Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - crow

1 ... 8 [9] 10 11
Interzone / Value versus Socialization.
« on: March 24, 2013, 04:31:18 PM »
When you consider it, the primary preoccupation of society is the separation, by individuals, of anything of value, from other individuals. This seems to be the basis of anything social.
Maybe I am missing something, but maybe everybody else is, too.
I mean, what is socialization, anyway?

It occurred to me, today, that civilization and socialization are very close to being opposites.
The first is interested in building something out of nothing, via cooperation of the many parts.
While the second is the wild party that follows the work, and uses up the fruits of the previously applied labour.

The more I see of people, the more I understand how socializing is really only an ongoing skirmish to separate others from their stuff. Money, goods, sex, opportunity, indeed anything having any perceived value. And for those who have nothing of any value, the socializing gets pretty thin.

Many people have built, and continue to build, whole value-systems around this idea. While inventing all kinds of explanations as to why they do it. The explanations are typically high-sounding and calculated to portray virtue of one sort, or another. Compassion, love, peace, caring. Sharing, equality, rights...

But when you stand back and examine what is going on, without assuming anything, beforehand, all you really see is what the individual can get out of any given situation, at the expense of another individual or individuals.

Camouflage. Make sure others get something too, so that what the individual gets doesn't look suspicious. Spread it out, so nobody will notice the selfish motivation. But where, oh where, does all the value come from? How much of it is there, to endlessly take from and hand out?

Interzone / Authority.
« on: March 22, 2013, 10:01:57 PM »
Nobody actively likes authority. Even when they understand the need for it.
Because authority is one of those things synonymous with its abuse.
It scares and threatens. What's to like?

Yet authority is like a fence: it keeps stuff in, as well as keeping stuff out.
In itself, it is neither good nor bad. It sets the stage, delineates the ends of things.
No field-game can take place without the field being first established.

I am not a champion of Civilization, because I see the end result of it.
With its inevitable descent into the swamps from which it arose, one has to wonder why even bother in the first place.
But any game lasts as long as it lasts. And while it does, its rules apply.

Crows really do, sometimes, carry big sticks. Native lore has interesting things to say about crows.
Moving outside of time and space. Spanning life and the afterlife. Keepers of The Sacred Law.
The Sacred Law is very simple. It goes something like this:

Respect and Reverence are your birthright. Your only birthright.
Bearing this in mind, you will move with the current of life.
Swim against this flow, and trouble will vie with struggle, all your days.

And you will surely drown.

Interzone / 'Uber-Man': A primer in how to be one.
« on: March 22, 2013, 05:38:18 PM »
Interesting place, this.
Sparsely populated by characters acting as if they are 'Uber-Men'.
I had never heard - or read - that term before my arrival, and so I watched, and read, hoping to discover what it might mean.
I saw the offerings of a few of these self-styled Uber-Men and felt a sense of bewilderment.
Because there really didn't seem to be anything Uber about them.
In fact, the most visible thing was an acting-as-if by those who seemed not to know anything about what they were acting-as.
Not that this is very unusual. I see this all the time. People re-imagining the world as they would have it be, with themselves in the starring role. It is a very common thing, indeed, this game of Boss-Of-The-World. I knew a child, back in the '60s, who played this very game, with me as his guileless minion, because I was a child, too, and it all seemed harmless enough, and rather fun, even if I had no clue what it was really about.

Uber: Above. Better-than. Superior.
Man: What exists after the boy is obsolesced and removed from service.

One might imagine that being an Uber-Man would entail actually being somehow superior to the Unter-Men. As opposed to snotty, immature, egotistical, boorish, and useless. To imagine this seems reasonable. Maybe I have it all wrong, though. Maybe what I assume it means has nothing at all to do with what it actually means.

Or maybe I am the only Man who actually does know what it means. In which case, here are a few pointers in how to become, and be, a Uber-Man...

