Thelema and radical...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Thelema and radical honesty.

Page 3 / 4

the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 1934
 

93!

Those would be expected. But is it like "What has gotten into David?! he's awful!" or like "I admire his honesty, I AM a big fat wanker!" Do they shun you or search your company?

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"david" wrote:
"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".

Yes, that was Shiva’s query relating to your wording but I agree: let’s all bury it now though before it gets tiresome.  I was being “radically honest” with you by saying that I thought your English style was “quite horrible”.  Though would you have preferred it if I had blathered on to you some pleasantry instead rather than saying what I felt when I thought that was the whole point of the exercise?

"david" wrote:
"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.

I don’t believe I am/ was making a big deal out of “nothing” here.  You were the one who emphasised the whole business about ”work” colleagues, rather than just anyone in the public arena one may happen to interact with, which was the reason why I queried it.  However we can certainly move on.

"david" wrote:
"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..

More than that, you were guilty of being disingenuous or even dishonesty itself.  I was drawing attention to the matter as a practical example of what you were going on about in other more theoretical examples like your reactions to your work-colleagues, etc. demonstrating that you apparently cannot even be “straight” or radically honest with your fellow Lashtalians here, while at the same time spieling on to us all about how wonderful it would be, etc.

"david" wrote:
"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.

Yes, this was apparent from your previous writing on the subject, david.  I wouldn’t say I was a particularly strong fan of theirs either, although their music like The Eagles is perferctly inoffensive and if one is in the right time and place and under the right libational stimulation, can be quite pleasurable.  If someone gave me a free ticket to see them on their tour I wouldn’t turn it down, put it that way.  But apart from prodding you again (since you do seem to rather invite it) the other reason I brought your colleague-into-Fleetwood Mac-anecdote up was because you obviously thought it would interest us (your readers here) whereas like yourself, a lot of us might not be interested in the least and have better things to do than read about your experiences with it.  Like everything else it’s all relative & sometimes it’s useful to have a mirror to hand.

Talking of which, regarding your new and improved behaviour – it obviously isn’t so far reaching and revolutionary that you have changed all of your ingrained habits yet.  For example, you still prefer to give a minimal or evasive answer where possible if you can get away with it, as can be seen by your responses to Michael, Tao and Lutz, instead of one which might reveal something of the “real david”, possibly because of your fear – previously expressed – that you will be vampirised or drained if you honestly admit too much to all of us.  Which hopefully you might have realised by now is rather silly, as what have you really got to lose?

Everybody’s got something to hide except for me and my monkey indeed.  Preacher, heal thyself!

N Joy


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 1093
 

If someone gave me a free ticket to see them on their tour I wouldn’t turn it down, put it that way.

duly noted.


ReplyQuote
Tao
 Tao
(@tao)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 316
 
"david" wrote:
Try it and see what you think.
"david" wrote:
Reactions and changed behaviour in others towards me.

That would be my point. You appear to be reporting your perception of others' perception of you (your psychological projection on them, to use the professional parlance). "As a sceptic", you should be at least as aware of the deluding nature of this particular fancy picture (confirmation bias) as you are of the mind's pattern-making proclivities.

If I were to follow you down the garden path of this experiment, it wouldn't matter in the least what I think others are thinking of me, unless, of course, I were only interested in deluding myself into thinking that my particular experiment were working in the way that I expected it to work. It would only matter what others were actually thinking of me... and this could only be ascertained by some controlled polling of their opinions on the matter, before, during, and after the experiment.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
Yes, that was Shiva’s query relating to your wording but I agree: let’s all bury it now though before it gets tiresome.  I was being “radically honest” with you by saying that I thought your English style was “quite horrible”. 

Well done, could you do that in your daily interactions with people also?

"jamie barter" wrote:
More than that, you were guilty of being disingenuous or even dishonesty itself.  I was drawing attention to the matter as a practical example of what you were going on about in other more theoretical examples like your reactions to your work-colleagues, etc. demonstrating that you apparently cannot even be “straight” or radically honest with your fellow Lashtalians here, while at the same time spieling on to us all about how wonderful it would be, etc.

I already 'fessed up about my pseudo intellectual statement and then I tried to deny it. . 

"jamie barter" wrote:
Yes, this was apparent from your previous writing on the subject, david.  I wouldn’t say I was a particularly strong fan of theirs either,

No. they are a classic band, I like Rumours and  a few of the singles but I wouldn't want to see them live as of now.

"jamie barter" wrote:
Talking of which, regarding your new and improved behaviour – it obviously isn’t so far reaching and revolutionary that you have changed all of your ingrained habits yet.  For example, you still prefer to give a minimal or evasive answer where possible if you can get away with it, as can be seen by your responses to Michael, Tao and Lutz, instead of one which might reveal something of the “real david”, possibly because of your fear – previously expressed – that you will be vampirised or drained if you honestly admit too much to all of us.  Which hopefully you might have realised by now is rather silly, as what have you really got to lose?

