Recommended Posts

Ah, I found the Branden quote re: evolution. It was in his book Honoring the Self: Self-Esteem and Personal Transformation. (The subtitle alone should be a clue...) Incidentally, quote in full context does touch on Ellen's "woo" accusations, both acknowledging some merit to those ideas while keeping the more far-out claims at arms length. The whole book is peppered throughout with talk of evolution and "transpersonal "change that borders on transhumanism. This book was published in 1983; and since then, he had gone further down the "woo" rabbit hole with his association with Ken Wilber, like in the video in the previous post. It'd be interesting to compare his comments here with the Branden of 20-something years later...

Anyway, the quotes:

“…many transpersonalists exhibit an alarming naivety concerning claims made in the fields of parapsychology and pataphysics. Nonetheless, their basic premise-that the course of evolution has not stopped, but continues in us and through us, and that the upper limits of our developmental possibilities are almost beyond speculation-appears to be borne out by research in the fields of biofeedback, hypnosis, psychedelic drugs, medication, and altered states of consciousness of all kinds. All have supported the belief that we have underestimated our potential for growth, well-being, and evolution. It has certainly never been my own view that once we acquire high self-esteem the process of individuation and development is complete. My point has rather been that the level of development with which I have been concerned cannot be bypassed-that is is the foundation for wherever the next steps of our evolution may take us.”

continues:

“It would take me far beyond the subject matter of this book to discuss what I think is rational or irrational in the transpersonal field. But since I am concerned here with honoring the self, and since many transpersonalists (especially those heavily influenced by Eastern religions) have launched what amounts to an attack on the ego and the self, I feel the need to say something about those attacks and their psychological and philosophical meaning.”

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The single greatest advance in medicine was the germ theory of disease. It's precursor was smallpox vaccination. There is no handling flu with vaccine, just the pretense, but the pretense is a ho

The pandemics in 1957 and then again in 1968 killed roughly 100k Americans each, they were influenza viruses , I don't know of any societal wide reactions that match this one. Did we flatten a curve ?

William, To add to my post above, I find your contempt for people like Mike Lindell and admiration for the elitist globalists a serious problem of blank-out. You're like a turkey on a farm a

Posted Images

(Here are some additional quotes for a synopsis of Branden's ideas on evolution and transhumanism throughout the book...I can imagine some of these carrying over into the ideas of the genetic transhumanists, while probably contrasting with them on his promotion of self and ego...indeed, one quote, while not meant to, addresses their fundamental differences, namely, transpersonal growth as a autonomous decision, vs. a transhumanism coerced upon humanity by a self-appointed elite.)
 

“In a world in which selflessness in commonly regarded as a synonym of virtue and selfishness ia synonym of evil-and in which the presumed goal of spiritual evolution is transcendence- book entitled Honoring the Self may sound strange, even a bit disorienting.”

[This is the quote that, to me, defines the differences between a self-imposed transhumanism vs. one by a coercive technocracy:] “Clearly the self includes more than that of which we are consciously aware, and we are influenced in any number of ways by factors operating beneath explicit awareness. This is one of the reasons why our free will is not unlimited. Nonetheless, our psychological freedom is a powerful force within our psyche. If conscious intentions and goals counted for nothing, we would all be existentially and intellectually impotent. Admittedly, our freedom exists within the limits. Admittedly, we can be under the sway of forces we do not recognize or understand. But in the possibility of self-awareness and self-monitoring its the possibility of change and evolution and some reasonable measure of control over our existence.”

“I conclude this discussion by addressing myself to the spiritual, or transpersonal, perspective; examining the view that holds self-transcendence to be the ultimate goal of human evolution. Should we strive to go ‘beyond ego”? Is the self merely a scaffolding to be discarded at a higher stage of our development? Is the disappearance of the self the final triumph of maturity?”

“The truth is, human beings cannot successfully regress to a lower level of evolution; we cannot draw back to a time before thinking in principles and long-range planning were possible. WE are conceptual beings…”

“Without this most primitive of level of self-value and self-acceptance, no further evolution is possible to us.”

“Nonetheless, the central goal of the maturational process is the evolution towards autonomy. This is the essence of the separation-individuation process.”

“We can think of major stages of development, as self evolves, as a series of matrix shifts, a series of deaths and births…so that the maturational, intellectual, and psychological attainments at a given stage of development provide the energy, the thrusting power, for evolution to the next stage. We use the attainments to transcend them.”

“Moral development is a separate track in an individual’s evolution.”