The big thing is to replace the acting-as-if with actually being the thing.
Uber-Men do not act like Uber-Men. They are Uber-Men.
This is good advice for life in general, and not restricted to simply being Uber.
Wish not to be like The Master. Be The Master.

Anyway, you can't be an Uber-Man before you are even a Man. And so being a Man, as opposed to a fake, is undeniably a good start. And a Man is a stand-alone entity. He does not engage in Mob Mentality. He does not see some innocent being attacked and automatically rush to put the boots in before the moment passes. He tends, instead, to defend the one being attacked, even to his own cost. Because he is a Man.
This selfless and courageously virtuous act elevates the Man from being merely Man, to the status of Uber-Man.
To cite only one simple example of what being a Uber-Man entails.

To sum up:
To be a Uber Man, you must do more than be rude, profane, obnoxious, aggressive and toxic.
You must first discover what it is to be a Man. Having mastered that somewhat time-consuming and difficult feat, you must then set about discovering what it means to be Uber.

Good luck.

Interzone / Humility. What is it?
« on: March 21, 2013, 11:42:33 PM »
It comes to my attention that the notion of humility has morphed from what it is (was), into an attack-term to lay waste to others. Which is interesting. Does anyone even remember what humility was, before this mutation occurred?

Humility comes as standard to anyone who knows that life is not about them.
Which is almost nobody, in modern times.
There is this odd belief among people, and especially among the young, that life should conform to whatever they think it should, at any particular moment. That life should be to their specification.
Written down, like that, it looks absurd, doesn't it? That anyone could actually behave in such a way.
But strangely, that absurdity is invisible to each individual that manifests it.

Why in the world would I care about appearing to be humble, anyway?
No reason occurs. None. Because humility has nothing whatsoever to do with appearances.

Humility is a state, not a circus, in which the one who is humble, is aware that the universe does not revolve around them. No more, no less.
In this rather obvious knowledge, the humble one behaves accordingly. And is humble.
He may be Conan The Barbarian, or he may be Pope Pius. How he appears does not matter.
He may turn the other cheek, or he may be taking no prisoners. Still, this is no indication of his inherent humility.

Humble is an attitude towards life. A stance. A viewpoint.
It is a core component of conservatism.
Without it, one is a monster.

Interzone / What 'thinking' actually is...
« on: March 21, 2013, 06:59:21 PM »
Thinking is taking what is real and replacing it with a token.
This token may be manipulated in any way at all.
It is, in fact, a simulation of reality.
This serves to project what might happen, if...

A useful tool, then, to gaze a short time into the future, to see what is likely to occur.
Or a short time into the past, to determine what went wrong.

It is far more practical, often, to design a house on paper, before physically building it with no idea of what the result will be. Unless, of course, you are so certain of your ability to improvise and problem-solve, that plans become wasteful of time.

The big trick to thinking, and the thing that has been almost universally forgotten, is to reconvert the tokens that comprise thinking, back into reality, after the thinking has taken place.
Remember: thinking is the conversion of reality into easily-manipulated tokens of reality.
To complete the process, it is necessary to re-convert those tokens back into reality.
Or you end up existing in a hypothetical world of tokens which have completely replaced reality.

Interzone / Thinking?
« on: March 10, 2013, 06:36:52 PM »
People think. Although, often, you might think they don't.
Even in this, judgement is the first thought people have.
Is he thinking, or is he incapable of thinking?
What is thinking, anyway?

I find thinking to be a system of comparison.
Compare this, to that, and decide which serves best, for whatever I desire.
And so thinking becomes about desire.
What do I want? How best to achieve it?
Observe, compare, decide.

But what if desire is removed from the process?
What if everything is left as whatever it is, without choosing the one over the other?
Start doing this, and you discover the often overlooked ability to observe.
Observation requires no thought. Because nothing needs to be done. No choice has to be made.
Without any need to make decisions, what use is thinking?

"I think that is crap", perhaps. And judgement creeps back in.
"It is what it is", perhaps. And judgement does not arise.