Everybody’s got something to hide except for me and my monkey indeed.  Preacher, heal thyself!

N Joy

You want more from me?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Tao" wrote:
"david" wrote:
Try it and see what you think.
"david" wrote:
Reactions and changed behaviour in others towards me.

That would be my point. You appear to be reporting your perception of others' perception of you (your psychological projection on them, to use the professional parlance). "As a sceptic", you should be at least as aware of the deluding nature of this particular fancy picture (confirmation bias) as you are of the mind's pattern-making proclivities.

Fair enough.  I don't know if I'm kidding myself yet, I'm glad you're aware of what confirmation-bias is, I would lean towards, no, it isn't confirmation bias but it's early days yet.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
93!

Those would be expected. But is it like "What has gotten into David?! he's awful!" or like "I admire his honesty, I AM a big fat wanker!" Do they shun you or search your company?

Love=Law
Lutz

Today, I thought I might get physically confronted by someone I know, for what I said.  I was sitting in his usual chair and I offered to change seats as I pointed out that the seat he was in was too small for him ie too small for his fat arse.  I didn't say "fat arse" but he took it that way.   

Also people are making uncharacteristic blunt comments towards me, like they've picked up my RH virus.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4170
 
"david" wrote:
Also people are making uncharacteristic blunt comments towards me, like they've picked up my RH virus.

No, they probably just think you're a schmuck.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"christibrany" wrote:
david seems like he is being extremely moralistic.  And as we know that is not how the world works.

RH is the enemy of moralism, the should and should-nots.


Parents even lie to their children when they tell them honesty is the best policy.  Honesty as a policy is bad advice, bullshit and a lie. If you have Anne Frank in the attic and a nazi knocks on the door and asks “Are there any Jews in this house?” you probably want to lie to the sonofabitch.

Then parents and other moralists compound the lie by saying honesty is the best policy because it is morally right. It turns out they were right about honesty being good, but for the wrong reasons. One of the best freak events of human history (and herstory as well) is that honesty is the best policy, but for entirely different reasons.

Radical Honesty, because it brings about the destruction of a lot of pat stories that are no longer useful or were all bullshit in the first place, is the very source of personal liberation and social revolution.

Because after the pain of the overthrow of the government of the mind stories, comes A GREAT SCARY JOY! Suddenly there is a new openness to the possibilities of play in the fields of the Lord!

http://radicalhonesty.com/2015/06/24/scary-intimacy/


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"david" wrote:
Also people are making uncharacteristic blunt comments towards me, like they've picked up my RH virus.

No, they probably just think you're a schmuck.

A radically honest schmuck?  Hahaha.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:

If someone gave me a free ticket to see them on their tour I wouldn’t turn it down, put it that way.

duly noted.

I forgot to add, free refreshments and paid travel expenses would also be highly acceptable too.

"david" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
More than that, you were guilty of being disingenuous or even dishonesty itself.  I was drawing attention to the matter as a practical example of what you were going on about in other more theoretical examples like your reactions to your work-colleagues, etc. demonstrating that you apparently cannot even be “straight” or radically honest with your fellow Lashtalians here, while at the same time spieling on to us all about how wonderful it would be, etc.

I already 'fessed up about my pseudo intellectual statement and then I tried to deny it. . 

Seven hail marys and a week in a hair shirt for you then

"david" wrote:
You want more from me?

As in, "you want a piece of me?!"  No, not just yet, thank you.  (I will let you know when I do.)

♫ Your inside is out, and your outside is in.  So, come on & take it easy! ♫
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Tao
 Tao
(@tao)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 316
 
"david" wrote:
Today, I thought I might get physically confronted by someone I know, for what I said.

Well, that tells us something about how this experiment is affecting your psyche (you believe that what you said stepped so far over someone's line that you were likely to get hit) but still nothing about what's actually happening out there in the world. Did you get physically confronted? Verbally confronted? Or was all of this drama relegated to your mind?

Also people are making uncharacteristic blunt comments towards me,

Such as? How many? What makes them uncharacteristic?

like they've picked up my RH virus.

If they had actually picked up the RH virus, as you put it, they would be speaking the truths of their mind to everybody. Is this what's happening? Or is this just their current mode of interaction with you in particular? Might these not just be cases of retaliation against an aggressor rather than some sort of catalysed outbreak of Radical Honesty in the workplace?

Less analysis, more data. These are the early stages, as you say. Wouldn't want to bias up the experiment, now would we?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6092
 

This thread, subtitled THE PSYCHOTHERAPY OF DAVID BLOG is brought to you as a publick service ... so that you'll learn what to do, and not do, and how to express yourself in better ways.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3620
 

I think my point about "RH"="narcissism" looks pretty good.
As to these "physical confrontations", I hope, in case you must defend yourself against them, that you have by now recovered the bat that demons stole from you last fall, forcing you to give someone a black eye through (what else?) "black magic".
It is good to learn that your status as a "skeptic" confers immunity against confirmation bias- whew!


