Thelema and radical...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Thelema and radical honesty.  

Page 2 / 4
  RSS

William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1090
20/06/2015 9:56 pm  

Aiwass as channeled by Julien Blanc...


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
20/06/2015 10:01 pm  
"ignant666" wrote:
This has been a fascinating journey into your psyche and views on sexual politics, david; while certainly in keeping with "radical honesty", what on earth do these thoughts have to do with Thelema, other than your efforts to rationalize you difficulties with women with AL quotations?
As Tao has suggested, wherever you go, there you are. It may take more than ruthvah in some cases.

You're a funny guy.

If you don't understand any of the thread so far then communicate with me which bit is holding you back and I'll try to help you understand.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
20/06/2015 10:01 pm  
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
Aiwass as channeled by Julien Blanc...

What a mindless statement that is. 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
20/06/2015 10:58 pm  
"ignant666" wrote:
, what on earth do these thoughts have to do with Thelema, .

Primarily it's about the false layers of fear and social programming which, not only cloud the voice of True Will (as I indicated in the quotes from AC in the OP) but also, at the same time,  jam honest communication between the sexes and people in general.  It's about courage, a theme which runs through Crowley's writings on initiation and is the underlying factor throughout the three chapters of Liber Al.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
21/06/2015 1:33 pm  

Re: 41. The word of Sin is Restriction. O man! refuse not thy wife, if she will! O lover, if thou wilt, depart! There is no bond that can unite the divided but love: all else is a curse. Accursed! Accursed be it to the aeons! Hell

"Los" wrote:
Try reading this verse as a metaphor (consider the three "grades").

My understanding of the three grades (as written about here davidcherubim.net/documents/initiation.htm) is that initiation is apparently a "a threefold process" involving three levels Hermit, the Lover, and the Man of Earth.  Bluntly put, the work of the Man of Earth is to attain the knowledge of his/her True Will and then once achieved the furtherment of this intimacy, ideally leads to the task of The Lover, namely "the crossing of "the Abyss."  The processes that follow this are the work of the Hermit.

With that said then, we have The Man of Earth's task; 41. The word of Sin is Restriction. O man! refuse not thy wife, if she will! where "thy wife" is the inner "voice " of TW ("if she will").

Then the task of  The Lover;O lover, if thou wilt, depart!l  i.e. "depart" from the idea of there even being a TW?

The task of The Hermit in Liber Al line 41 is, presumably addressed with There is no bond that can unite the divided but love?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
21/06/2015 11:07 pm  

Newser) – Children shouldn't lie to their elders, right? Fair enough, but a new study says the best child liars possess superior verbal working memory skills, the BBC reports. Researchers at the University of Sheffield gathered 114 children, ages six and seven, and told them not to peek at answers about a fictitious cartoon character on the back of a card (meanwhile, a hidden camera was on them the whole time). Then researchers questioned the children, spotted the liars, and evaluated their ability to lie in the face of two entrapment questions. The "best" liars fibbed each time, while poor liars did it only once or not at all. Writing in the Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, researchers say they were most impressed by a child's ability to keep up a strong cover story for any falsehood.

In memory tests that followed, the talented liars showed a more powerful working memory with words, but not with pictures. This is likely because covering up for lies involves juggling a lot of verbal information and "keeping the researcher's perspective in mind."


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
21/06/2015 11:46 pm  

Yeah a lot of criminals are "intelligent". 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 3:26 pm  

This is a simple "how to" and what to expect; http://m.wikihow.com/Practice-Radical-Honesty

I've been doing this today on my first day back at work after being away for a week.  I recommend this..

Here's the first few paragraphs (this phone won't let me italicise);

the book of wisdom. -Thomas Jefferson

You have probably told many little lies and half-truths throughout your life. And you probably spend a significant chunk of your time evaluating what's going on in other people's minds, because they're probably not being completely honest with you. What would happen if you stopped lying? Ditched the brown-nosing and diplomacy? Stopped walking on eggshells? Are you ready to find out?

The "radical honesty" movement was founded by a psychotherapist named Brad Blanton, who insists that everyone would be much happier if we were all completely honest, as in no lies--no matter how small and white they may be. It’s a pledge to see and verbally acknowledge things exactly as they are, to the best of your ability. If you have a habit of stopping short of saying what you really think, turning things around will take time, but the results can be shockingly refreshing.


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1090
22/06/2015 4:33 pm  

It’s a pledge to see and verbally acknowledge things exactly as they are, to the best of your ability.

Will that avoid spinning your wheels in the dreaded 'friends zone'?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 6:38 pm  
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:

It’s a pledge to see and verbally acknowledge things exactly as they are, to the best of your ability.

