no better school
            for materialism than the cinema. For what one
            sees there is not reality as men see it. Only
            an age which has so little idea of reality as
            this age of ours, which worships reality as an
            idol in a material sense, could believe that
            the cinema represents reality. Any other age
            would consider whether men really walk along
            the street as seen at the cinema; people would
            ask themselves whether what they saw at such a
            performance really corresponded to reality. Ask
            yourselves frankly and honourably, what is
            really most like what you see in the street: a
            picture painted by an artist, an immobile
            picture, or the dreadful sparkling pictures of
            the cinematograph. If you put the question to
            yourselves quite honourably, you will admit
            that what the artist reproduces in a state of
            rest is much more like what you see. Hence,
            while people are sitting at the cinema, what
            they see there does not make its way into the
            ordinary faculty of perception, it enters a
            deeper, more material stratum than we usually
            employ for our perception. A man becomes
            etherically goggle-eyed at the cinema; he
            develops eyes like those of a seal, only much
            larger, I mean larger etherically. This works
            in a materialising way, not only upon what he
            has in his consciousness, but upon his deepest
            sub-consciousness. Do not think I am abusing
            the cinematograph; I should like to say once
            more that it is quite natural it should exist,
            and it will attain far greater perfection as
            time goes on. That will be the road leading to
            materialism. But a counterbalance must be
            established, and that can only be created in
            the following way. With the search for reality
            which is being developed in the cinema, with
            this descent below sense-perception, man must
            at the same time develop an ascent above it, an
            ascent into Spiritual reality. Then the cinema
            will do him no harm, and he can see it as often
            as he likes. But unless the counterbalance is
            there, people will be led by such things as
            these, not to have their proper relation to the
            earth, but to become more and more closely
            related to it, until at last, they are entirely
            shut off from the Spiritual world." (Cosmic
            and Human Metamorphoses; lecture 4)

            . . . and:

            ". . . . it is part of the natural evolution of
            humanity; we should be clear about the
            following characteristic of our age, namely,
            that if man does not strive out of inner
            activity for development and maintain it
            consciously, then with mere intellectualism at
            his twentieth year he will begin to get rusty.
            He then receives stimuli only from outside, and
            through these external stimuli keeps himself
            going. Do you think that if things were not
            like that people would flock to the cinema?
            This longing for the cinema, this longing to
            see everything externally, depends on the human
            being becoming inwardly inactive, on his no
            longer wanting inner activity. The only way to
            listen to lectures on Spiritual Science, as
            meant here, is for those present to do their
            share of the work. But today that is not to
            people's liking. They flock to lectures or
            meetings with lantern slides so that they can
            sit and do as much as possible without
            thinking. Everything just passes before them.
            They can remain perfectly passive." (Younger
            Generation: Lecture X)

            I think that we could plausibly hypothesize
            that the tendencies that RS spoke of here are
            intensified with TV and computer imaging. But
            I would assume that the computer at least
            offers the opportunity for the viewer to be
            somewhat less passive, depending on how much he
            uses it for creative work. Still, I doubt that
            this, in itself, would be the kind of
            *thinking* work that Steiner was talking about.

            Steiner does give us an outline of the
            *general* problem: inner passivity, ethereal
            goggle-eyes, materialistic effects on the soul.
            And he is no Luddite; he allows that these
            things are necessary in our times. More, he is
            not a defeatist; he gives us strong hints about
            the healthy counterbalance: inner work, the
            inner activity of real thinking, the kind he
            taught in *PoF*.

            Starman wrote:

            >>So I don't see anything negative about the
            internet in relation to people waking up, and
            in fact I see more positive in it than the
            older TV and radio. Comments?<<

            Robert writes:

            About TV: Regardless of programming, it does
            tend to hypnotize people.

            “By the way, your TV screen has a flicker rate
            that induces a hypnotic trance. No kidding.
            Read about it in The Edison Gene by Thom
            Hartmann.”
            <http://www.under-one-roof.net/life-coach/coaching-newsletters/coach-newsletter5-01-07.html>

            “If you take a person who has never watched
            television at all and you put them in front of
            a television set, it will take 45 minutes for
            their brain to enter into hypnotic wave. If you
            put that same person in front of a television
            set the next night, it will only take five
            minutes before they become hypnotized by the
            flickering light. And the following day, the
            third day, they will go into the hypnotic wave
            in five seconds. TV is the greatest thing that
            has destroyed every nation in the world because
            every show will propagandize you.”
            <http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/5490>

            About radio: At least it does allow people to
            conjure up their own imagery, rather than just
            passively accept the imagery that is fed to
            them. Still, it does create an unnatural
            electromagnetic environment that people must
            live in. I think RS said something to the
            effect that this “wireless” environment is
            making people less intelligent -- but I don’t
            recall the exact words or citation.

            About the Internet: I agree that it gives
            people at least the opportunity to be less
            passive than TV, for instance. But how many
            people really take advantage of the
            opportunity, and how many just use the Internet
            as a more convenient, most personalized TV?

            But, as the *Atlantic* article suggests, even
            for those who use the Internet interactively,
            it might well be shortening their attention
            spans and making their thinking “staccato”.

            It’s true that the freedom, scope, and speed of
            the Internet make garbage “content” more
            readily available than before, and it’s a good
            question as to whether so many people will
            freely choose the garbage over the worthwhile
            content that the net effect will be to debase
            people in general. But regardless of the
            content of the media, it seems clear enough
            that the media themselves are becoming ever
            more “Ahrimanic”. Writing is more Ahrimanic
            than speech; print is more Ahrimanic than
            writing; and electronic communications are more
            Ahrimanic than print. And this is so
            inevitably; there would be no point in trying
            to hold back this “progress”.

            But the real question is how to take the
            Ahrimanic in healthy moderation and how to
            counter it “spiritual activity”, in the modern
            form brought by Steiner in Anthroposophy.