“In this final chapter, I address myself to the notion that the disappearance of ego is a hallmark of the higher stages of human development and that self-transcendence is the ultimate goal of of our psychological and spiritual evolution….Transpersonal psychologists insist, and I would hardly disagree, that what is commonly regarded as normal, everyday consciousness is sub-optimal. “

Link to post
Share on other sites

China knows how to play the guilt game, camps(reservations?) etc. Its hard to argue how the US, in this instance at least, can take the moral high ground. Biden doesn't attempt it. Meaning no us vs them. And boom goes the dynamite. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well , but.. smallpox and no US in 1492.

Not sure but I think Han Chinese are one of , if the, 'most' racist 'groups' there is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just catching up... (I had one of my injection-in-the-left-eye days yesterday, and I'm still feeling tired.  For some reason the dose hit me harder than usual.)

First, a HUH? re the synopsis of Ken Wilber's interview of Nathaniel:

11 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

Synopsis:

"Nathaniel Branden, Ayn Rand’s former lover and the inspiration for her famous John Galt character

The hell NB was "the inspiration" for John Galt!  Rand had the entirety of Atlas plotted out and she was working on the writing when Nathaniel entered her life.  Did NB ok that statement?

Seems to me I was corresponding with NB at the time of the interview.  I know we talked a fair amount about the pluses and minuses he saw in Wilber's views. He liked Wilber personally quite a lot.  I think that I'd like him, too.  He seems to me very sincere, and a positive influence.  I'm not at all unsympathetic to the New Age thing - but intellectually, I have to see the woo.

Ellen

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

Haven't found the quote I'm looking for yet, but this is from an essay on his website, "Self-Esteem in the Information Age":

"Recent and emerging technological and economic realities may be driving our evolution as a species, commanding us to rise to a higher level than our ancestors. If this premise is correct, it is the most important development of the twentieth century – and in its ramifications the least appreciated. It has profound implications for the organization of the future and the values that will have to be dominant in corporate culture – values that serve and celebrate autonomy, innovativeness, self-responsibility, self-esteem (in contrast to such traditional values as obedience, conformity, and respect for authority)."

Not at all clear how "recent and emerging technological and economic realities" would manage to drive evolution.  Evolution is a theory of descent - biological descent - with modification.  Lots of details needed re particulars of the modifying - and just how genome lines might be isolated so as to compete.  Details are notoriously left out in statements such as Nathaniel's.

Also, re values that have become "dominant in corporate culture" - not what he was predicting.

Ellen

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

Synopsis:

"Nathaniel Branden, Ayn Rand’s former lover and the inspiration for her famous John Galt character

Ya know...I posted that earlier in the a.m., and was so focused on the other part (and had only copy-and-pasted the synopsis, that I didn't even notice that...wow!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

Not at all clear how "recent and emerging technological and economic realities" would manage to drive evolution.  Evolution is a theory of descent - biological descent - with modification.  Lots of details needed re particulars of the modifying - and just how genome lines might be isolated so as to compete.  Details are notoriously left out in statements such as Nathaniel's.

Also, re values that have become "dominant in corporate culture" - not what he was predicting.

Ellen

That reminds me of something else, that evolution (so I'm told) doesn't happen on the individual level, but on the species level, and that a change in an individual would be a mutation. That makes me wonder how transhumanists would potentially try to effect evolution by doing things to individuals with "vaccines" that are based on altering the dna of a virus, like the current Johnson and Johnson vaccine. And then, if indviduals don't evolve, but mutute, wouldn't the vaccinated people have to be able to procreate in order for the vaccines to be driving the evolution? (I bring that up because of claims that the vaccines are meant to sterilize, that Bill Gates was sterlizing people in Africa via sterilizations, etc...the darker implication here being that evolution is being "driven" by a process of elimination...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2021 at 1:04 PM, ThatGuy said:

And yet, as she told Nathaniel Branden, in regards to sex (and to his surprise), "the animal is not unimportant."
***************
So it would be interesting to see how Nathaniel Branden, for his part, had made statements such as "evolution is still happening to us and through us."

Rand supposedly said "The physical [not "animal"] is not unimportant."

And if Nathaniel said that about evolution I have no idea how he could have known it. Who does?

--Brant

NB could talk up a storm and liked to tell about what once left him tongue tied: He had just given a lecture about sex and romantic love and found himself in an elevator with a spinster type woman member of the audience who thanked him for the talk but told him that personally she preferred the music of ____________ to sex

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

"Nathaniel Branden, Ayn Rand’s former lover and the inspiration for her famous John Galt character ...."