This is the essence of taoism. Summed up, in as few words as possible, it distils down to: "It is what it is".
And this way of seeing things renders thought redundant.
This is not to say that thought becomes extinct, impossible, or even undesirable.
When the need arises for thought, then thought arises.
But any other time, it does not.

It seems very close to impossible to convey this to those who are unable to see it.
And so, over time, I learn to observe this impossibility, and leave it be.
When something seems to be non-existent, it seems very difficult, to some, to accept it may exist.
Lacking the ability to detect something, however, does not mean that something is not there.

Left-brained individuals, for example, are often unable to entertain the possibility of God.
Because God does not come with an instruction manual, or whatever constitutes proof, to such people.
This, however, does not mean that God does not exist.
It means that the one trying to see it, can not.

Learning to suspend judgement is a good way to start learning to suspend thought.
And when you can do that, the unseen becomes seen.
There may be something to be said for being blind, but being able to see is probably quite useful, too.

Interzone / Theories.
« on: March 08, 2013, 08:59:13 PM »
It has come to my attention that the theoretical has come to replace actual knowledge, in our current age.
I used to wonder why it was that whatever I contributed to whatever forum, would be met with such outrage and resistance. Now I know...

Most forum users appear to be young, and being young, have a rather small store of actual experience.
This, together with wanting to appear to be more accomplished than they actually are, aka ego, causes an intense resentment of anyone claiming to know things via actual experience.

What I notice most, is that people - having no experience of their own - tend to view everything as theoretical.
This manifests very often with the prefix: "I think...", or: "In my opinion..."
And opinions, as we all know, have lately come to mean that mine is as valid as yours, although yours has no validity because it differs from mine.

And so I observe this:
I have no opinion to offer. What use are opinions?
When I offer something, it is because I know it to be true. Through direct experience, and observation.
I offer it for no other reason than to offer it, feeling it to be something not widely known.
I am, in fact, reporting what-is, as opposed to doing what so many others do, whatever that is.

So: while others think only in terms of theory, I do not think at all.
I deal in reality, and report my findings.
And if popularity was at the top of my list of reasons for exposing myself, then I certainly wouldn't be doing it.

Interzone / Mystical Thinking.
« on: March 01, 2013, 06:48:27 PM »
Who can spot the deliberate error in the title?
You may be a mystic, or you may be a thinker, but you may not be both at the same time.
Mysticism being the absence of thought, and thought being the absence of mysticism.
Something is whatever it is, until you run it through your thought-machine, ending up with whatever you think it is.
One may learn to suspend thought, at will, thus attaining the ability to become mystical.
This does not mean one is unable to think.
Only that one now has the choice of whether to think, or not.

Highly recommended: the ability to not-think, when thinking does not serve.

Interzone / Wetiko.
« on: February 08, 2013, 08:14:23 PM »
Who is familiar with the term 'Wetiko'?
What does it mean to you?
Do you think you understand it, or do you understand it?

I confess, I was not familiar with the term until today. But I have been aware of the concept for many years.
You might say I am a Blade Runner, in the sense that I am able to instantly detect a lack of authenticity in humans.
A crow-sense, that enables a crow - who is unable to be anything but authentic - to detect a lack of authenticity in others.
Wetiko is the mind-virus that creates leftists out of former humans. While simultaneously causing such people to see themselves as what they mimic, but can never actually be: authentic, living humans.

Interzone / Could it be..?
« on: January 12, 2013, 05:37:08 AM »
Could it be that leftists are leftists because leftism offers them an opportunity to demand that others behave in a certain way, while allowing them - as accusers - of being under no obligation to behave in such a way themselves?
Could it really be that simple? That shallow? That pathetic?

Interzone / Quantum Consciousness.
« on: October 30, 2012, 07:06:05 PM »

How ironic. Some scientist finally figures out what I have been talking about for twenty-five years.
Which only goes to show: science is useful, if you live in isolation for a quarter century, and have no life.
It reduces the obvious into scientific terms, thus rendering it 'true', or at least 'mainstream'.
Better late than never, though.
This could be a game-changer.