            Robert Mason
          • Durward Starman
            *******Absolutely, I agree completely. What I see as the positive --- it s one of the 6 basic exercises to look for that in all things--- is that this medium
            Message 5 of 12 , Aug 31, 2008
              *******Absolutely, I agree completely. What I see as the positive --- it's one of the 6 basic exercises to look for that in all things--- is that this medium can be changed by the users, by us. Anthroposophy never has gotten into TV or movies as far as I know, with all the millions of man-hours of work-energy absorbed by the Hollywood/TV industry---- not a mention of it except for a brief one in a little-known film on UFOs in the section detailing Trevor James Constable and his filming of invisible etheric UFOs ("Overlords of the UFO", in the 1970s). In the same way, there has been a total blackout on cancer cures like the Hoxsey and Gerson therapies, and radionics, and so many other things, since all one had to do was brainwash the few managers of the major TV networks and/or intimidate them with the threat of lawsuits for reporting information the medical dictatorship has declared verboten. That lock on information is gone now. If few have so far taken advantage of the new freedom--- well, the medium is young yet. But if it had been around 30 years ago, for instance, they might not have been able to get away with what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for instance.
               
                 (For those who never knew of him ----and he was crucified before he could become big enough to be heard much of--- he was a chiropractor here in Virginia Beach who got very interested in "radionics" machines, devices invented by Dr. Albert Abrams and developed further by Dr. Ruth Drown and others in the 1920s and '30s, that are able to attune to and diagnose the etheric body. Whitehouse discovered them through studying the psychic readings Edgar Cayce gave on them for researchers (calling it 'etheronics' and saying it was the rediscovery in a new form of an ancient science of the Atlanteans). He got one, from George de la Warr labs I believe (whose company in the UK is apparently defunct now), and set up an Etheronic Research Foundation next to his chiropractic office and spent a few years seeking grants for this study and practicing with it. One of his clients apparently complained to the authorities about something--- I never did find out what the actual complaint was--- and he was put on trial for whatever they term it when you heal without permission. In vain he brought William Tiller here from Stanford and other researchers into radionics to testify---they found him guilty and took away his license to practice chiropractic, even though nobody ever accused him of being a bad chiropractor, thus depriving him of his livelihood. Back in the 1950s they did worse to Ruth Drown and Wilhelm Reich, which is why no one knows yet about etheric physics except we anthroposophists. But with the free flow of information called the internet, everyone in the 21st century will!)

              -starman
              www.DrStarman.com




              To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
              From: robertsmason_99@...
              Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:21:18 -0700
              Subject: [steiner] re: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


              To Starman, who wrote:

              >>First, I see any technology as neutral in
              itself. . . . No point in just criticizing the
              medium anymore than complaining about your
              appearance in the mirror!<<

              Robert writes:

              I’d say that, to a large degree, “the medium is
              the message”, regardless of programming
              content. (Not to deny, of course, that this
              content very largely determines the overall
              effect.) Hoffman’s ideas about this, and the
              *Atlantic* article, were what provoked me to
              start this thread in the first place. Recall
              those who, correctly in a way, opposed the
              advent of Gutenberg’s print technology. And
              recall Nietzsche and the typewriter. -- More
              recently I again came across Steiner’s remarks
              in this vein, regarding the cinema:

              "It is quite natural that the world today
              should be confronted with impulses leading
              entirely to materialism. That cannot be
              prevented, it is connected with the deep needs
              of the age. But a counterbalance must be
              established. One very prominent means of
              driving man into materialism is the
              cinematograph. It has not been observed from
              this standpoint; but there is no better school
              for materialism than the cinema. For what one
              sees there is not reality as men see it. Only
              an age which has so little idea of reality as
              this age of ours, which worships reality as an
              idol in a material sense, could believe that
              the cinema represents reality. Any other age
              would consider whether men really walk along
              the street as seen at the cinema; people would
              ask themselves whether what they saw at such a
              performance really corresponded to reality. Ask
              yourselves frankly and honourably, what is
              really most like what you see in the street: a
              picture painted by an artist, an immobile
              picture, or the dreadful sparkling pictures of
              the cinematograph. If you put the question to
              yourselves quite honourably, you will admit
              that what the artist reproduces in a state of
              rest is much more like what you see. Hence,
              while people are sitting at the cinema, what
              they see there does not make its way into the
              ordinary faculty of perception, it enters a
              deeper, more material stratum than we usually
              employ for our perception. A man becomes
              etherically goggle-eyed at the cinema; he
              develops eyes like those of a seal, only much
              larger, I mean larger etherically. This works
              in a materialising way, not only upon what he
              has in his consciousness, but upon his deepest
              sub-consciousness. Do not think I am abusing
              the cinematograph; I should like to say once
              more that it is quite natural it should exist,
              and it will attain far greater perfection as
              time goes on. That will be the road leading to
              materialism. But a counterbalance must be
              established, and that can only be created in
              the following way. With the search for reality
              which is being developed in the cinema, with
              this descent below sense-perception, man must
              at the same time develop an ascent above it, an
              ascent into Spiritual reality. Then the cinema
              will do him no harm, and he can see it as often
              as he likes. But unless the counterbalance is
              there, people will be led by such things as
              these, not to have their proper relation to the
              earth, but to become more and more closely
              related to it, until at last, they are entirely
              shut off from the Spiritual world." (Cosmic
              and Human Metamorphoses; lecture 4)

              . . . and:

              ". . . . it is part of the natural evolution of
              humanity; we should be clear about the
              following characteristic of our age, namely,
              that if man does not strive out of inner
              activity for development and maintain it
              consciously, then with mere intellectualism at
              his twentieth year he will begin to get rusty.
              He then receives stimuli only from outside, and
              through these external stimuli keeps himself
              going. Do you think that if things were not
              like that people would flock to the cinema?
              This longing for the cinema, this longing to
              see everything externally, depends on the human
              being becoming inwardly inactive, on his no
              longer wanting inner activity. The only way to
              listen to lectures on Spiritual Science, as
              meant here, is for those present to do their
              share of the work. But today that is not to
              people's liking. They flock to lectures or
              meetings with lantern slides so that they can
              sit and do as much as possible without
              thinking. Everything just passes before them.
              They can remain perfectly passive." (Younger
              Generation: Lecture X)

              I think that we could plausibly hypothesize
              that the tendencies that RS spoke of here are
              intensified with TV and computer imaging. But
              I would assume that the computer at least
              offers the opportunity for the viewer to be
              somewhat less passive, depending on how much he
              uses it for creative work. Still, I doubt that
              this, in itself, would be the kind of
              *thinking* work that Steiner was talking about.