Nathaniel couldn't have been the inspiration for John Galt as Rand started writing the novel five or six years before they met and because Galt was more a type than character. He was mostly an abstraction.

--Brant

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

"Atlas Evolved"...I haven't listened to it yet...

TG,

You should listen to it. I have twice and it's very interesting. btw - The video (basically an audio in video form) you posted is only the first of 4. If you want to hear the whole thing, I have it and can loan it to you if you don't want to buy it. Shoot me a line. (That goes for others here on OL.)

I like Ken Wilber a lot, but I haven't read or watched much of his more recent stuff, meaning his stuff from the last few years. I like the framework of Spiral Dynamics, his quadrant, holons, his erudition, and so on.

I hold that the mind developed over evolution, which is why it is modular. When one module is more active, it serves as the frame for the functions of the other modules. This view works well with Wilber's models. The AQAL quadrant especially allows for this and allows one to get great value from great works by great minds without dismissing any of them due to ideology. For that alone, I respect Wilber as an intellectual--a lot.

As to his transpersonal ideas, I doubt if he is into transhumanism engineered by drugs, nanoparticles, genetic engineering, uploading the brain to the cloud, etc. Certainly not eugenics-like culling of the human race or sterilizing suboptimal specimens.

I understand his view of transpersonal as people having greater personal awareness from mystical-like training and experiences (added to everything done by the rest of their minds, including reason), until their identity merges with a higher plane of existence.

The following is my opinion, but I believe it is right. In my understanding, Wilber would consider the tinkering by the transhumanists to be misguided, that is, a form of freezing human development at a stage before it has achieved a full-on connection with the One, God, the divine, the totality of existence, or whatever word one wants to put on it. 

Michael

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

The hell NB was "the inspiration" for John Galt!

Ellen,

That had to be Wilber's marketing people. I don't recall NB ever saying that.

5 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

I'm not at all unsympathetic to the New Age thing - but intellectually, I have to see the woo.

In the full interview, the woo was mostly during the discussion of Devers. NB claimed he witnessed some of her psychic abilities both during his intensives and in other places. He liked to show her off for shock value. She stopped when another psychic castigated her harshly at first contact, without knowing her or speaking to her first, for using her "powers" for ignoble ends.

I talked to Devers in a long telephone call (only one) shortly after I went to the memorial event for Barbara that TAS did in Los Angeles. I missed Devers at the event, but I was able to get her telephone number.

I cold-called her a month or two after I got back. She is a sweet lady. She confirmed to me the story about stopping due to being called out. Actually, I didn't prod her except to say I was interested in her psychic side and I was nonjudgmental. On the contrary, I was curious. (btw - I still am this way due to some personal experiences I have had.) I did not ask her for a demonstration, just for whatever she wanted to tell me. And off she went.

If she truly does have psychic abilities, I must have passed the test because we talked and talked and talked that day. When we signed off, she said I took up her pool time. :) 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Woo? The Amazing Randi lived to be 92! He was a good man.

James Randi https://web.randi.org

James Randi (born Randall James Hamilton Zwinge; August 7, 1928 – October 20, 2020) was a Canadian-American stage magician and scientific skeptic who extensively challenged paranormal and pseudoscientific claims. He was the co-founder of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI), and founder of the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF). Randi began his career as a magician under the stage name The Amazing Randi and later chose to devote most of his time to investigating paranormal, occult, and supernatural claims, which he collectively called "woo-woo". Randi retired from practicing magic at age 60, and from his foundation at 87.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Brazil is very multi-racial as Michael can attest to knowing first hand. What works here may not work there, etc. I have this "reasonable' feeling that the virus was a test case. More is to come. But if China can only kill off X amount of humans what have they gained? They have avoided a nuclear war to achieve the same effect.         

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Meh...

Brazil also has a very Trump-like President Bolsonaro, which the establishment ruling class is going nuts trying to get rid of.

The fake news treats him like they treated President Trump. 

Look at a comparison. 

The US has a population of a little over 328 million. According to the Worldometer (which I believe is grossly inaccurate, but whatever), there have been about 545 thousand deaths from COVID-19.

Brazil has a population of almost 214 million (about two-thirds of the US) and according to the Worldometer, there have been about 275 thousand deaths from COVID-19.

In my world, 275 doesn't come anywhere near two-thirds of 545. Instead it is about half, meaning that Brazil has a substantially lower COVID-19 death rate compared to the population than the US. But, hey. I use the math I learned when I was young. I don't use woke math. :evil: 

Besides, all stats dealing with COVID-19 are as bogus as all hell.

Now look at the framing of Brazil's "crisis" in the fake news articles.