Interzone / Opinions.
« on: October 18, 2012, 07:31:37 PM »
Everybody has them. Until, possibly, they don't.
What are opinions, exactly?
Biases masquerading as preferences, and reactions to the conflicting preferences of others?
A stand-in for actual knowledge?

People often see me as opinionated, being unable to define what I am in any other way.
I submit that the lack of opinion can closely resemble opinion.
How can these two polar opposites be so similar in appearance?
How can they be accurately differentiated?

Interzone / The nature of ego.
« on: October 11, 2012, 04:48:16 PM »
What is ego, anyway?
I'll tell you what it is.
I am an expert on ego.
I used to have one.

Ego is what you pretend you are, when you aren't.
Ego stands in for the substance that is lacking.
Ego makes of you, something you wish you were, but aren't.
Ego prevents you, from ever being what you claim to be.

People often say I am egotistical and arrogant.
What they mean, by that, is that I act 'superior'.
Not realizing that it is not an act.
Because superiority is unknown to them.

It never occurs to the inferior, that they behave as they do, because of their inferiority.
It never occurs to them, either, that what they see in a superior being, is, in fact, superiority.

Superiority means authority. And authority is bad.
Because the one who rebels against authority is immature.
That is why this age of 'equality' will be the death of us all.
Because it cancels out the benefits of superiority.

There are a few who recognize their inferiority.
And seek to leave it behind, as a child outgrows its toys.
But for every one of those, there are a hundred who cling to childhood.

What would you rather be?
Inferior, or superior?
Superiority doesn't appear by claiming it so.
It comes by abandoning inferiority, and putting superiority first.

The real failing of ego, is that when enough people are egotistical, nothing is real any more.
Nothing can be trusted. Nothing is true.
Proofs must be demanded, and the proofs become more important that what they prove.
What are you going to do with proof?

Life isn't about proof.
It is about living.
And proof is nothing, whatever, to do with living.
Neither is ego.

Interzone / What is 'Wisdom', anyway?
« on: September 21, 2012, 12:04:42 AM »
Long before I knew what I was doing, I was pursuing the attainment of wisdom.
Like The Holy Grail, a legendary thing that had obvious, if cryptic value.
Worth finding!

After a lifetime (so far) of questing after this elusive thing, I have come to have a considerable amount of it.
And with it comes a whole new question: what to do with it?

For almost exactly the same amount of time I was on this quest, I suffered (seriously suffered) from the world's worst stutter. And then one day it was completely gone. And with that came the whole new question: what to do with it.

I started hanging out on stuttering forums, trying to share my new success, and knowledge of how to attain it, with (fellow) stutterers. With shocking results...

Very soon I was the target of incredible abuse, and gratuitous attacks. I suffered this for altogether too long a time, before accepting that nobody wanted to hear that their pet disability was curable. And that to offer such assistance was to become no more than a sitting duck, unable to escape the pot-shots taken at it.

What I realized about all of this was that people were not seeing what I was offering for what it was. They seemed to always turn it into what it was not, instead, before even considering what was on offer.
I was there to boast about my success, they said.
To 'look-good' to others.
Motivated by ego, the need to impress, to tell blatant lies, etc.

Outside of speech-forums, in the real world, another problem manifested itself to the newly-fluent me:
I discovered, to my anguish, that although I had always assumed people were generally mean to me, because I stuttered (and sometimes they were), that they were, more often than not, extraordinarily patient while I subjected them to my three-words-per-minute freak-show act.
And now that I could speak, as well, or better than them, they made no bones about not being remotely interested in whatever I had to say.
Well. Get used to it. That is probably the norm for most people, that is so normal, they don't even recognize it. Nobody is really interested in what you have to say, anyway, because they are too busy composing what they are going to say, just as soon as they can cut you off.