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4170
 
"ignant666" wrote:
I think my point about "RH"="narcissism" looks pretty good.
As to these "physical confrontations", I hope, in case you must defend yourself against them, that you have by now recovered the bat that demons stole from you last fall, forcing you to give someone a black eye through (what else?) "black magic".
It is good to learn that your status as a "skeptic" confers immunity against confirmation bias- whew!

With all this stuff about the "R.H. virus", it's probably "septic" rather than "skeptic".


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4170
 
"david" wrote:
"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.

No it's not. Intuition covers a wide spectrum, typically taking in "hunch", "a feeling", "instinct", etc. There's nothing "metaphysical" about it; rather, it can be considered hyper-developed sensory information.

If it's "metaphysical", then why do you think it's a term that crops up in the quote from the Radical Honesty information you quoted? I'd guess that the R.H. crowd aren't a bunch of occultists, mystics or metaphysicians.

On the other hand, your much-vaunted "common sense" is a moveable feast, often lagging fifty years or so behind scientific discoveries. For instance, Big Bang theory - that something sprang into existence out of nothing - seems contrary to "common sense"; the alternative - that the universe has always been here - also seems contrary to "common sense". Might be that "common sense" isn't quite the Stone of the Wise that you suppose it to be.

Ho hum, it's a conundrum, as Keith Moon might have said to the bishop.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"ignant666" wrote:
I think my point about "RH"="narcissism" looks pretty good.
As to these "physical confrontations", I hope, in case you must defend yourself against them, that you have by now recovered the bat that demons stole from you last fall, forcing you to give someone a black eye through (what else?) "black magic".
It is good to learn that your status as a "skeptic" confers immunity against confirmation bias- whew!

I think you're confusing me with someone else.  Did someone say a demon stole their bat?  I'm an a-theist, a-leprechaunist and an a-fairyist because I value scepticism.  Surely you know that by now? 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
No it's not. Intuition covers a wide spectrum, typically taking in "hunch", "a feeling", "instinct", etc. There's nothing "metaphysical" about it; rather, it can be considered hyper-developed sensory information.

You're right but woolly-thinking newagey folk tend to use it as a given, ESP facility outside of the capacity of reason. 

"Michael Staley" wrote:
If it's "metaphysical", then why do you think it's a term that crops up in the quote from the Radical Honesty information you quoted? I'd guess that the R.H. crowd aren't a bunch of occultists, mystics or metaphysicians.

Maybe they are but I'm not and so what?

 

"Michael Staley" wrote:
On the other hand, your much-vaunted "common sense" is a moveable feast, often lagging fifty years or so behind scientific discoveries. For instance, Big Bang theory - that something sprang into existence out of nothing - seems contrary to "common sense"; the alternative - that the universe has always been here - also seems contrary to "common sense". Might be that "common sense" isn't quite the Stone of the Wise that you suppose it to be.

Ho hum, it's a conundrum, as Keith Moon might have said to the bishop.

Big Bang theory and it's antithesis negates common sense?  Well, lol, no, common sense brought us the Big Bang theory and it's antithesis. 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

The other questions I will answer soon, as well as analysing whether RH is more fitting as a beginner Thelemic practice where AC encourages students to explore parts of themselves they would ordinarily avoid.  Since most people lie (apparently 93% of Americans lie habitually and how's that for a Thelemic coincidence? )
http://radicalhonesty.com/about/faq/

well, it would follow that RH is an ideal exercise therefore.....maybe. 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6092
 
"david" wrote:
93% of Americans lie habitually...

How would anyone know that to be true? Intuition? Survey of 100 people (who lie)? How about Chinese, Bolivians and Eskimos? Why are Americans singled out? National bias? Do you realize what a fool you are making of yourself?

That's 7 questions. Take your time 😀


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3620
 
"david" wrote:
"ignant666" wrote:
I think my point about "RH"="narcissism" looks pretty good.
As to these "physical confrontations", I hope, in case you must defend yourself against them, that you have by now recovered the bat that demons stole from you last fall, forcing you to give someone a black eye through (what else?) "black magic".
It is good to learn that your status as a "skeptic" confers immunity against confirmation bias- whew!

I think you're confusing me with someone else.  Did someone say a demon stole their bat?  I'm an a-theist, a-leprechaunist and an a-fairyist because I value scepticism.  Surely you know that by now? 

Ah, how soon they forget (but the Akashic Record aka google allows speedy retrieval from the Memory Hole).

It is interesting to note that your sometimes tumultuous interactions with your work colleagues predate your recent embrace of "radical honesty".

1) As to you, last fall, giving a work colleague a black eye via "black magic" (and an interesting incident of your asserted immunity, as a "skeptic", to confirmation bias):

"david" wrote:
For me though I'd have to ask whether an adult who lives a life of hexing every single person who p1sses them off can lead to any kind of attainment?  I think that is the question.  On an sidenote for entertainment purposes here is a related story.  Last week some guy was annoying me.  I contemplated how I wouldn't mind hexing him so someone gives him a black eye.  I swear, the very next morning he came into work with a full on black eye.  He said it was caused by pulling an object which had jammed in his wardrobe. 