              Steiner does give us an outline of the
              *general* problem: inner passivity, ethereal
              goggle-eyes, materialistic effects on the soul.
              And he is no Luddite; he allows that these
              things are necessary in our times. More, he is
              not a defeatist; he gives us strong hints about
              the healthy counterbalance: inner work, the
              inner activity of real thinking, the kind he
              taught in *PoF*.

              Starman wrote:

              >>So I don't see anything negative about the
              internet in relation to people waking up, and
              in fact I see more positive in it than the
              older TV and radio. Comments?<<

              Robert writes:

              About TV: Regardless of programming, it does
              tend to hypnotize people.

              “By the way, your TV screen has a flicker rate
              that induces a hypnotic trance. No kidding.
              Read about it in The Edison Gene by Thom
              Hartmann.”
              <http://www.under- one-roof. net/life- coach/coaching- newsletters/ coach-newsletter 5-01-07.html>

              “If you take a person who has never watched
              television at all and you put them in front of
              a television set, it will take 45 minutes for
              their brain to enter into hypnotic wave. If you
              put that same person in front of a television
              set the next night, it will only take five
              minutes before they become hypnotized by the
              flickering light. And the following day, the
              third day, they will go into the hypnotic wave
              in five seconds. TV is the greatest thing that
              has destroyed every nation in the world because
              every show will propagandize you.”
              <http://www.wakeupfr omyourslumber. com/node/ 5490>

              About radio: At least it does allow people to
              conjure up their own imagery, rather than just
              passively accept the imagery that is fed to
              them. Still, it does create an unnatural
              electromagnetic environment that people must
              live in. I think RS said something to the
              effect that this “wireless” environment is
              making people less intelligent -- but I don’t
              recall the exact words or citation.

              About the Internet: I agree that it gives
              people at least the opportunity to be less
              passive than TV, for instance. But how many
              people really take advantage of the
              opportunity, and how many just use the Internet
              as a more convenient, most personalized TV?

              But, as the *Atlantic* article suggests, even
              for those who use the Internet interactively,
              it might well be shortening their attention
              spans and making their thinking “staccato”.

              It’s true that the freedom, scope, and speed of
              the Internet make garbage “content” more
              readily available than before, and it’s a good
              question as to whether so many people will
              freely choose the garbage over the worthwhile
              content that the net effect will be to debase
              people in general. But regardless of the
              content of the media, it seems clear enough
              that the media themselves are becoming ever
              more “Ahrimanic”. Writing is more Ahrimanic
              than speech; print is more Ahrimanic than
              writing; and electronic communications are more
              Ahrimanic than print. And this is so
              inevitably; there would be no point in trying
              to hold back this “progress”.

              But the real question is how to take the
              Ahrimanic in healthy moderation and how to
              counter it “spiritual activity”, in the modern
              form brought by Steiner in Anthroposophy.

              Robert Mason




              Be the filmmaker you always wanted to be—learn how to burn a DVD with Windows®. Make your smash hit
            • Robert Mason
              ... movies as far as I know, with all the millions of man-hours of work-energy absorbed by the Hollywood/TV industry---- not a mention of it except for a brief
              Message 6 of 12 , Sep 2, 2008
                To Starman, who wrote:

                >>Anthroposophy never has gotten into TV or
                movies as far as I know, with all the millions
                of man-hours of work-energy absorbed by the
                Hollywood/TV industry---- not a mention of it
                except for a brief one in a little-known film
                on UFOs in the section detailing Trevor James
                Constable and his filming of invisible etheric
                UFOs ("Overlords of the UFO", in the 1970s).<<

                Robert writes:

                I’m not sure, but I think that RS may have
                popped up in a German movie or two a few years
                back.

                Starman wrote:

                >>. . . . what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for
                instance.

                >>(For those who never knew of him ----and he
                was crucified before he could become big enough
                to be heard much of--- he was a chiropractor
                here in Virginia Beach who got very interested
                in "radionics" machines, devices invented by
                Dr. Albert Abrams and developed further by Dr.
                Ruth Drown and others in the 1920s and '30s,
                that are able to attune to and diagnose the
                etheric body. Whitehouse discovered them
                through studying the psychic readings Edgar
                Cayce gave on them for researchers (calling it
                'etheronics' and saying it was the rediscovery
                in a new form of an ancient science of the
                Atlanteans). He got one, from George de la Warr
                labs I believe (whose company in the UK is
                apparently defunct now), and set up an
                Etheronic Research Foundation next to his
                chiropractic office and spent a few years
                seeking grants for this study and practicing
                with it. One of his clients apparently
                complained to the authorities about something--
                - I never did find out what the actual
                complaint was--- and he was put on trial for
                whatever they term it when you heal without
                permission. In vain he brought William Tiller
                here from Stanford and other researchers into
                radionics to testify---they found him guilty
                and took away his license to practice
                chiropractic, even though nobody ever accused
                him of being a bad chiropractor, thus depriving
                him of his livelihood.<<

                Robert writes:

                I first had contact with him in the early ‘80s,
                when all that legal excrement was coming down.
                He then left the country; went to Thailand, I
                think, and I lost contact with him. But he
                landed in Sedona, and I was in touch with him
                there, briefly, by long distance, around ’89.
                Lost touch with him again, but it seems he went
                to San Clemente Island, and I saw a very brief
                note on the Net a few years ago that he had
                died there. That’s about all I know, except
                that he apparently was still working with
                radionics, with elaborate new “machines” that
                he developed. As with Reich, I have to wonder
                whether his death was natural.