And, you know, the exact same thing occurs, among 'intelligent' people, when wisdom is offered.
Wisdom is not something the young know about. It's the one really big lack a young person has, while having a surfeit of other things that their elders no longer have, or only have in limited quantities.
Not that age is any guarantee of wisdom. All too often it is not.
Yet there can be no wisdom without age and experience.
Lots and lots of experience.

And what to do with it?
Well, obviously, it changes one's own life, immeasurably, and by osmosis, everything in the vicinity benefits, whether it, or they, know it, or not.
But something the aged do, as the certainty of extinction looms, ever closer, is to try to pass along what they have learned, discovered, attained or realized. It is as natural as the sun rising in the east.
It seems a colossal waste, to take with one, to one's grave, all that one has learned, through a lifetime of trial and error, bliss and pain. So it must, somehow, be shared...

But the young, again...
Not knowing what wisdom is, cannot recognize it, and so ridicule it, instead.
Imagining that if they do not know something, already, themselves, then it must be horseshit.
And being horseshit, then the sharer of it must be insulted, undermined, abused and driven off.
There was once this guy called Jesus, see...

The young do not know that every great name didn't start out that way.
For every great name, an ordinary person preceded it.
Plato, Socrates, Nietzsche...
All nobodies, until they became somebodies (in the eyes of later generations).

And all their views, without ever having read anything by any of them, I have been able to come to, myself, without help, and without guidance, just as they, themselves did. Or so I hear, from those who have read these people.
So what?
Do you see what I am talking about, here?

The wise have about as much use for 'looking-good' as a pancake does for oil-based paint.
The wise know themselves.
The wise are repositories of things the unwise have no concept of.
Perspectives unimaginable to the unwise.

And so the moronic attacks of lesser beings have no effect upon them, especially when they originate from internet morons who know absolutely nothing about those they attack, and who inevitably end up projecting their own worst faults upon their target-of-the-moment.
Such people - concerned so much with appearances - have no faint idea how incredibly puerile they appear when they behave as they do, or how egotistical their own imagined superiority renders them.

So what is wisdom, anyway?
The ability to know by not-knowing. To go beyond childish things, such as context-less intelligence, and to make use of any and all experiences that come along.
I stopped stuttering when I realized I had absolutely nothing in common with those horrid assholes who stuttered, while turning their disabilities into an all-consuming superiority-complex.
I was nothing like them! But without exposure to them, I might never have known that.

I stopped being unwise when I realized I was nothing like unwise people, and that they had nothing in common with me. That there was absolutely no advantage in trying to be like them, or to impress them, or have them like me. But without exposure to the worst in these people, I might never have known that.

So every shitty thing has its value, along with all those things that are in no way shitty.
It is only a matter of where you stand, in relation to what.
And what you are able to realize that those around you are unable to.

The best way, there is, to look really, really stupid, is to try to look intelligent, when you are not.
Especially when you try to do it at somebody else's expense.

So, where do you stand, concerning the unexpected appearance of what could be wisdom?
Are you open to consider something you maybe don't yet know?
Or compelled to ridicule it, out of hand?

Interzone / Animal/bird relationships.
« on: September 19, 2012, 06:42:06 PM »
Two days ago, I was in the right place, at the right time, to see one of my cats with a bird in its mouth.
I streaked over to it and made clear my displeasure at this.
It was my Song Sparrow! I say mine, because for several years I have been sharing space with this bird, who is in love with a Spotted Towhee, and they hang out together, all the time.
The sparrow was fine, and flew off, coming back to visit me, later that day.

Today, the same cat had my frog in its mouth. This frog has grown from a tiny thing into a very big specimen, over several years, and often lets me touch its head while it sunbathes. Again the cat dropped it, while it lay doggo. Or froggo. And after I took it back to the pond, it leaped off into the middle and dove down.

I have lots of close relationships with lots of creatures and birds. Very close!
Does anybody else have such relationships?
I ask, because I know they are incredibly beneficial to mental health and wellbeing.
A life exclusively centered around human relationships is a bleak life, removed from reality, that can often lead to a warped view of life. Socialism!

1 ... 8 [9] 10 11