2) As to my hypothesizing that you did this because demons stole your bat (for the record, you never denied that this was so):

"ignant666" wrote:
david: I will promise to stop doing this as soon as "skeptics" stop offering their misreadings of AC's work in these forums.
The idea that his work has much to do with "day to day functionality as a human being" is truly bizarre.
Interesting point about the bat. Aren't you the same guy who recently gave someone a black eye through "black magic"? Did you do so because demons stole your bat?

which was a reply to your

"david" wrote:
[...] If I tell you that I can't find my baseball bat  and it's likely that  "a demon" stole it and scurried away with it to some infernal metaphysical realm then do you just accept that as real because anything goes in the world of forms?  No.  [...]

ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6092
 
"david" wrote:
... anything goes in the world of forms?  No.  [...]

Yes. No is incorrect. Anything (apparently) goes in the world of forums.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"ignant666" wrote:
"david" wrote:
"ignant666" wrote:
I think my point about "RH"="narcissism" looks pretty good.
As to these "physical confrontations", I hope, in case you must defend yourself against them, that you have by now recovered the bat that demons stole from you last fall, forcing you to give someone a black eye through (what else?) "black magic".
It is good to learn that your status as a "skeptic" confers immunity against confirmation bias- whew!

I think you're confusing me with someone else.  Did someone say a demon stole their bat?  I'm an a-theist, a-leprechaunist and an a-fairyist because I value scepticism.  Surely you know that by now? 

Ah, how soon they forget (but the Akashic Record aka google allows speedy retrieval from the Memory Hole).

It is interesting to note that your sometimes tumultuous interactions with your work colleagues predate your recent embrace of "radical honesty".

1) As to you, last fall, giving a work colleague a black eye via "black magic" (and an interesting incident of your asserted immunity, as a "skeptic", to confirmation bias):

"david" wrote:
For me though I'd have to ask whether an adult who lives a life of hexing every single person who p1sses them off can lead to any kind of attainment?  I think that is the question.  On an sidenote for entertainment purposes here is a related story.  Last week some guy was annoying me.  I contemplated how I wouldn't mind hexing him so someone gives him a black eye.  I swear, the very next morning he came into work with a full on black eye.  He said it was caused by pulling an object which had jammed in his wardrobe. 

2) As to my hypothesizing that you did this because demons stole your bat (for the record, you never denied that this was so):

"ignant666" wrote:
david: I will promise to stop doing this as soon as "skeptics" stop offering their misreadings of AC's work in these forums.
The idea that his work has much to do with "day to day functionality as a human being" is truly bizarre.
Interesting point about the bat. Aren't you the same guy who recently gave someone a black eye through "black magic"? Did you do so because demons stole your bat?

which was a reply to your

"david" wrote:
[...] If I tell you that I can't find my baseball bat  and it's likely that  "a demon" stole it and scurried away with it to some infernal metaphysical realm then do you just accept that as real because anything goes in the world of forms?  No.  [...]

Note "on a side note FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES" ie not as proof that ESP exists.

End of the disinformation and your obsession.  End of the matter.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

By the way its interesting how I proposed that RH is similar to Jugorum work in that it involves vigilance but it just seemed to go over everyone's head. How about discussing it?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
93% of Americans lie habitually...

How would anyone know that to be true? Intuition? Survey of 100 people (who lie)? How about Chinese, Bolivians and Eskimos? Why are Americans singled out? National bias? Do you realize what a fool you are making of yourself?

That's 7 questions. Take your time 😀

Well duh, a survey of course hence the website link.

I mean its not rocket science is it? Any idiot knows that everyone lies and covers up what's on their mind.  Look around and look within.


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1843
 

“By the way its interesting how I proposed that RH is similar to Jugorum work in that it involves vigilance but it just seemed to go over everyone's head. How about discussing it?”

no its boring

when the master points at the moon
there is always some one commenting on the manner of the finger
complicating the obvious

know thy self
get on with it


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

"Its boring", a kindergarten mantra if ever there was one.  Children are incapable of proper analysis and a parrot could recite "know thyself" at any post at any thread in this entire forum and kill it instantly.  Lol.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6092
 
"david" wrote:
93%

Any idiot knows that everyone lies ...

93% is not "everyone."


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6092
 
"david" wrote:
... a kindergarten mantra if ever there was one.

Except you become as little children, you shall not enter the Aeon of Horus 😀


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"Tiger" wrote:
when the master points at the moon
there is always some one commenting on the manner of the finger
complicating the obvious

know thy self
get on with it

Hear hear.  I have been trying to make that point myself.  It appears as if david may want some sort of validation for his self, however, and may not give up so easily?  ???