Will that avoid spinning your wheels in the dreaded 'friends zone'?

Yes.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 7:05 pm  

I walked into work and about five people asked how I was from room to room and I said, bluntly and enthusiastically, "Depressed!  It was great.  So on for the rest of the day.  This all probably relates to what Crowley told Bennett about initiation in which it was about a direct and instant relay from the subconscious to the conscious.  Time will tell.

It's a mindfulness of, in the following order; one's immediate environment then one's bodily tensions then one's  mental activity then get ready to say what's on your mind and say it.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 7:45 pm  

It was really funny when a woman was telling me about going to a Fleetwood mac concert and I said, "A classic band but I'd really not want to see them live nowadays."  Etc.  Initially I was on the verge of saying, "I'm not interested in hearing about you going to your concert,  I'm just reading a website on my phone."  That sentiment was expressed but it all came out within the normal flow of conversation.   


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
22/06/2015 8:42 pm  
"david" wrote:
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
Aiwass as channeled by Julien Blanc...

What a mindless statement that is. 

Ha ha “lol”! 

(Well, I thought it was quite funny anyway... As they say, "lighten up"?! :D)

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
22/06/2015 8:53 pm  
"david" wrote:
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
Aiwass as channeled by Julien Blanc...

What a mindless statement that is. 

Mindless = The state sought after by aspiring super-Ipsissimi everywhere ;D


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 9:27 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
Aiwass as channeled by Julien Blanc...

What a mindless statement that is. 

Mindless = The state sought after by aspiring super-Ipsissimi everywhere ;D

Just out of interest, are you or Jamie capable of radical honesty as described?  For example;


•Admit when you've forgotten someone's name, even if you're supposed to know that person's name because you've known them for years and seen them regularly and you know their kids' names, and even their dog's name.
•Tell someone when you're starting to get bored with the conversation. "I stopped listening about a minute ago" or "I'm not really interested in talking about this" or simply, "I'm bored. I'll be back in ten minutes."
•Express frustration with your co-workers, and even your boss. "I'm annoyed that you didn't respond to our memo earlier. But at the same time, I'm relieved, because then if we don't nail one of the things you want, we can blame any delays on your lack of response."
•Start sentences with the words "I resent you for..." or "I appreciate you for..."
•Read up on How to Practice Nonviolent Communication.
•If possible, express your honesty in person. It allows you to fully experience the ramifications of being radically honest, and makes it harder for the receiving party to run away--which probably means they'll still be there when the shock subsides, and your interaction can recover and move forward

Interestingly enough, Albert Camus was preoccupied with radical honjesty particularly in his character, Meursault, from his best selling novel, The Outsider.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 10:35 pm  

Keeping in line with the OP, I also think that Crowley probably encouraged radical honesty at Cefalu but he didn't call it that of course. 


ReplyQuote
OKontrair
(@okontrair)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 501
22/06/2015 10:36 pm  
"david" wrote:
I said, bluntly and enthusiastically, "Depressed!  It was great.  So on for the rest of the day. 

Surely, as soon as you started enjoying being plain damn rude to your co-workers you weren't depressed any more. That being the case when you persisted in saying you were you were lying.

"david" wrote:
Interestingly enough, Albert Camus was preoccupied with radical honjesty particularly in his character, Meursault, from his best selling novel, The Outsider.

You can't possibly have read this book. No-one's comprehension is that bad.

OK


ReplyQuote
Tao
 Tao
(@tao)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 316
22/06/2015 10:38 pm  
"david" wrote:
We have established that Isa is the Arabic name for Christ (the sufferer)?

Well, for Jesus anyway. Islam doesn't hold much with "The Christ".

"david" wrote:
I asked who or what is Asar in the above passage.

Did you? Sorry, must've missed that. Asar is the 19th century transcription to English of the heiroglyphics representing the name that has come down to us via Greek as Osiris. 20th century scholarship has offered many other alternative transliterations for what has now been standardized to: Wsjr.

"david" wrote:
Liber Pyramidos has Asar as Osiris in his putrefying aspect it would seem, therefore Asar is now "with" Isa (Christ).

  I'm not sure if your "therefore" necessarily follows. In Pyramidos, the Candidate invokes Asar un-Nefer into herself and undergoes the ritual as Osiris. This seems to be in contradiction to Crowley's comment that, since the Heirophant is now Horus, the Candidate must also be Horus. I would guess that, as with everything else in this system, there isn't a simple plug-and-play answer. There are multiple layers to be considered depending on what level one is observing.

"david" wrote:
They are now both, not of Nuit because the religious "calamity" formula is over and Horus now takes the succession.  That's a fair assessment?