                Starman wrote:

                >>. . . . no one knows yet about etheric
                physics except we anthroposophists. But with
                the free flow of information called the
                internet, everyone in the 21st century will!<<

                Robert writes:

                Oh, but the cutting-edge research all over the
                place is stumbling into the “etheric”, though
                that term might not be used for it. In this
                country that research might be “fringe” stuff,
                poorly funded if at all -- or suppressed by
                academic politics or economic pressure, or by
                outright murder. (But what’s happening in the
                “black world”? I suspect that “they” know
                plenty.) But you could look around Borderland
                Science, Keely Net, Etheric Warriors, etc. for
                some of the “fringe” buzz. -- But in other
                counties, such as Russia, it’s not necessarily
                so “fringe”; the Russians speak of “bio-
                photons”, “torsion fields”, etc.

                Robert M
              • Durward Starman
                Starman wrote: . . . . what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for instance. (For those who never knew of him ----and he was crucified before he could become big
                Message 7 of 12 , Sep 2, 2008
                  Starman wrote:

                  >>. . . . what they did to Dr. Whitehouse, for
                  instance.

                  >>(For those who never knew of him ----and he
                  was crucified before he could become big enough
                  to be heard much of--- he was a chiropractor
                  here in Virginia Beach who got very interested
                  in "radionics" machines, devices invented by
                  Dr. Albert Abrams and developed further by Dr.
                  Ruth Drown and others in the 1920s and '30s,
                  that are able to attune to and diagnose the
                  etheric body. Whitehouse discovered them
                  through studying the psychic readings Edgar
                  Cayce gave on them for researchers (calling it
                  'etheronics' and saying it was the rediscovery
                  in a new form of an ancient science of the
                  Atlanteans). He got one, from George de la Warr
                  labs I believe (whose company in the UK is
                  apparently defunct now), and set up an
                  Etheronic Research Foundation next to his
                  chiropractic office and spent a few years
                  seeking grants for this study and practicing
                  with it. One of his clients apparently
                  complained to the authorities about something--
                  - I never did find out what the actual
                  complaint was--- and he was put on trial for
                  whatever they term it when you heal without
                  permission. In vain he brought William Tiller
                  here from Stanford and other researchers into
                  radionics to testify---they found him guilty
                  and took away his license to practice
                  chiropractic, even though nobody ever accused
                  him of being a bad chiropractor, thus depriving
                  him of his livelihood.< <

                  Robert writes:

                  I first had contact with him in the early ‘80s,
                  when all that legal excrement was coming down.
                  He then left the country; went to Thailand, I
                  think, and I lost contact with him. But he
                  landed in Sedona, and I was in touch with him
                  there, briefly, by long distance, around ’89.
                  Lost touch with him again, but it seems he went
                  to San Clemente Island, and I saw a very brief
                  note on the Net a few years ago that he had
                  died there. That’s about all I know, except
                  that he apparently was still working with
                  radionics, with elaborate new “machines” that
                  he developed. As with Reich, I have to wonder
                  whether his death was natural.
                   
                   
                  *******That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with radionics at all for at least the past ten years when he was in bad health and almost blind. He was on the East Coast all that time, and a friend of mine took him in here in Virginia Beach, where he died a quite natural death in her house a few years ago, old, broken and forgotten by almost everyone.
                   
                     Believe it or not, occultists are not so important that the mythical 'Power Structure' stays up nights worrying about them, has their phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to keep the Golden Shining New Age from dawning. Most people in business and government have never heard of any of these people, and regard what little they do hear of them as utter quackery. It's up to us to prove our science works without blind faith in it, and few do so.



                  Starman wrote:
                  >>. . . . no one knows yet about etheric
                  physics except we anthroposophists. But with
                  the free flow of information called the
                  internet, everyone in the 21st century will!<<

                  Robert writes:

                  Oh, but the cutting-edge research all over the
                  place is stumbling into the “etheric”, though
                  that term might not be used for it. In this
                  country that research might be “fringe” stuff,
                  poorly funded if at all -- or suppressed by
                  academic politics or economic pressure, or by
                  outright murder. (But what’s happening in the
                  “black world”? I suspect that “they” know
                  plenty.) But you could look around Borderland
                  Science, Keely Net, Etheric Warriors, etc. for
                  some of the “fringe” buzz. -- But in other
                  counties, such as Russia, it’s not necessarily
                  so “fringe”; the Russians speak of “bio-
                  photons”, “torsion fields”, etc.

                  Robert M

                  *******People who say that haven't been much in touch with Russian academia lately! The myths propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for 40 years, but absolutely nothing wacko like that is tolerated by Putin's government now.
                     As for the "black world" of Area 51 technology or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and simple. If you make contacts in government, you'll find absolutely no one here in the US allowed to waste funding on fringe or pseudo-science. That whole Independence Day scenario is just imagined by people with the most incredibly wacked-out ideas of how our government operates. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but science and government in both the US and Russia is totally, completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from orthodoxy at your peril. What you do in church or what science fiction you read are your business, but leave it outside the office door if you expect to go anywhere.
                      It's a myth that there are amazing scientific discoveries being suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA--- rather, people in the fringe science/occult world usually become unbalanced and destroy themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in government cares about any of these crackpots who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in the grip of Lucifer.
                   
                  -starman


                  Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find Out How
                • Robert Mason
                  ... thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with radionics at all for at least the past ten years when he was in
                  Message 8 of 12 , Sep 4, 2008
                    To Starman, who wrote:

                    >>That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                    thinking, rumors and fear substituting for
                    knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                    radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                    when he was in bad health and almost blind. He
                    was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                    friend of mine took him in here in Virginia
                    Beach, where he died a quite natural death in
                    her house a few years ago, old, broken and
                    forgotten by almost everyone.<<

                    Robert writes:

                    That’s shocking to me; I didn’t have a clue that
                    Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last
                    info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                    Clemente.