The art of banter is something else which I gave another pointer to and which has been disregarded, which I believe covers the same diplomatic ground, and more, as this vaunted “radical honesty”.  There is an interesting observation on this included in the novel which the film starring Hannibal Lecter, I mean Anthony Hopkins, The Remains of the Day, was based on.  But unfortunately I don’t have it to hand at the moment.  But it is an incontrovertible fact that (s)he who can truly master the art of social banter will go far in the material world.

"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
93% of Americans lie habitually...

How would anyone know that to be true? Intuition? Survey of 100 people (who lie)? How about Chinese, Bolivians and Eskimos? Why are Americans singled out? National bias? Do you realize what a fool you are making of yourself?

That's 7 questions. Take your time 😀

Shiva, that could of course be nine questions if one counts Chinese, Bolivians and Eskimos as separate.  (But I am nitpicking again, I fear.  Stoppit, jamie!)

"Tiger" wrote:
“By the way its interesting how I proposed that RH is similar to Jugorum work in that it involves vigilance but it just seemed to go over everyone's head. How about discussing it?”

no its boring

"david" wrote:
"Its boring", a kindergarten mantra if ever there was one.

Our esteemed webmaster himself apparently showed prescience of this tendency of david's in his locking of the “Thelemic Practice” thread:

Reply #827 by Lashtal on: May 22, 2015, 0643 pm:

You're boring me now.
Locked

david starts off with something but then chokes it with platitudes or worries it to death so that in the end it becomes boring, no matter if there was some intrinsic worth in the discussion to begin with or not.  It doesn’t help either that he doesn’t seem to know how to answer posters’ enquiries or points satisfactorily, or that he personally unilaterally declares if something is to be “the end of the matter” - which can also be a nuisance especially if you’re going to come across at the same time ass a bit of a superior know-it-all.

Maybe his tag partner could help him out and come to the rescue here? (e.g., another “I think what david is trying to say here is…”) Or does he not have a clue?

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
93%

Any idiot knows that everyone lies ...

93% is not "everyone."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nitpicker


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
"Tiger" wrote:
“By the way its interesting how I proposed that RH is similar to Jugorum work in that it involves vigilance but it just seemed to go over everyone's head. How about discussing it?”

no its boring

"david" wrote:
"Its boring", a kindergarten mantra if ever there was one.

Our esteemed webmaster himself apparently showed prescience of this tendency of david's in his locking of the “Thelemic Practice” thread:

Reply #827 by Lashtal on: May 22, 2015, 0643 pm:

You're boring me now.
Locked

david starts off with something but then chokes it with platitudes or worries it to death so that in the end it becomes boring, no matter if there was some intrinsic worth in the discussion to begin with or not.  It doesn’t help either that he doesn’t seem to know how to answer posters’ enquiries or points satisfactorily, or that he personally unilaterally declares if something is to be “the end of the matter” - which can also be a nuisance especially if you’re going to come across at the same time ass a bit of a superior know-it-all.

Maybe his tag partner could help him out and come to the rescue here? (e.g., another “I think what david is trying to say here is…”) Or does he not have a clue?

N Joy

"It's boring" is a negative comment and is a strategy to avoid analysis.  It's lazy. 

As for me wanting to end the matter of Ignant666's disinformation.  If you think I was lying then please point out where and why.   

This is what I think.  Here I go the heart of Thelemic practice i.e. Jugorum, and I point out that it is essentially the same as R.H. in terms of vigilance and discipline and True Will.  Then, your conditioned mind dismisses this truth because you literally don't seem to be able face up to it?  Is this the emotional plague in action?  Ganging up on the truth-teller? 

Prove me wrong.  RH and Jugorum, dare to compare and contrast.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6092
 

All right 😀  Don't say anything rational and just keep on with those links to obscure websites.

Anyway, now you've ticked me off and I'll not be interacting with you again for a long while ... if ever. I hereby relegate you to non-entity status and will only refer to you as "Oh, him!" Which is similar to "Ho hum," a sigil of boredom.

[/align:hbjgpazm]


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Shiva" wrote:

All right 😀  Don't say anything rational and just keep on with those links to obscure websites.

Anyway, now you've ticked me off and I'll not be interacting with you again for a long while ... if ever. I hereby relegate you to non-entity status and will only refer to you as "Oh, him!" Which is similar to "Ho hum," a sigil of boredom.

[/align:2qu3cc3y]

Obscure website?  What?

It's a link for the online dictionary definition of the word "nitpicker" not a 25 minute irrelevant youtube video. 

Consciousness is not achieved without pain.  Do you want consciousness?

Boredom?  Enjoy your boredom.  If you ever do want to eliminate boredom from your life then try telling the truth more.  Remember the thread?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Tao" wrote:
Well, that tells us something about how this experiment is affecting your psyche (you believe that what you said stepped so far over someone's line that you were likely to get hit) but still nothing about what's actually happening out there in the world.