I don't know. One has to balance this with Nuit's claim/declaration that she is everything and everything is her. What does it mean when Everything declares that something is not of her? I really don't think the easy answer ("they don't count anymore") is supportable. Especially when Crowley then went on to compose the primary initiation ceremony of the A.'.A.'. with Osiris as its hero and continued to refer to the second initiation as a crucifixion. The officers have rotated; they haven't been annihilated.

As for the rest of the matter, on topic to this thread, I no longer remain baffled. Your intervening posts have more than cleared things up. I wish you all the best in beginning to live your life honestly and forthrightly. If I may make a suggestion: Since you live so close, take a holiday to Paris sometime. That place, more than any other, should give you a quick hit of perspective on what it means to live in honest communication with others and might start to dispel some of your illusions about how "most" women and "most" men interact.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 11:06 pm  
"Tao" wrote:
As for the rest of the matter, on topic to this thread, I no longer remain baffled.

That's good.

"Tao" wrote:
Your intervening posts have more than cleared things up. I wish you all the best in beginning to live your life honestly and forthrightly.

Thanks.  By the way this is a thread about how Thelema and radical honesty are intertwined.  It isn't a personal manifesto.

"Tao" wrote:
. If I may make a suggestion: Since you live so close, take a holiday to Paris sometime. That place, more than any other, should give you a quick hit of perspective on what it means to live in honest communication with others and might start to dispel some of your illusions about how "most" women and "most" men interact.

Ah yes, the bourgeoisie -shocking, decadent degeneracy of the real Bohemia mythos.  If you have 10 seconds go to  1m10 to 1m25s in this link with Serge Gainsbourgh.  Pretty hilarious stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwB0zcx96-A

Anyway, no, radical honesty is not just about dating or the like, it's an all encompassing thing, particularly based around work-colleagues.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
22/06/2015 11:12 pm  
"OKontrair" wrote:
"david" wrote:
I said, bluntly and enthusiastically, "Depressed!  It was great.  So on for the rest of the day. 

Surely, as soon as you started enjoying being plain damn rude to your co-workers you weren't depressed any more. That being the case when you persisted in saying you were you were lying.

No.  I felt better later on. Who thinks it was rude?  Your conditioned ego?  Please read and learn before you make such judgements; http://m.wikihow.com/Practice-Radical-Honesty

"OKontrair" wrote:
You can't possibly have read this book. No-one's comprehension is that bad.

OK

I don't recall it but I did read Colin Wilson's analysis of it along with various other characters.  It bored me to tears at the time.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
23/06/2015 1:20 am  
"david" wrote:
Just out of interest, are you or Jamie capable of radical honesty as described?

Just out of interest, I'd say Jamie is incapable of radicalism, and I'm much worse. 😮

But I'm sure he can be honestly honest, even if I have a record of recorded records.

Interestingly enough, Albert Camus was preoccupied with radical honjesty particularly in his character, Meursault, from his best selling novel, The Outsider.

To be honest with you, I don't know who Albert was/is/will be, nor do I care about his best selling novel.

Keeping in line with the OP, I also think that Crowley probably encouraged radical honesty at Cefalu but he didn't call it that of course.

Why would you think that? "Probably" you say? Why only at Cefalu? Were you there? What about when he lied to a police officer, convincing him that his opium apparatus was a coffee maker? What about when he lied, calling himself a Prince? Well, these last two incidents weren't at Cefalu, so I guess it's alright ???

... it's an all encompassing thing, particularly based around work-colleagues.

If it's "all encompassing," why is it particularly based around any one segment?


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2582
23/06/2015 2:28 am  

I lie sometimes if it saves peoples feelings.  Because I have learnt in my life that if you are honest all the time people think you are an asshole, and they don't want to help you and I feel bad because i was trying to help them with honesty.  So sometimes lying is good.
That is all.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2582
23/06/2015 2:29 am  

PS i dont think the notion of true will has anything to do with objective honesty.

What if it is my true will to be a jester and lie all the time for laughs?
What if it is my true will to be a dickhead and hurt people by lying to them because i dont care?

david seems like he is being extremely moralistic.  And as we know that is not how the world works.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2582
23/06/2015 2:32 am  

Yes David you should never lie about your feelings. I too tell people bluntly I am in a bad mood. or i think the meal is shit. but what i was trying to say with post one is you have to know when to do it.  ie what is a small thing and a large thing.
sometimes we are all better off if we lie a little.
so yes you are not incorrect in applying honesty in those situations no one gives a fuck about, like office small talk.
but in my opinion you are incorrect in applying it all the time.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 3:13 pm  

@ Shiva, the opium apparatus lie. Think about it, would a long spell in prison have been his True Will?  The "prince" lie he explained that that was Jugorum personality-switch work, if I'm not mistaken so again it was perhaps a case of lies in accord with True Will.  That's a good point.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
23/06/2015 3:20 pm  
"david" wrote:
It's a mindfulness of, in the following order; one's immediate environment then one's bodily tensions then one's mental activity then get ready to say what's on your mind and say it.