                    I was pretty sure that I had seen something on
                    the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                    elaborate “machines” before he died. But I
                    googled and didn’t find it again. I did find
                    this:

                    “One of the founders in Radionic research was
                    Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                    instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to
                    teach classes to the agency on Radionic
                    principles starting in 1979. Charles used to
                    analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                    pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under
                    unusual circumstances in a Military hospital.
                    His body was cremated right after.”
                    <http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php?topic=74098.1080;wap2>

                    Starman wrote:

                    >>Believe it or not, occultists are not so
                    important that the mythical 'Power Structure'
                    stays up nights worrying about them, has their
                    phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to
                    keep the Golden Shining New Age from dawning.
                    Most people in business and government have
                    never heard of any of these people, and regard
                    what little they do hear of them as utter
                    quackery. It's up to us to prove our science
                    works without blind faith in it, and few do
                    so.<<

                    Robert writes:

                    But “most people in business and government“
                    aren’t in the real Power Structure, and probably
                    know hardly anything about it. The real Power
                    Structure is itself occultic, and is very aware
                    of the danger that the “light-side” occultists
                    and semi-occultist pose for it.

                    Starman wrote:

                    >>People who say that haven't been much in
                    touch with Russian academia lately! The myths
                    propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The
                    Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for
                    40 years, but absolutely nothing wacko like that
                    is tolerated by Putin's government now.<<

                    Robert writes:

                    Some people over there apparently take such
                    “rubbish” seriously enough:
                    <http://www.pyramids.ru/english.html>
                    "[The Russian pyramid discoveries we have written about on our Divine Cosmos website prove that ‘torsion fields’ can be harnessed to create positive consciousness effects, miraculous healing phenomena and a noticeable decrease in earthquake and severe weather activity in the vicinity surrounding the pyramid.
                    "Ozone holes appear to close up over the pyramids and water underneath the pyramids is purified. Oil well production also increases by 25 percent and the pumped material is cleaner than usual. Check out our free video seminar on DivineCosmos.com for more information.]"
                    <http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=362&Itemid=30>

                    "They have collected a lot of data indicating that the pyramids exhibit a hitherto unknown ‘pyramid power’. Studies revealed that pyramids can increases the immune system of organisms leading to a better health. Agricultural seeds that were placed inside the pyramid for 1 to 5 days yielded a crop increase of 30 to a 100%. The Russian military measured a column of energy right above the pyramid extending for several kilometres into the air. Amazing enough the ozone layer improved over the area of the pyramids and seismic activity in the region diminished. A nearby oil well yielded a better production since the oil had become less viscous. The reports were confirmed by the Russian academy of Oil and Gas."
                    <http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/SODA_chapter7.html>

                    I haven’t been in touch with Russian academia
                    lately, but you can read about some of the more
                    recent research here:
                    <http://www.divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=103&Itemid=36>
                    I would guess that you could find more by
                    Googling around a little.

                    Starman wrote:

                    >>As for the "black world" of Area 51 technology
                    or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and
                    simple.<

                    Robert writes:

                    But there is a black world; it was written into
                    law in the National Security Act of 1947. But
                    it’s so dark that there is no clear boundary
                    between the governmental and the non-
                    governmental. It’s a good question as to which
                    is the tail and which is the dog.

                    And it doesn’t come just from Hollywood. There
                    are reporters, such as George Knapp:
                    <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22george+knapp%22++%22area+51%22&aq=f&oq=>
                    . . . a scientist such as Bob Lazar:
                    <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22bob+lazar%22++%22area+51%22&btnG=Search>
                    . . . a pilot such as John Lear:
                    <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22john+lear%22++%22area+51%22>

                    . . . just Google around.

                    Starman wrote:

                    >>If you make contacts in government, you'll
                    find absolutely no one here in the US
                    allowed to waste funding on fringe or pseudo-
                    science. That whole Independence Day scenario is
                    just imagined by people with the most incredibly
                    wacked-out ideas of how our government operates.
                    Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but science and
                    government in both the US and Russia is totally,
                    completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from
                    orthodoxy at your peril. What you do in church
                    or what science fiction you read are your
                    business, but leave it outside the office door
                    if you expect to go anywhere. It's a myth that
                    there are amazing scientific discoveries being
                    suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA---
                    rather, people in the fringe science/occult
                    world usually become unbalanced and destroy
                    themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in
                    government cares about any of these crackpots
                    who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in
                    the grip of Lucifer.<<

                    Robert writes:

                    There’s a long history of fringe researchers
                    being harassed and dying under mysterious
                    circumstances. You seem to know about Dr.
                    Reich. More recently, there was Dr. Eugene
                    Mallove for instance:
                    <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Eugene+Mallove%22++murder>

                    As Steiner said, materialism is a conspiracy;
                    those in the know, know better. Orthodox
                    science is for the chumps on the outside. Most
                    of those in “the government” are indeed outside
                    the real Power Structure. The grunts in the
                    trenches are allowed to operate only on a need-
                    to-know, compartmentalized basis.

                    You seem to accept that Reich was persecuted by
                    "the government"; why wouldn't "they" just as
                    well persecute other scientists who get too
                    close to the truths that are not supposed to
                    be known to those on the "outside"?

                    Robert Mason
                  • Durward Starman
                    That s a pretty good example of conspiratorial thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with radionics at all for
                    Message 9 of 12 , Sep 7, 2008
                      That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                      thinking, rumors and fear substituting for
                      knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                      radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                      when he was in bad health and almost blind. He
                      was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                      friend of mine took him in here in Virginia
                      Beach, where he died a quite natural death in
                      her house a few years ago, old, broken and
                      forgotten by almost everyone.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      That’s shocking to me; I didn’t have a clue that
                      Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last
                      info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                      Clemente.