Well this person has had a mild physical confrontation with me before in the past.  I apologise that I forgot to present this important fact.  Anyway, as I was saying, after my R.H. comment the other day,  I was subsequently snubbed in a hostile manner, by him.  He started to brood.  These are signs of possible, and I want to stress, possible behavioural traits of someone who could get confrontational, particularly as we were both possibly going to leave the room together alone and at the same time.  Anyway all you need to know is that I pissed him off with a radically honest observation.  Pure and simple. 

"Tao" wrote:
Such as? How many? What makes them uncharacteristic?

Insults e.g. are you a slow worker?  This from a girl who has not said anything like this to anyone since she's been working with us.  Someone else commented on an old photo when I had "more hair."  Again this from someone I have never known to make such a personal, traditionally "rude" comment. It's a lot of fun.
 

"Tao" wrote:
If they had actually picked up the RH virus, as you put it, they would be speaking the truths of their mind to everybody. Is this what's happening? Or is this just their current mode of interaction with you in particular?

I don't know I only know what they do when they're in my company. 
 

"Tao" wrote:
Might these not just be cases of retaliation against an aggressor rather than some sort of catalysed outbreak of Radical Honesty in the workplace?

Is there a difference?  Good question.  Well that's a tricky one because R.H. is wrongly seen as hostility (i.e. me being perceived as, as you say "an aggressor") but that's a shallow surface-level view. 

Remember R.H. will bring trouble into your life, for those with the balls to handle that truth.  Is it worth it then?  Well, lies and covering up also bring trouble.  You have to weigh up (like you're using the scales of Maat) whether you want healing trouble or BS fear, boredom, no fun and stagnancy trouble.

R.H. brings the former but it also brings fun....a lot of fun.  I'll repeat that point, you are going to get trouble and danger whatever you do.  Fact.

Thou shalt have danger & trouble  Cp3. 11


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3620
 

How far do you intend to ride this particular clown-car, david?

You do realize that this thread consists entirely of your (perhaps unintentional) self-revelations as you pursue the latest shiny object you have found on the internet, and people making fun of these, and also ridiculing your attempts to tie all this to the topic of this site (and, of course, your sloppy writing, and sloppier reasoning)? Even your goo-roo could barely muster a partial defense of the relevance of this topic.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"ignant666" wrote:
How far do you intend to ride this particular clown-car, david?

You do realize that this thread consists entirely of your (perhaps unintentional) self-revelations as you pursue the latest shiny object you have found on the internet, and people making fun of these, and also ridiculing your attempts to tie all this to the topic of this site (and, of course, your sloppy writing, and sloppier reasoning)? Even your goo-roo could barely muster a partial defense of the relevance of this topic.

goo-roo; G-U-R-U ; gee you are you!! By the way do you know what "emotional plague" is?  Los actually pointed out that AC wrote  a letter to his son,  advising him never to lie as this is indicative of fear.  A good and relevant point so the OT is relevant to Crowley after all wouldn't you say? 

"Sloppy reasoning? How about disputing where my reasoning is "sloppy" as oppose to just trolling me.  Are you a generally open person when your not posting on this forum?

Jugorum and R.H.  Could you discuss the similarities?  No? 

If you can't compare and contrast them then I guess, tragically, that you can only throw petty little insults as you distort truth. 

Clown?  I prefer moron.  Only a moron would be vigilant of his tendency to lie, right?


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 547
 

I'll be honest, radically honest... I'm sceptical!


ReplyQuote
Tao
 Tao
(@tao)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 316
 
"david" wrote:
Anyway, as I was saying, after my R.H. comment the other day,  I was subsequently snubbed in a hostile manner, by him.  He started to brood.  These are signs of possible, and I want to stress, possible behavioural traits of someone who could get confrontational, particularly as we were both possibly going to leave the room together alone and at the same time.

These are also possible traits of someone who could break down in tears. Or who is suffering indigestion. Or who noticed a bit of a pong coming off the nit he was stuck in a room with. Once again, you are interpreting the responses of others. Interpretation during experimentation introduces bias, pure and simple.

Anyway all you need to know is that I pissed him off with a radically honest observation.  Pure and simple.

1) I don't really need to know any of this. I'm attempting to help you improve your experimentation and data collecting techniques so that this little hobby-horse of yours might eventually take you somewhere.
2) I don't know that you pissed him off. I know your projection of what he was thinking and your assumption of what was likely to happen next... but apparently never did.

Insults e.g. are you a slow worker?  This from a girl who has not said anything like this to anyone since she's been working with us.  Someone else commented on an old photo when I had "more hair."  Again this from someone I have never known to make such a personal, traditionally "rude" comment. It's a lot of fun.

Better. I would surmise that this glee you're deriving from the experiment is what is interfering with your data collection and motivating all of the early analysis as to its efficacy... but at least you're recording it. That's good.
 

I don't know I only know what they do when they're in my company. 