You said this before back in Reply #19.  I responded back in Reply #30 that it could all be summed up as “Know Thyself” Q.E.D. & so why repeat ourselves?!  Also as I've myself previously stated in another thread, finding out why one’s mental activity gives rise to bodily tensions (and vice versa) is all an invaluable part of the practice of Reichian character armour vegeto-therapy (and some would argue more open to questionly, Hubbard’s E-meter processes as well).

"david" wrote:
By the way this is a thread about how Thelema and radical honesty are intertwined.  It isn't a personal manifesto.

There does seem to be rather a lot of your own personal “stuff” in it though … ??? ::) E.g.:

"david" wrote:
It was really funny when a woman was telling me about going to a Fleetwood mac concert and I said, "A classic band but I'd really not want to see them live nowadays."  Etc.  Initially I was on the verge of saying, "I'm not interested in hearing about you going to your concert,  I'm just reading a website on my phone."  That sentiment was expressed but it all came out within the normal flow of conversation.

What makes you think we may be interested in hearing (= reading about) your finding this experience “really funny”?  Ditto your assorted work experiences in e.g. Replies #60 and 68 and similarly elsewhere... (Incidentally, I'm not saying that we all wouldn't be, of course.  That'd be up to you to surmise... ;D)

"david" wrote:
Anyway, no, radical honesty is not just about dating or the like, it's an all encompassing thing, particularly based around work-colleagues.

This is quite horrible English & I’m not even sure what you’re trying to say.  What if you don’t work?  What if you work alone and don’t have any colleagues? (:'()  What if you’re so stinking rich you don’t need to work?  (What if?)

"david" wrote:
Just out of interest, are you or Jamie capable of radical honesty as described?  For example;

•Admit when you've forgotten someone's name, even if you're supposed to know that person's name because you've known them for years and seen them regularly and you know their kids' names, and even their dog's name.
•Tell someone when you're starting to get bored with the conversation. "I stopped listening about a minute ago" or "I'm not really interested in talking about this" or simply, "I'm bored. I'll be back in ten minutes."
•Express frustration with your co-workers, and even your boss. "I'm annoyed that you didn't respond to our memo earlier. But at the same time, I'm relieved, because then if we don't nail one of the things you want, we can blame any delays on your lack of response."
•Start sentences with the words "I resent you for..." or "I appreciate you for..."
•Read up on How to Practice Nonviolent Communication.
•If possible, express your honesty in person. It allows you to fully experience the ramifications of being radically honest, and makes it harder for the receiving party to run away--which probably means they'll still be there when the shock subsides, and your interaction can recover and move forward

Like so much else it all depends on the particular circumstances in a given place at a particular time.  In other words, one would have to be a bit unbalanced to give the same kind of general response to all comers on each and every occasion – not to mention being inflexible and incapable of adapting to environment.

"david" wrote:
Interestingly enough, Albert Camus was preoccupied with radical honjesty particularly in his character, Meursault, from his best selling novel, The Outsider.
"david" wrote:
"OKontrair" wrote:
You can't possibly have read this book. No-one's comprehension is that bad.

I don't recall it but I did read Colin Wilson's analysis of it along with various other characters.  It bored me to tears at the time.

But you were being dishonest – or at least disingenuous – here in initially trying to give the impression to other Lashtalians that you’ve actually read the book in question, david, although goodness knows why one would feel the need to stoop to such pseudo-intellectualism.  (And “best seller”?  Yes, it’ll be a surefire ‘airport’/ ‘poolside’ read this summer, I’ll be bound!)  Your intellectual opinion here is culled second-hand and second-rate, from Wilson in this instance (and from Wikipedia & google in most others.)  Do you regard that as being honest?

"Shiva" wrote:
What about when he lied to a police officer, convincing him that his opium apparatus was a coffee maker?

Minor nit-pick here, though if we’re talking about A.C.’s sojourn in Paris in the late 20s, wasn’t it meant to be some form of fangled cocaine-distillation apparatus – but which actually was a genuine coffee maker in reality?  Point taken, though!

"Shiva" wrote:
What about when he lied, calling himself a Prince?

Prince, Laird, Count… his joking apart, maybe A.C. wasn’t exactly being entirely honest with himself about his inferiority complex and desire for self-aggrandisement?

Yours (sort-of) honestly,
И Joy


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 6:38 pm  
"Tao" wrote:
"david" wrote:
We have established that Isa is the Arabic name for Christ (the sufferer)?

Well, for Jesus anyway. Islam doesn't hold much with "The Christ".

"david" wrote:
I asked who or what is Asar in the above passage.

Did you? Sorry, must've missed that. Asar is the 19th century transcription to English of the heiroglyphics representing the name that has come down to us via Greek as Osiris. 20th century scholarship has offered many other alternative transliterations for what has now been standardized to: Wsjr.

"david" wrote:
Liber Pyramidos has Asar as Osiris in his putrefying aspect it would seem, therefore Asar is now "with" Isa (Christ).

  I'm not sure if your "therefore" necessarily follows. In Pyramidos, the Candidate invokes Asar un-Nefer into herself and undergoes the ritual as Osiris. This seems to be in contradiction to Crowley's comment that, since the Heirophant is now Horus, the Candidate must also be Horus. I would guess that, as with everything else in this system, there isn't a simple plug-and-play answer. There are multiple layers to be considered depending on what level one is observing.

"david" wrote:
They are now both, not of Nuit because the religious "calamity" formula is over and Horus now takes the succession.  That's a fair assessment?

I don't know. One has to balance this with Nuit's claim/declaration that she is everything and everything is her. What does it mean when Everything declares that something is not of her? I really don't think the easy answer ("they don't count anymore") is supportable. Especially when Crowley then went on to compose the primary initiation ceremony of the A.'.A.'. with Osiris as its hero and continued to refer to the second initiation as a crucifixion. The officers have rotated; they haven't been annihilated.

.

By the way thanks for this, Tao.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 6:40 pm  
"christibrany" wrote:
PS i dont think the notion of true will has anything to do with objective honesty.

What if it is my true will to be a jester and lie all the time for laughs?
What if it is my true will to be a dickhead and hurt people by lying to them because i dont care?

What if radical honesty helps people to get close to or actually attain their True Will?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 6:48 pm  
"christibrany" wrote:
Yes David you should never lie about your feelings. I too tell people bluntly I am in a bad mood. or i think the meal is shit. but what i was trying to say with post one is you have to know when to do it.  ie what is a small thing and a large thing.
sometimes we are all better off if we lie a little.
so yes you are not incorrect in applying honesty in those situations no one gives a fuck about, like office small talk.
but in my opinion you are incorrect in applying it all the time.

The general gist of radical honesty is that we live in self-imposed mental prison where it becomes very difficult to think our way out of it.  Everyone's got something to hide except for me and my monkey.  The amount of effort that the average person puts into keeping themselves locked up from others would be better used elsewhere wouldn't it?  I think that radical honesty appears to unlock this "armour".     


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
23/06/2015 6:50 pm  
"david" wrote:
Think about it, would a long spell in prison have been his True Will?

Think about it? OK!  He lied. We don't know if a prison term would be his Will or not. Many people claim to have found "enlightenment" in a jail or under adverse conditions.

... it was perhaps a case of lies in accord with True Will.

Yes. "Perhaps."  Mixing lies with Will is interesting. But who can tell what someone's "Will" is/was? Who can tell who was Perdurabo and who was the demon Crowley? 😀

Anyway, we know (that it is said) that a Magus uses falsehood to "get his way." It seems like this whole subject is just as full of discrepancies and illusion as the Ipsissimus topic, any moral topic, and (of course) the Will topic ::)

"jamie barter" wrote:
Like so much else it all depends on the particular circumstances in a given place at a particular time.

Please answer each cited "for instance" with detailed references to any and all possible circumstances. Points will be deducted for (a) generalizations and (b) Omitting any possible variation from any particular circumstance. We will give you, say, twenty years to respond ;D

"David" wrote:
What if radical honesty helps people to get close to or actually attain their True Will?

What if buzzards had radios in their behind? Why, then there'd be music in the [s:216ngcx9]aur[/s:216ngcx9], er, air.

Some of the questions and responses in this thread are getting so theoretical and ridiculous that I feel a dizziness coming on 😉


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
23/06/2015 7:26 pm  

93!

"Shiva" wrote:
Some of the questions and responses in this thread are getting so theoretical and ridiculous that I feel a dizziness coming on 😉

I do know that dizziness. I feel it too - or is it just boredom?

Honestly, this thread should have been called "What do you think of this radical honesty movement of which I have found a website?" but it has zilch to do with Thelema, apart of maybe "be honest to yourself" which is a quite obvious advice for all this introspection work to do ...