                      I was pretty sure that I had seen something on
                      the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                      elaborate “machines” before he died. But I
                      googled and didn’t find it again. I did find
                      this:

                      “One of the founders in Radionic research was
                      Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                      instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to
                      teach classes to the agency on Radionic
                      principles starting in 1979. Charles used to
                      analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                      pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under
                      unusual circumstances in a Military hospital.
                      His body was cremated right after.”
                      <http://forum. treasurenet. com/index. php?topic= 74098.1080; wap2>

                       
                      ******He died two years ago. This is a perfect example of how you can't believe what you read on the internet. Always check things out, and not with 'sources' that believe the same nonsense you're trying to verify. That explains all the rest of the stuff you posted, none of which requires any further response; it's horse-hockey.
                       
                         Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about the stated subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul which anthroposophy says mankind should now be developing (though sometimes questions can be asked in a way to try to force an answer like, "When did you stop beating your wife?", or "Is the Internet a Threat or a Menace?") ----but rather just a way to dredge up conspiracy theories. It appears so because the subject is being ignored. So I will not be participating further. Others are welcome to.
                       
                      -Starman

                      www.DrStarman.com




                      To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
                      From: robertsmason_99@...
                      Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 11:34:22 -0700
                      Subject: [steiner] RE: Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul?


                      To Starman, who wrote:

                      >>That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                      thinking, rumors and fear substituting for
                      knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                      radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                      when he was in bad health and almost blind. He
                      was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                      friend of mine took him in here in Virginia
                      Beach, where he died a quite natural death in
                      her house a few years ago, old, broken and
                      forgotten by almost everyone.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      That’s shocking to me; I didn’t have a clue that
                      Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last
                      info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                      Clemente.

                      I was pretty sure that I had seen something on
                      the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                      elaborate “machines” before he died. But I
                      googled and didn’t find it again. I did find
                      this:

                      “One of the founders in Radionic research was
                      Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                      instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to
                      teach classes to the agency on Radionic
                      principles starting in 1979. Charles used to
                      analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                      pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under
                      unusual circumstances in a Military hospital.
                      His body was cremated right after.”
                      <http://forum. treasurenet. com/index. php?topic= 74098.1080; wap2>

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>Believe it or not, occultists are not so
                      important that the mythical 'Power Structure'
                      stays up nights worrying about them, has their
                      phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to
                      keep the Golden Shining New Age from dawning.
                      Most people in business and government have
                      never heard of any of these people, and regard
                      what little they do hear of them as utter
                      quackery. It's up to us to prove our science
                      works without blind faith in it, and few do
                      so.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      But “most people in business and government“
                      aren’t in the real Power Structure, and probably
                      know hardly anything about it. The real Power
                      Structure is itself occultic, and is very aware
                      of the danger that the “light-side” occultists
                      and semi-occultist pose for it.

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>People who say that haven't been much in
                      touch with Russian academia lately! The myths
                      propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The
                      Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for
                      40 years, but absolutely nothing wacko like that
                      is tolerated by Putin's government now.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      Some people over there apparently take such
                      “rubbish” seriously enough:
                      <http://www.pyramids .ru/english. html>
                      "[The Russian pyramid discoveries we have written about on our Divine Cosmos website prove that ‘torsion fields’ can be harnessed to create positive consciousness effects, miraculous healing phenomena and a noticeable decrease in earthquake and severe weather activity in the vicinity surrounding the pyramid.
                      "Ozone holes appear to close up over the pyramids and water underneath the pyramids is purified. Oil well production also increases by 25 percent and the pumped material is cleaner than usual. Check out our free video seminar on DivineCosmos. com for more information. ]"
                      <http://divinecosmos .com/index. php?option= com_content& task=view& id=362&Itemid= 30>

                      "They have collected a lot of data indicating that the pyramids exhibit a hitherto unknown ‘pyramid power’. Studies revealed that pyramids can increases the immune system of organisms leading to a better health. Agricultural seeds that were placed inside the pyramid for 1 to 5 days yielded a crop increase of 30 to a 100%. The Russian military measured a column of energy right above the pyramid extending for several kilometres into the air. Amazing enough the ozone layer improved over the area of the pyramids and seismic activity in the region diminished. A nearby oil well yielded a better production since the oil had become less viscous. The reports were confirmed by the Russian academy of Oil and Gas."
                      <http://www.soulsofd istortion. nl/SODA_chapter7 .html>

                      I haven’t been in touch with Russian academia
                      lately, but you can read about some of the more
                      recent research here:
                      <http://www.divineco smos.com/ index.php? option=com_ content&task= view&id=103& Itemid=36>
                      I would guess that you could find more by
                      Googling around a little.

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>As for the "black world" of Area 51 technology
                      or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and
                      simple.<

                      Robert writes:

                      But there is a black world; it was written into
                      law in the National Security Act of 1947. But
                      it’s so dark that there is no clear boundary
                      between the governmental and the non-
                      governmental. It’s a good question as to which
                      is the tail and which is the dog.

                      And it doesn’t come just from Hollywood. There
                      are reporters, such as George Knapp:
                      <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22george+ knapp%22+ +%22area+ 51%22&aq= f&oq=>
                      . . . a scientist such as Bob Lazar:
                      <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22bob+lazar% 22++%22area+ 51%22&btnG= Search>
                      . . . a pilot such as John Lear:
                      <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22john+lear% 22++%22area+ 51%22>

                      . . . just Google around.

                      Starman wrote:

                      >>If you make contacts in government, you'll
                      find absolutely no one here in the US
                      allowed to waste funding on fringe or pseudo-
                      science. That whole Independence Day scenario is
                      just imagined by people with the most incredibly
                      wacked-out ideas of how our government operates.
                      Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but science and
                      government in both the US and Russia is totally,
                      completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from
                      orthodoxy at your peril. What you do in church
                      or what science fiction you read are your
                      business, but leave it outside the office door
                      if you expect to go anywhere. It's a myth that
                      there are amazing scientific discoveries being
                      suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA---
                      rather, people in the fringe science/occult
                      world usually become unbalanced and destroy
                      themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in
                      government cares about any of these crackpots
                      who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in
                      the grip of Lucifer.<<

                      Robert writes:

                      There’s a long history of fringe researchers
                      being harassed and dying under mysterious
                      circumstances. You seem to know about Dr.
                      Reich. More recently, there was Dr. Eugene
                      Mallove for instance:
                      <http://www.google. com/search? hl=en&q=% 22Eugene+ Mallove%22+ +murder>

                      As Steiner said, materialism is a conspiracy;
                      those in the know, know better. Orthodox
                      science is for the chumps on the outside. Most
                      of those in “the government” are indeed outside
                      the real Power Structure. The grunts in the
                      trenches are allowed to operate only on a need-
                      to-know, compartmentalized basis.