Best not to put the cart before the horse, then. So, to amend your record:
- The "girl" above has not previously said anything to you that you've perceived to be an insult since she began at the company.
- People are starting to interact with you in ways which you perceive to be different than they have in the past.
- None of this has yet been confirmed by direct or by third-party polling of subjects.
 

"Tao" wrote:
Might these not just be cases of retaliation against an aggressor rather than some sort of catalysed outbreak of Radical Honesty in the workplace?

Is there a difference?  Good question.  Well that's a tricky one because R.H. is wrongly seen as hostility (i.e. me being perceived as, as you say "an aggressor") but that's a shallow surface-level view. 

Remember R.H. will bring trouble into your life, for those with the balls to handle that truth.  Is it worth it then?  Well, lies and covering up also bring trouble.  You have to weigh up (like you're using the scales of Maat) whether you want healing trouble or BS fear, boredom, no fun and stagnancy trouble.

R.H. brings the former but it also brings fun....a lot of fun.  I'll repeat that point, you are going to get trouble and danger whatever you do.  Fact.

Well that was short-lived. We've gone from initial discovery to full-on evangelism in little over a week. Call off the experimentation, there's no more need. The instrumentation is corrupted. Data is untrustworthy.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

"Little" hobby-horse?  No, BIG hobby-horse.

"Tao" wrote:
These are also possible traits of someone who could break down in tears. Or who is suffering indigestion. Or who noticed a bit of a pong coming off the nit he was stuck in a room with. Once again, you are interpreting the responses of others. Interpretation during experimentation introduces bias, pure and simple.

He told me that I had gone too far...... words to that effect.  I've known him for years and I know when he's pissed off. 

"Tao" wrote:
1) I don't really need to know any of this. I'm attempting to help you improve your experimentation and data collecting techniques so that this little hobby-horse of yours might eventually take you somewhere.
2) I don't know that you pissed him off. I know your projection of what he was thinking and your assumption of what was likely to happen next... but apparently never did.
.

Yeah maybe it wouldn't have gotten to a physical confrontation stage.  However you're obsessing...needlessly.  Read my lips : I know when I have pissed someone off that I have known for years.

Wow.

"Tao" wrote:
Best not to put the cart before the horse, then. So, to amend your record:
- The "girl" above has not previously said anything to you that you've perceived to be an insult since she began at the company.
- People are starting to interact with you in ways which you perceive to be different than they have in the past.
- None of this has yet been confirmed by direct or by third-party polling of subjects.
 

You're right I need to employ a personal social-scientist to follow me around all day and interview everyone I interact with.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

You're right.  It's too early to evangelize. 


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

I exaggerated by saying it may've turned into a fight.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3620
 
"Hamal" wrote:
I'll be honest, radically honest... I'm sceptical!

Quite a few are, it seems, as to the validity of subjective evaluations of the effects of one's own behavior.

You do realize, david, that your experience has no explanatory power?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"ignant666" wrote:
"Hamal" wrote:
I'll be honest, radically honest... I'm sceptical!

Quite a few are, it seems, as to the validity of subjective evaluations of the effects of one's own behavior.

You do realize, david, that your experience has no explanatory power?

Haha you actually missed the point of that 35 page thread.  Experience first then use reason to weigh up the evidence.  That's what I was doing.

You , Barter and Shiva still avoiding explaining the similarities in Jugorum and R.H. I see. 

Interesting how children are natural R.H. until society gets hold of them.  The moralisms and should/because statements; the beginnings of fear;

46. Dost thou fail? Art thou sorry? Is fear in thine heart?

47. Where I am these are not.

In other words (as the OP states) radical honesty is a stripping away of the layers of social programming.  This could easily be a description of Crowley's advice on how to achieve True Will; 

From Little Essays (1938)

What is my True Will?' ... until we become innocent, we are certain to try to judge our Will by some Canon of what seems `right' or `wrong'; in other words, we are apt to criticise our Will from the outside, whereas True Will should spring, a fountain of Light, from within

From Liber Aleph:

Give Ear, give Ear attentively; the Will is not lost; though it be buried beneath a life-old midden of Repressions, for it persisteth vital within thee (is it not the true Motion of thine inmost Being?)

From Magick Without Tears (written 1940s, published 1954):

As you travel inward, you become able to perceive all the layers (of social programming) which surround the `Self' from within

Crowley wrote:
You, being a man, are therefore a star. The soul of a star is what we call genius. You are a genius. This fact is obscured by moral complexes which enmesh it, or lack of adequate machinery to express it in terms of action.

It's true that TW should override truth-telling as Blanton says e.g.  if the SS knock on the door and ask if any jews are in the house you don't say, "Yeah sure there's  a little girl upstairs her name is Frank, Anne Frank to be specific" but it generally ties in with Thelemic practice as part of R.H. is also developing attention skills; noticing one's body , emotional state and thoughts.  Thelemic practice is overwhelmingly introspective and introverted; LRBP, GRP, Star Ruby, ceremonies, pretending one is talking to entities, invocation, meditation, divination, Resh so on.  One goes away into a little hiding place to practice them in the privacy of one's isolation.    But human beings are overwhelmingly social creatures whether they like it or not and you can't remain in a numbing trance all the time.    The only one that is social-centric, moreso is Jugorum in which, unless one is  a hermit,  speech, action and thought has to be curbed in response to social cues.  Vigilance is paramount here and this is where R.H. converges with that Thelemic practice but it's a permanent vigilance act as oppose to e.g. some sort of 2 week trial of refusing to say "the" when you have to talk to someone.