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 8:11 pm  
"jamie barter" wrote:
There does seem to be rather a lot of your own personal “stuff” in it though … ??? ::) E.g.:

I'm the only person In know who is attempting it.

"jamie barter" wrote:
This is quite horrible English & I’m not even sure what you’re trying to say.  What if you don’t work?  What if you work alone and don’t have any colleagues? (:'()  What if you’re so stinking rich you don’t need to work?  (What if?)

Are you talking about horrible English as in something all-encompassing not being able to be particular?  E.g. Stalin's brutality against his people was all-encompassing, particularly the kulaks.  As for the generalization that most people are in employment well, you're nit picking.
 

"jamie barter" wrote:
But you were being dishonest – or at least disingenuous – here in initially trying to give the impression to other Lashtalians that you’ve actually read the book in question

Yes it did give that impression didn't it?  I was hoping someone could enlighten us on the matter and it would've been better to add that.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 8:12 pm  
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
93!

"Shiva" wrote:
Some of the questions and responses in this thread are getting so theoretical and ridiculous that I feel a dizziness coming on 😉

I do know that dizziness. I feel it too - or is it just boredom?

Honestly, this thread should have been called "What do you think of this radical honesty movement of which I have found a website?" but it has zilch to do with Thelema, apart of maybe "be honest to yourself" which is a quite obvious advice for all this introspection work to do ...

Love=Law
Lutz

Haha I admire your directness!


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 8:23 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
Think about it, would a long spell in prison have been his True Will?

Think about it? OK!  He lied. We don't know if a prison term would be his Will or not. Many people claim to have found "enlightenment" in a jail or under adverse conditions.

Wasn't he already doing his True Will by that time, moreso than when he didn't have a clue and only aspired to it?  In other words, didn't he already have some inkling about what True Will is, from personal experience?

Do you think radical honesty is for people who have already had strong experience of True Will or for those aspiring to such a thing?

"Shiva" wrote:
Yes. "Perhaps."  Mixing lies with Will is interesting. But who can tell what someone's "Will" is/was? Who can tell who was Perdurabo and who was the demon Crowley? 😀

We know when someone is stressed or afraid (i.e. status-fear not natural fear of danger) or self-divided.  The facial expressions and gestures are a dead give away. 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
23/06/2015 8:35 pm  
"OKontrair" wrote:
"david" wrote:
I said, bluntly and enthusiastically, "Depressed!  It was great.  So on for the rest of the day. 

Surely, as soon as you started enjoying being plain damn rude to your co-workers

This common occurrence is a great focal point of experimentation in radical honesty.  That is, you don't feel good or great one morning (or whenever) and you meet someone you know and they ask how you are?  Do you lie about it?  Why?  Would it benefit you to tell the truth in that scenario?


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3118
23/06/2015 11:57 pm  

It sounds like another term for "radical honesty" is "narcissism".
"RH" seems to assume that every social encounter is "about" the practitioner, and his performance (for an audience consisting of his smug self) of being "better" than those around him- he is "just being honest, man", while around him all are hypocrites with "status anxiety" who lack the courage to be like the "RH" guy.
I assume it is news to few adults that very few people who ask you "how are you doing?" actually want a full report on the state of your bowels and psyche.
I can certainly see the appeal of "RH" to the sort of person who is attracted to Thelema so he can do whatever he wants, and can also see the appeal of the idea of "saying whatever pops into your head" to some posters here.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
24/06/2015 12:12 am  
"ignant666" wrote:
"RH" seems to assume that every social encounter is "about" the practitioner, and his performance (for an audience consisting of his smug self) of being "better" than those around him- he is "just being honest, man", while around him all are hypocrites with "status anxiety" who lack the courage to be like the "RH" guy.
I assume it is news to few adults that very few people who ask you "how are you doing?" actually want a full report on the state of your bowels and psyche.
I can certainly see the appeal of "RH" to the sort of person who is attracted to Thelema so he can do whatever he wants, and can also see the appeal of the idea of "saying whatever pops into your head" to some posters here.

I put the link in for a reason as I wanted people to be fully informed. http://m.wikihow.com/Practice-Radical-Honesty


Know where to draw the line. How honest is too honest? In the honesty business, there’s a fine line between radical and reckless. Reckless honesty is the result of pushing the authenticity envelope so far that you shoot yourself in the foot. The border between radical and reckless must be patrolled by your intuition. Sometimes that line is obvious, but sometimes it’s not

Personally I would have used the term "common sense" instead of "intuition" here.

and

Radical self-honesty requires a matching dose of humility. Whatever score you give yourself in any category is almost surely inflated. If the currency by which we measure others is pounds, the currency by which we measure ourselves is yen. Some of these feelings of superior knowledge, skill, or judgement are no doubt justified. But many, if not most of them, aren’t. The moment you become conscious of this, your self-awareness expands. You begin to ask yourself more honest questions and give yourself more honest answers.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
24/06/2015 11:38 am  
"david" wrote:
Personally I would have used the term "common sense" instead of "intuition" here.