Draw your own conclusions.

Here is mine. If Boslonaro somehow falls, look again and you will see an immediate miracle of recovery in the fake news media.

Fake news is fake.

A is A.

:) 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The US has a population of a little over 328 million. According to the Worldometer (which I believe is grossly inaccurate, but whatever), there have been about 545 thousand deaths from COVID-19.

Brazil has a population of almost 214 million (about two-thirds of the US) and according to the Worldometer, there have been about 275 thousand deaths from COVID-19.

In my world, 275 doesn't come anywhere near two-thirds of 545. Instead it is about half, meaning that Brazil has a substantially lower COVID-19 death rate compared to the population than the US. But, hey. I use the math I learned when I was young. I don't use woke math.

Regarding the accuracy of the case and death figures given by Worldometers:

Worldometers report what the official figures for any given country report.  The Worldometers people aren’t able to do testing themselves to verify or disconfirm the accuracy of officially reported figures.

Different countries vary a lot in how rigorous and accurate they are in testing and reporting.  Political factors play a big role.  (For instance, does the government of the country want to look like containment efforts are being successful or like the virus is raging at constant-crisis level?)

The US and Brazil are especially suspect in their figures - suspect in the direction of grossly inflated figures, especially for deaths.

To compare the (reported) death rates of the US and Brazil, you need to compare percentage of deaths per number of cases.

According to the figures reported by Worldometers as of March 13, 21:00 gmt:

For the US:

90,367 cases per million population;

1,644 deaths per million population

This gives a 1.819% death rate.

 

For Brazil:

53,220 cases per million population;

1,289 deaths per million population.

This gives a 2.422% death rate.

Ellen

PS: I haven’t looked at the article you link to, just commenting on Worldometers' figures as given.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

According to the figures reported by Worldometers as of March 13, 21:00 gmt:

For the US:

90,367 cases per million population;

1,644 deaths per million population

This gives a 1.819% death rate.

 

For Brazil:

53,220 cases per million population;

1,289 deaths per million population.

This gives a 2.422% death rate.

Ellen

PS: I haven’t looked at the article you link to, just commenting on Worldometers' figures as given.

 

Ellen, something looks very wrong. Are you sure those decimal points aren't off to the right by one place? E.g. 1289 deaths divided into one million gets me about 775.

Iow, a one-in-775 chance of death by Covid in Brazil. And 606:1 in the US. Which are fractions of 1 per cent.

You are right on inflation of numbers, at least here in SA. The "National Crisis" has been milked for the ruling Party's power and politicians personal gain.

Edit> Ah, I think I get it, the death rate you calculated by dividing into the cases, when it is normally calculated:  deaths "per million population" - not by case numbers. Deaths, by cases, is something else and will be much higher. One can't die of it if one hasn't caught it, simply.

And bearing in mind that 1.819% is weighted heavily towards those with comorbidities and of old age, any weakened immune systems. They - foremost - should have been protected/self-protect, the world did not have to stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony,

The percentages I gave are percent of (reported) cases which (reportedly) resulted in death.  For instance, if there are 100 cases and 1 of those cases is fatal, that's 1%.

The percentage is the same if you calculate on the basis of total deaths and total cases or on the basis of per-million deaths and per-million cases.  The advantage of having the per-million figures is that they make comparing what's going on in different countries easier since you're using a uniform population size for the comparing.

Ellen

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

To compare the (reported) death rates of the US and Brazil, you need to compare percentage of deaths per number of cases.

Ellen,

It depends on what one wants.

If one wants to see how badly a disease is killing off a population, one has to compare deaths to population, not deaths to cases of infection.

For example, cancer. Deaths from cancer is often cited as a stat compared against the population, not just compared against people who have cancer. 

Why is that not a valid calculation for COVID-19?

It is. And it is used.

For instance, in the Cuomo scandal, they calculate the rise in the number of elderly people who died from COVID-19 in nursing homes as compared to the number of people there, not just according to the number of the elderly in nursing homes with the disease. 

Besides, I don't believe any stats about COVID-19 reported in the press. It's all about politics, not medicine. The term medicine is the wrapper, but the product it wraps is made out of shit.

Michael

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The basic CDC corona virus death data is statistical garbage. Before Chuck Norris goes to bed at night he checks his closet for CDC MSM used data.

--Brant

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2021 at 6:08 PM, william.scherk said:

Have they tried placing sick elderly patients in congregated living facilities? Have they tried giving Bolsonaro an Emmy? I bet that that would work. Have the tried handcuffing and arresting children who are one day older than being excused from wearing masks?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now