 
Living home on monkey island, baby
Right in the middle of a zoo
Living home on monkey island, baby
Pretend to be a monkey too

Well, here I am on monkey island
Hiding behind a rock
I'm all dressed up with my monkey suit
Pretending to be something I'm not

Living home on monkey island, baby
Right in the middle of a zoo
Living home on monkey island, baby
Pretend to be a monkey too

Well there's one thing about these monkeys, baby
They don't know I'm around
But that's pretty good 'cause if they knew
They'll probably come and put me down

Living home on monkey island, baby
Right in the middle of a zoo
Living home on monkey island, baby
Pretend to be a monkey too

With my paisley tie and my one button suit
I'm about as close as I can get
I guess I must be doing okay
'Cause they haven't come and got me yet

Living home on monkey island, baby
Right in the middle of a zoo
Living home on monkey island, baby
Pretend to be a monkey too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyzk2byktGg

wow


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4170
 
"david" wrote:
You , Barter and Shiva still avoiding explaining the similarities in Jugorum and R.H. I see.

They're not avoiding it. They're just not interested; perhaps they don't see any similarities.

In all my years on LAShTAL I've never known such a stupid thread as this, nor posts so vapid as yours. Come back, Carrot_Childe - all is forgiven.

"david" wrote:
They'll probably come and put me down

Is there any way to speed up the process? Please?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"david" wrote:
You , Barter and Shiva still avoiding explaining the similarities in Jugorum and R.H. I see.

They're not avoiding it. They're just not interested; perhaps they don't see any similarities.

You can read their minds now?

It looks like they know it would expose their faulty reasoning, hence the avoidance and now you provide them with a convenient shield of "not interested....bored".  Y'know you've been told about this negative tendency you have before.  A tendency to not contribute to a discussion but to just make snipey comments and then scurry off.

"Michael Staley" wrote:
In all my years on LAShTAL I've never known such a stupid thread as this,

Really? 

It's your layers of social programming talking.  If you have to talk yourself into believing in the existence of preater- human intelligences with no evidence  then RH is, naturally, not going to appeal to you.  I understand that. 

Stupid thread?  RH was "started" by a Dr.  What do you have a doctorate in?

vapid: offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging; bland.  Maybe it's not getting past your armour.  The signal is there but you can't process it.


ReplyQuote
belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1092
 
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
"this one goes to Eleven"

Remarkable prophetic accuracy, William.

Well, I hoped this would push it over to Eleven, but it seems we have a post or two to go.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3620
 

Thank gods we have the doughty david to strip away the layers of our social programming, the only possible reason one would find david's fantasies (what some like to call "fancy pictures") about himself, and how others see him to be dull, vapid, inane, and utterly lacking any connection to the life, work, and legacy of AC.

A mere collective 160 years (at a conservative estimate) of study of AC's work among only four of us who have posted to call out the unusual imbecility of this topic and how david has pursued it (Shiva, Jamie Barter, Michael Staley and me) must of course bow to david's conclusory fiat that "RH" is "Thelemic", and also to his "reasoning" that post hoc, ergo propter hoc is a good interpretation of the "evidence" (david's subjective perceptions of how other perceive him differently after a couple days of "RH") he has offered.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"ignant666" wrote:
Thank gods

Chapter 1;

11. These are fools that men adore; both their Gods & their men are fools.

21. With the God & the Adorer I am nothing: they do not see me. They are as upon the earth; I am Heaven, and there is no other God than me, and my lord Hadit.

....but anyway...........

"ignant666" wrote:
we have the doughty david to strip away the layers of our social programming, the only possible reason one would find david's fantasies (what some like to call "fancy pictures") about himself, and how others see him to be dull, vapid, inane, and utterly lacking any connection to the life, work, and legacy of AC.

"fancy pictures"?  You can't even face the similarities (or non) between Jugorum and RH even though I've challenged you to do so about 5 times.

"ignant666" wrote:
A mere collective 160 years (at a conservative estimate) of study of AC's work among only four of us who have posted to call out the unusual imbecility of this topic

Amazing isn't it?

There is an "imbecility" and an "innocence" and a "foolishness" to talking direct truth, you're right about that but you miss the point.   


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3620
 
"david" wrote:
Stupid thread?  RH was "started" by a Dr.  What do you have a doctorate in?

Since you ask, and not that it's particularly relevant other than in terms of having some professional training in methodological rigor, my Ph.D. is in criminology.


ReplyQuote
Page 3 / 4
Share: