Serapis Bey

Bob, I noticed you edited this post, but I was going to say I favor my Hyatt quote because he means "Awe" in its literal definition, not the kind of sentimentality Bradbury enjoys. Notice the prominence of "dread."

see "Hormesis" as well: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormesis

I doubt it re Glenn Beck. I listen to him regularly and he never says anything even remotely similar. Michael heh heh heh heh heh

I wonder how Greg's beliefs are not a Christianized version of The Secret, with Jeebus placed as a cherry on top? More seriously, though: In one sense he is right -- we are all victims of our upbringing, just as our parents were victims of theirs. As any social worker will tell you, ending the cycle of abuse in dysfunctional familes involves a lot of anguish and HARD WORK on the part of the family's latest iteration. Positing "free will" and "autonomy" in the manner of Objectivism usually just results in a change of verbalisms -- rearranging the furniture without changing the actual room, as Greg put it before. "The nature of the beast is quite depressing. For example, the fact that early childhood training affects the organism to the degree it does argues for a very primitive species. Regardless of the cortical processes or "consciousness", early childhood trauma, modeling, beliefs and training stay with most people until they die. This argues for a tribal form of inteligence; early programming remains with the organism almost regardless of cortical feedback." -- Hyatt "The sins of the father are heaped on the son by way of the mother." - Ibid

Bro, do you even lift?

"To be in Awe of Life is the only True Religion" -- C.S. Hyatt

"'Distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful" -- Nietzsche

Stop the tumbrel; I want to get off! --Brant

Progressive: "That's EXACTLY what we're saying!!!" MSK: ???

lol. when isn't it?

Wands, Cups, Swords, Pentacles. Parallel to the astrological elements: Fire, Water, Air, Earth. See for a brief description of each suit from "Psychic Library." I don't know which deck is used for the illustrations. Not the Crowley deck. I love the Crowley deck - see. Ellen Ellen, you might be interested to learn that Timothy Leary considered the Tarot an early and primitive attempt at expressing the reality of DNA and its role as biological information-storage. (Leary also considered himself to be the reincarnation of Crowley, btw). http://www.amazon.com/Game-Life-Future-History-Series/dp/1561840505 Greg probably considers this "satanic demonology" or somesuch. He'd probably be right, too. ;) p.s. Leary started to the lose the plot in his later years, but I found his pre-LSD Harvard work to have value -- his Interpersonal Circumplex, in particular. Just imagine if the early luminaries in the Oist movement had bothered to consider this material, instead of positing and having faith in absolute and effortless autonomy. I wonder if we'd have the same fractures and fissures... Image here.

As a matter of course the synchronicities in the flow of events reveal themselves when you're right where you're supposed to be in relation to that flow. :smile:GregI know, that's what weird meansAfter a while weird becomes normal when you get used to it by following one synchronicity that leads to another. Greg It's true, tmj -- "Everything you fear is waiting with slavering jaws in Chapel Perilous, but if you are armed with the wand of intuition, the cup of sympathy, the sword of reason, and the pentacle of valor, you will find there (the legends say) the Medicine of Metals, the Elixir of Life, the Philosopher's Stone, True Wisdom and Perfect Happiness."

Thou hast just entered Chapel Perilous. (If you enjoy weird coincidences, check out Cosmic Trigger)

Paging Kolker: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqckWXeZoa8

Darrell - the "long history of success" in science does not speak to our moral choices. Science might have a relationship to morality, but that relationship is orthogonal

Fiction by induction and philosophy by deduction? I wonder how Mr. "Identification First, Evaluation Second" (MSK) feels about this?

I remember hearing Peikoff's '76 taped course -- the whole series was an attempt to elucidate Objectivism from "the ground up", block by block, each new step logically derived from the preceding, until finally arriving at Rand's theory of art. However, the very first lecture was titled (iirc), "The Metaphysical Nature of Man", wherein Peikoff waxed eloquent on the "sense of life" of Objectivism, and how it differed from other philosophies. It was quite moving and inspirational. He offered some dubious excuse for why he chose to start the course off in this manner, instead of diving right into Metaphysics. After Objectivism and I grew apart, I recognized the gambit for what it was -- subtle manipulation, what the psychologists call "priming", a technique often used by cult leaders. It allows the listener to hold psycho-emotive images in mind as the rest of "reasons" and "logic" are poured on top. It was only until recently, after studying Nietzsche, that I no longer view what Peikoff did as "manipulation", but rather the reality of how EVERYONE "chooses" their philosophies. For humans, aesthetics comes first. Reverse-engineering their sentiments into """reasons""" comes second. I hold no grudges.

It's also unclear why he feels snakes are "deceitful" and "deceptive" more than any other animal. It's not my feeling, Robert. For thousands of years the snake has been an archetype representing evil... but who knows, in another thousand years the archetype could be the lawyer. Greg OH!! Greg takes a shot! nice one

Greg: Hmmm...

Hey, cut RB some slack. Somebody needs to do the dirty work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugdpjKVH3EQ p.s. asking = pushing?

Ellen is so sexy when she talks physics. I bet she's the kinda gal who gets excited by cutting edge thinking. Time is the Space...between me and you - Seal (<-----now that is True Love)

I agree. Are you suggesting I have used sarcasm excessively?

Self-acceptance is always the first step.

Indeed. But Kacy seems to believe that you are not justified in having such an understanding if your interlocutor tells you differently. According to him, what an individual verbalizes about himself is the final word, and any contradictions or ulterior motives you detect are "arbitrary", and thereby null and void. You have been plainly TOLD what your interlocutor believes, you see. Basic human respect for the other person demands that you cease and desist your line of thinking, otherwise unpleasant consequences will ensue. Snuff that spark of thought in your soul, MICROAGGRESSOR. This is probably due to his being steeped in the atheist/skeptic community, whose zeal for attacking "pseudoscience" and enforcing Right Thinking has grown to the point where having basic human intuition and social sense is an affront against "reason." This strikes me as profoundly regressive and counterproductive. http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Inquisition-Robert-Wilson/dp/1561840025 Look what they did to Rupert Sheldrake (ya feel me, Mike?) I swear, if Objectivism/Skepticism doesn't attract autists, it certainly creates them. Oh shit. Did I just tell Kacy what he is thinking? Forgive me Father for I have sinned...

Jesusporn for immoral secular leftists. Profaning the sacred always excites the degenerate. Greg Would you put "Last Temptation" and Serrano's "Piss Christ" in the same moral category?