                      You seem to accept that Reich was persecuted by
                      "the government"; why wouldn't "they" just as
                      well persecute other scientists who get too
                      close to the truths that are not supposed to
                      be known to those on the "outside"?

                      Robert Mason




                      Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live. See Now
                    • carol
                      D. Starman: Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about the stated subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul which anthroposophy
                      Message 10 of 12 , Sep 8, 2008
                        D. Starman: "Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about
                        the stated subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul
                        which anthroposophy says mankind should now be developing (though
                        sometimes questions can be asked in a way to try to force an answer
                        like, "When did you stop beating your wife?", or "Is the Internet a
                        Threat or a Menace?") ----but rather just a way to dredge up conspiracy
                        theories. It appears so because the subject is being ignored. So I will
                        not be participating further. Others are welcome to."

                        It might 'appear' that the question is being ignored, but in fact, the
                        exercise itself proved that < within conversation/human exchange over
                        the internet as medium> specific topics can be broadened in any given
                        direction, given the will to do so by those involved, and that ' true
                        transparency' does have a chance of showing up somewhere along the
                        way..

                        In everyday living, it happens that we find it interesting just
                        listening to a couple of people talk over a given subject- each
                        individual brings up interesting details of which 'we' may have no
                        immediate knowledge of. We gain somehow from our participation as
                        listener. Of what might have been discussed through a situation thus
                        described, we in turn may filter, or perhaps we may retain key details;
                        we may accept to hold some closer to our inner beings more than others,
                        we may simply retain an overall impression which itself conveys meaning
                        to us etc.

                        From my experience of using the internet, something of the nature of
                        what happens in person to person exchanges, manages to transcend- given
                        that good intentions are a ground rule, at the onset.

                        Through the 'freshness' of the 'internet' exchange of information
                        concerning this researcher from Virginia Beach (both participants to the
                        'conversation' live there as well, as far as I can see) I, as observer,
                        was able to gain something from it, for myself. For example, I watched
                        as various ideas literally were placed forward, over a period of time,
                        showing up on my electronic monitor. These ideas eventually came to
                        express (at least) how an eyewitness account might compare with what has
                        been pre-prepared for mass consumption. (Of course, a little more
                        was expressed...)

                        This was enlightening for me- for it actually furnished me with a
                        seemingly 'real' life lesson- for 1, in filtering information...

                        Is the internet good or bad for the consciousness soul? Perhaps the best
                        answer I can now furnish is the following: given that the internet is
                        here, the 'consciousness soul' had best establish it's place, therein.

                        carol.




                        --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, Durward Starman <DrStarman@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        > That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial thinking, rumors and
                        fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He was not working with
                        radionics at all for at least the past ten years when he was in bad
                        health and almost blind. He was on the East Coast all that time, and a
                        friend of mine took him in here in Virginia Beach, where he died a quite
                        natural death in her house a few years ago, old, broken and forgotten by
                        almost everyone.<<Robert writes:That's shocking to me; I didn't
                        have a clue that Dr. Whitehouse was back in The Beach. The last info I
                        had, indirectly, was that he was in San Clemente.I was pretty sure that
                        I had seen something on the Net about him being in San Clemente with
                        elaborate "machines" before he died. But I googled and
                        didn't find it again. I did find this:"One of the founders in
                        Radionic research was Dr. Charles Whitehouse. Charles was the first
                        instructor at the Defense Intelligence Agency to teach classes to the
                        agency on Radionic principles starting in 1979. Charles used to analyse
                        pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel pics from Mindanao. He died in
                        1999 under unusual circumstances in a Military hospital. His body was
                        cremated right after."
                        <http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php?topic=74098.1080;wap2>
                        >
                        > ******He died two years ago. This is a perfect example of how you
                        can't believe what you read on the internet. Always check things out,
                        and not with 'sources' that believe the same nonsense you're trying to
                        verify. That explains all the rest of the stuff you posted, none of
                        which requires any further response; it's horse-hockey.
                        >
                        > Perhaps the purpose of this thread was not to talk about the stated
                        subject---which was a QUESTION about a level of the soul which
                        anthroposophy says mankind should now be developing (though sometimes
                        questions can be asked in a way to try to force an answer like, "When
                        did you stop beating your wife?", or "Is the Internet a Threat or a
                        Menace?") ----but rather just a way to dredge up conspiracy theories. It
                        appears so because the subject is being ignored. So I will not be
                        participating further. Others are welcome to.
                        >
                        > -Starmanwww.DrStarman.com
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > To: steiner@...: robertsmason_99@...: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 11:34:22
                        -0700Subject: [steiner] RE: Is the internet good or bad for the
                        consciousness soul?
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > To Starman, who wrote:>>That's a pretty good example of conspiratorial
                        thinking, rumors and fear substituting for knowledge, I can verify. He
                        was not working with radionics at all for at least the past ten years
                        when he was in bad health and almost blind. He was on the East Coast all
                        that time, and a friend of mine took him in here in Virginia Beach,
                        where he died a quite natural death in her house a few years ago, old,
                        broken and forgotten by almost everyone.<<Robert writes:That's
                        shocking to me; I didn't have a clue that Dr. Whitehouse was back in
                        The Beach. The last info I had, indirectly, was that he was in San
                        Clemente.I was pretty sure that I had seen something on the Net about
                        him being in San Clemente with elaborate "machines" before he
                        died. But I googled and didn't find it again. I did find
                        this:"One of the founders in Radionic research was Dr. Charles
                        Whitehouse. Charles was the first instructor at the Defense Intelligence
                        Agency to teach classes to the agency on Radionic principles starting in
                        1979. Charles used to analyse pics. for me and did a numer of tunnel
                        pics from Mindanao. He died in 1999 under unusual circumstances in a
                        Military hospital. His body was cremated right after."
                        <http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php?topic=74098.1080;wap2>Starman
                        wrote:>>Believe it or not, occultists are not so important that the
                        mythical 'Power Structure' stays up nights worrying about them, has
                        their phones tapped, and puts them out of the way to keep the Golden
                        Shining New Age from dawning. Most people in business and government
                        have never heard of any of these people, and regard what little they do
                        hear of them as utter quackery. It's up to us to prove our science works
                        without blind faith in it, and few do so.<<Robert writes:But "most
                        people in business and government" aren't in the real Power
                        Structure, and probably know hardly anything about it. The real Power
                        Structure is itself occultic, and is very aware of the danger that the
                        "light-side" occultists and semi-occultist pose for it.Starman
                        wrote:>>People who say that haven't been much in touch with Russian
                        academia lately! The myths propounded in Psychic Discoveries Behind The
                        Iron Curtain were the source of much rubbish for 40 years, but
                        absolutely nothing wacko like that is tolerated by Putin's government
                        now.<<Robert writes:Some people over there apparently take such
                        "rubbish" seriously enough:
                        <http://www.pyramids.ru/english.html>"[The Russian pyramid discoveries
                        we have written about on our Divine Cosmos website prove that
                        `torsion fields' can be harnessed to create positive
                        consciousness effects, miraculous healing phenomena and a noticeable
                        decrease in earthquake and severe weather activity in the vicinity
                        surrounding the pyramid. "Ozone holes appear to close up over the
                        pyramids and water underneath the pyramids is purified. Oil well
                        production also increases by 25 percent and the pumped material is
                        cleaner than usual. Check out our free video seminar on DivineCosmos.com
                        for more
                        information.]"<http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task\
                        =view&id=362&Itemid=30>"They have collected a lot of data indicating
                        that the pyramids exhibit a hitherto unknown `pyramid power'.
                        Studies revealed that pyramids can increases the immune system of
                        organisms leading to a better health. Agricultural seeds that were
                        placed inside the pyramid for 1 to 5 days yielded a crop increase of 30
                        to a 100%. The Russian military measured a column of energy right above
                        the pyramid extending for several kilometres into the air. Amazing
                        enough the ozone layer improved over the area of the pyramids and
                        seismic activity in the region diminished. A nearby oil well yielded a
                        better production since the oil had become less viscous. The reports
                        were confirmed by the Russian academy of Oil and
                        Gas."<http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/SODA_chapter7.html>I haven't
                        been in touch with Russian academia lately, but you can read about some
                        of the more recent research
                        here:<http://www.divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view\
                        &id=103&Itemid=36>I would guess that you could find more by Googling
                        around a little.Starman wrote:>>As for the "black world" of Area 51
                        technology or whatever, it is Hollywood fiction, plain and
                        simple.<Robert writes:But there is a black world; it was written into
                        law in the National Security Act of 1947. But it's so dark that
                        there is no clear boundary between the governmental and the
                        non-governmental. It's a good question as to which is the tail and
                        which is the dog.And it doesn't come just from Hollywood. There are
                        reporters, such as George
                        Knapp:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22george+knapp%22++%22area+\
                        51%22&aq=f&oq=>. . . a scientist such as Bob
                        Lazar:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22bob+lazar%22++%22area+51%\
                        22&btnG=Search>. . . a pilot such as John
                        Lear:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22john+lear%22++%22area+51%2\
                        2>. . . just Google around.Starman wrote:>>If you make contacts in
                        government, you'll find absolutely no one here in the US allowed to
                        waste funding on fringe or pseudo-science. That whole Independence Day
                        scenario is just imagined by people with the most incredibly wacked-out
                        ideas of how our government operates. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble,
                        but science and government in both the US and Russia is totally,
                        completely materialist and orthodox. Stray from orthodoxy at your peril.
                        What you do in church or what science fiction you read are your
                        business, but leave it outside the office door if you expect to go
                        anywhere. It's a myth that there are amazing scientific discoveries
                        being suppressed by economic powers and/or the CIA--- rather, people in
                        the fringe science/occult world usually become unbalanced and destroy
                        themselves. Assassins are unnecessary. No one in government cares about
                        any of these crackpots who are mostly "legends in their own minds", in
                        the grip of Lucifer.<<Robert writes:There's a long history of fringe
                        researchers being harassed and dying under mysterious circumstances. You
                        seem to know about Dr. Reich. More recently, there was Dr. Eugene
                        Mallove for
                        instance:<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Eugene+Mallove%22++mur\
                        der>As Steiner said, materialism is a conspiracy; those in the know,
                        know better. Orthodox science is for the chumps on the outside. Most of
                        those in "the government" are indeed outside the real Power
                        Structure. The grunts in the trenches are allowed to operate only on a
                        need-to-know, compartmentalized basis.You seem to accept that Reich was
                        persecuted by"the government"; why wouldn't "they" just aswell persecute
                        other scientists who get tooclose to the truths that are not supposed
                        tobe known to those on the "outside"?Robert Mason
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > _________________________________________________________________
                        > Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with
                        Windows Live.
                        > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093185mrt/direct/01/
                        >
                      • Robert Mason
                        ... Just for clarity: I don t live in Va. Beach now; I m about 50 miles away. I did live there for a couple of years, about 20 years ago. Robert M
                        Message 11 of 12 , Sep 9, 2008
                          --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, "carol" <organicethics@...> wrote:

                          >. . . . Virginia Beach (both participants to the
                          > 'conversation' live there as well, as far as I can see). . . .

                          Just for clarity: I don't live in Va. Beach
                          now; I'm about 50 miles away. I did live there
                          for a couple of years, about 20 years ago.

                          Robert M
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.