Interesting. Why?


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
24/06/2015 12:53 pm  
"david" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
There does seem to be rather a lot of your own personal “stuff” in it though … ??? ::) E.g.:

I'm the only person In know who is attempting it.

Oh!  Well fair enough then, I suppose!  Carry on!  (I presume you didn’t actually mean “I’m the only person in the know who is attempting it” [sic] there?)

"david" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
This is quite horrible English & I’m not even sure what you’re trying to say.  What if you don’t work?  What if you work alone and don’t have any colleagues? (:'()  What if you’re so stinking rich you don’t need to work?  (What if?)

Are you talking about horrible English as in something all-encompassing not being able to be particular?  E.g. Stalin's brutality against his people was all-encompassing, particularly the kulaks.

Your attempt to deflect my observation through the backwaters of Stalinism is a thoroughly transparent manoeuvre and therefore manages to fall flat on its face.  Nice try, though!

"david" wrote:
As for the generalization that most people are in employment well, you're nit picking.

But I don’t think I did generalize that most people are in work at all.  If anything I was saying there are a lot of cases where people aren’t lumped together in employment.  Shiva questioned the internal logic of your remark, which you have yet to also properly address, but I stated that this business about “work colleagues” has been pumped up into far more importance than it deserves.  Not everyone has work colleagues, for the reasons gone into which I exampled: they could also be disabled, solo crafts(wo)men, drastically shy or antisocial, rich & workfree, etc etc.  What I suspect you meant to say was regarding the matter of daily social interaction amongst one’s peers – fellow human beings, basically – which has nothing to do with work per se: in other words, or in a (one) word, banter.  Would you disagree with this?  If so, please explain how – if not so, then we can move on from this.

"david" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
But you were being dishonest – or at least disingenuous – here in initially trying to give the impression to other Lashtalians that you’ve actually read the book in question

Yes it did give that impression didn't it?  I was hoping someone could enlighten us on the matter and it would've been better to add that.

But why should someone – considering you were the savant who brought Camus up in the first place?

I’m sorry if you didn’t quite appreciate my criticism, but I did find that sentence of yours quoted above in particular quite horrible.  I’ve read far worse, of course (so don’t give yourself a complex about it!)  But since this is a forum, one shouldn’t post if one can’t take good old constructive critical feedback and disagreements with one's own points-of-view, ideally like water off a duck’s backside without quacking, so that instead of putting what you’re trying to say another way, your prefer to accuse me of nit picking (which I may often do, but not in this instance!)  Throughout the thread you are & have been making a considerable virtue (as I said earlier: in its simplest interpretation of being a good, rather than a bad, thing) out of honesty - or even radical honesty, as you prefer to embellish the term - saying how marvellous it would be if we could all communicate straight with each other.  And yet when I queried your very own actions and example regarding “The Outsider” in this respect, you shilly-shally and refuse to give a straight answer back – itself an action of dubious rectitude, considering.  It was a devastatingly simple question, befitting the subject matter of the thread question and requiring a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer – no politician’s shilly-shallying and hedging about the bush (or bushing about the hedge even), as I say…  Or don’t you believe in putting your money where your mouth is, as it were?

How essential is this adjectival phrase “radical” in the thread title anyway – would(n’t) it work just as well – or better even – with just Thelema and Honesty? (capital ‘H’ there optional)?

Incidentally david, haven’t Fleetwood Mac had to put off their latest tour because of some injury or other - and wasn’t it meant to have been the return of the ‘classic’ line-up with Buckingham & Nicks?  Though I had a friend once who claimed – quite seriously – everything went to rack’n’ruin (as opposed to rock’n’roll) and on a terminally downhill slope for them after Peter Green left (!)

"Shiva" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
Like so much else it all depends on the particular circumstances in a given place at a particular time.

Please answer each cited "for instance" with detailed references to any and all possible circumstances. Points will be deducted for (a) generalizations and (b) Omitting any possible variation from any particular circumstance. We will give you, say, twenty years to respond ;D

Well, that was the short answer I gave.  You want the long one referring to any & all possible circumstances?  That would be hopelessly anal, & I’m not sure twenty years would be quite adequate enough though… ;D

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
24/06/2015 3:18 pm  
"jamie barter" wrote:
I’m not sure twenty years would be quite adequate enough though… ;D

Your appeal has been recognized and you are granted thirty-three years to complete the task ... but not a Supreme Grand Council more 😉


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
24/06/2015 3:45 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
I’m not sure twenty years would be quite adequate enough though… ;D

Your appeal has been recognized and you are granted thirty-three years to complete the task ... but not a Supreme Grand Council more 😉

I’m conscious that the clock is ticking!  (*Sigh!* No time for any more mucking around for me, then… :o)

With nose applied to grindstone,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
24/06/2015 8:23 pm  
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"david" wrote:
Personally I would have used the term "common sense" instead of "intuition" here.

Interesting. Why?

It's too metaphysical and such a wishy-washy and airy-fairy nonsense term.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
24/06/2015 8:37 pm  
"jamie barter" wrote:
Your attempt to deflect my observation through the backwaters of Stalinism is a thoroughly transparent manoeuvre and therefore manages to fall flat on its face.  Nice try, though!

It actually wasn't a deflection.  I genuinely thought that you were correcting my use of the term "all-encompassing" in tandem with the term "particularly".

"jamie barter" wrote:
But I don’t think I did generalize that most people are in work at all.  If anything I was saying there are a lot of cases where people aren’t lumped together in employment.  Shiva questioned the internal logic of your remark, which you have yet to also properly address, but I stated that this business about “work colleagues” has been pumped up into far more importance than it deserves. 

Look, using radical honesty obviously involves everyone you meet and interact with daily and as most people work and interact with  colleagues daily then a big proportion of such an individual's rad honesty is going to involve them.  Why are you making a massive issue out of nothing?  Let's move on.

   

"jamie barter" wrote:
  And yet when I queried your very own actions and example regarding “The Outsider” in this respect, you shilly-shally and refuse to give a straight answer back – itself an action of dubious rectitude, considering.  It was a devastatingly simple question, befitting the subject matter of the thread question and requiring a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer –

Yes I was guilty of pseudo-intellectual act in bringing in Camus's Outsider into the discussion..

"jamie barter" wrote:
Incidentally david, haven’t Fleetwood Mac had to put off their latest tour because of some injury or other - and wasn’t it meant to have been the return of the ‘classic’ line-up with Buckingham & Nicks?  Though I had a friend once who claimed – quite seriously – everything went to rack’n’ruin (as opposed to rock’n’roll) and on a terminally downhill slope for them after Peter Green left (!)

I don't know I am not really interested in what Fleetwood Mac are up to nowadays.  My work colleague was but I'm not.  I though I explained that I was, throughout the conversation with her, on the verge of telling her that I had better things to do than listen to a story about something that doesn't interest me. 

Keeping it OT, this leads me to another point in that such disciplinary self-observation (involved in Radical Honesty) is akin to the Jugorum work, in that sense.  It's a similar use of active tension.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
24/06/2015 9:34 pm  
"david" wrote:
It actually wasn't a deflection.  I genuinely thought that you were correcting my use of the term "all-encompassing" in tandem with the term "particularly".

No, that was me. But I wasn't "correcting" your usage, I was pointing out the illogicity of the phrase.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
24/06/2015 10:49 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
It actually wasn't a deflection.  I genuinely thought that you were correcting my use of the term "all-encompassing" in tandem with the term "particularly".

No, that was me. But I wasn't "correcting" your usage, I was pointing out the illogicity of the phrase.

Great!


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
24/06/2015 10:56 pm  

Could we move on now?  My latest point about the similarities between the vigilance in Jugorum work and the vigilance involved in practicing R.H.; check it out if you will.

Y'know I'm tempted to say that this last few days of R.H. people have noticed a big change in me.  As a sceptic I am well aware of how the ego tricks itself by looking for patterns but I am open to it. 


ReplyQuote
Tao
 Tao
(@tao)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 316
25/06/2015 12:32 am  
"david" wrote:
Y'know I'm tempted to say that this last few days of R.H. people have noticed a big change in me.

What is it that tempts you to say this? Have you polled them? Who are they? What is your sample size? What sort of a change is it that they are noticing?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
25/06/2015 8:47 am  

Try it and see what you think.


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
25/06/2015 10:27 am  

93!

"david" wrote:
Y'know I'm tempted to say that this last few days of R.H. people have noticed a big change in me.  As a sceptic I am well aware of how the ego tricks itself by looking for patterns but I am open to it.

What kind of change are you talking about? I guess everybody would notice a change when "I'm fine, thanks, and good morning to you too" is replaced by "I'm fine, thanks, but you look like a big fat wanker!"

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
25/06/2015 10:36 am  

Reactions and changed behaviour in others towards me.


ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 4
Share: