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.

Messages - Cramulus

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 794
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Reality Safari: Gurdjieff
« on: June 05, 2018, 08:53:58 pm »
I'm okay with the negative connotations of calling it Sleep because it's the state I want to overcome. I rely on it too much, and that's what keeps me comfortable - and mediocre.

In some ways, the "sleep" I'm trying to escape is a Black Iron Prison - a place where you are not entirely free, boundried by your own choices and tastes. You can never fully escape, but by actively confronting your own internal obstacles and habits (including the ones you like), by resisting your urge to settle into the most comfortable position, you can attain a higher degree of freedom.

Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Reality Safari: Gurdjieff
« on: June 05, 2018, 08:38:11 pm »
Would it be fair to say that "sleeping mind" might be too much of an active (and negatively connotated) verb?

Like, would "reliance on heuristics" work? People don't think beyond the heuristic, don't evaluate if that specific one applies in a certain situation, and essentially don't "think" about it.

I think Sleeping is the right metaphor for the dream state / autopilot we exist in most of the time.

When I have my "ahah!" moments - when I finally see my own ignorance and laziness - when there is an electrical contact between my conscious and unconscious parts - I feel awake.

I've noticed, personally, that the experience of trying to "wake myself up" feels similar to an attempt to make a dream lucid. Like, look around right now---is this a dream? How can you tell? You have to be present, that's the only way to know. If the 'reality check' is mechanical, automatic, it doesn't work.

If the sleep metaphor doesn't play for you, think about it this way - being 'awake' is the opposite of mechanical action. In Illuminatus, Wilson and Shea describe the automatic processes as "the robot" and the self that can overcome the robot as "the human". Sometimes the human can even reprogram the robot, but the robot has to be defeated first.

"Reliance on Heuristics" speaks to a deficiency in the intellectual process. But doesn't describe other parts of the "sleeping" experience - like how I constantly filter out the data I'm receiving from my body (or emotions). It doesn't describe how when I'm emotional, my intellect is pulled into service of that emotion.

I'm reminded of that passage from the Principia Discordia - the Parable of the Bitter Tea.

In Chasing Eris, Brenton interviewed the writer of that passage ... that passage is about how your body / intuition is often way ahead of your mind. The character is brewing this tea, and he suspects that it's going to taste awful, but he's absorbed in the process and brews it anyway. And then he discovers what he already knew - it was a bitter tea. His mind is disconnected into different ribbons, they cannot communicate with each other while he's acting mechanically.

Is it? how so?

Bring and Brag / Re: QGP Arts Megathread - Backgrounds
« on: June 05, 2018, 07:14:05 pm »
love these - have been rotating them through my laptop wallpapers

Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Reality Safari: Gurdjieff
« on: June 05, 2018, 07:11:52 pm »
On the difference between Knowledge and Understanding ----

Knowledge is an accumulation of facts. We acquire knowledge really fluidly. It's stored inside of us in various places, and isn't always accessible. You might forget it - or some knowledge you have might contradict other knowledge, and you might not be aware of that. Sometimes you act in ignorance of knoweldge you actually do possess - that's because it's disconnected, only plugged into your consciousness through association.

Understanding is when the knowledge is integrated into our being. It's now part of the gestalt human and is reflected in everything we do.

To turn knoweldge into understanding, it has to be fired in the crucible of the awake mind. You have to think about it critically, use it, feel it. Gurdjieff says that Understanding isn't just ruled by the intellect, but the emotions too. And the body, to a degree. To understand something, you have to feel what you think, and think what you feel.

Essentially, you take the data from the intellectual processor and feed it into your emotional processor.
And take the data from your emotional processes and examine them using your reason and intellect.

for example -- I was planning a trip, and laying out the sequence of actions I needed to take to be ready. It made a lot of sense! Only on meditation after the fact did I realize how much I was asking of my girlfriend in order to make this schedule work. And she did it without hesitation, to make things easier for me! There is a tenderness and sweetness in her willingness to go along with it. I could shift the plan a bit, take on a little more work, and require less of her. This emotional awareness was not present when I building my plan--to taste the emotional quality of the schedule, I had to reprocess it using my emotions.

I vividly recall a moment when I was writing my college thesis... late at night, as I poured through the data, all the papers I had read suddenly crystalized and I experienced a flash of insight. Disconnected, they were just knowledge. Connected, they were understanding.

We make a lot of mistakes in our lives because we are not used to thinking about what we feel -- and feeling about what we think.

Sometimes I'm in an argument and I am so certain that I'm right... but the reason and emotions are different processors, usually disconnected from each other. For me, my intellect is dominant over my emotions. That means there are often flaws in my reasoning, an emotional callousness or insensitivity that I am blind to. If I could connect these two ribbons, I would live better.

My finding is that it's very hard to connect your reason and emotion in the moment. Easier to do during reflection.

On Small Aims------

I've mentioned these little tasks before. "Being awake" is too big of a goal. You might be able to awaken for a few moments, but then somebody asks what's for dinner and all of the sudden you're in that thought and that thought alone. And when you're in a train of thought, how do you zoom out and lose the myopic focus on it?

It seems to me that the "habitual mind" is asleep. Often when we are thinking about things, making decisions, etc, we are really applying a heuristic somewhat mechanically. We learned a rule about how to behave, or how things work, and so we apply that rule whenever we can. If I miss a train, I already know how it's going to affect my trip home, and what actions I should take to account for it - I don't really need to think about it, it's something I memorized the first time I missed that train. But the mind that first made the decision - it was awake, actively solving problems, processing data.

The Gurdjieff work is not about destroying your habits. We need our habits - without them, you would be paralyzed. You would take forever to get things done. But we all rely on habits too much. We even resist things that steer us away from our habitual responses, because it's more comfortable. The habits become a set of bars in the black iron prison. So we try to disrupt our habits, to inject a little bit of consciousness into them.

The Gurdjieff group gives us "small aims" every week. These are little informal practices that tend to be about disrupting a habit. For example, try holding a fork with your opposite hand. Does that affect your awareness of the meal? Do you eat differently? Do you taste the food more? Try it for a week and see.

We call it a "shock"--something that jars you out of your routine. A gap through which consciousness might shine. Try different things, you'll experience consciousness in different ways. Gurdjieff was all about disturbing people. They say - if a man was a vegetarian, Gurdjieff would make him eat meat. If he ate a lot of meat, Gurdjieff would put him on a veggie diet. The idea is to create a struggle within the self, to experience hardship consciously. To suffer voluntarily. That friction can produce something -- can develop consciousness.

Or Kill Me / Re: The left and the right
« on: June 01, 2018, 02:18:11 pm »
weren't the drugs and state-sponsored value systems in Brave New World just an advanced form of factory production?

like saying, I'm cool with the government controlling every aspect of life down to people's personal values as long as it's not based on money

Line-assembly of humans is good, actually - as long as those humans are nice

Literate Chaotic / Re: Heartwarming poem - "On Bullshit"
« on: May 25, 2018, 02:03:58 pm »
they have a fight
bullshit man wins
bullshit man versus everything man

and that's beautiful












oooh stoics, oooh, haaha hi cum boys

oooooh  haha <3 your emotional control gets me so hard <3 <3 hehe wink emoji



Aneristic Illusions / Re: E-Democracy
« on: May 24, 2018, 09:55:46 pm »
WOW, as soon as I saw this thread....  :horrormirth:

But related to the topic --- did you guys see that Maine adopted Instant Runoff Voting? Can't believe it's actually a Thing now.

Apple Talk / Re: Ancapistan, take 6
« on: May 20, 2018, 01:38:15 pm »
Isn't there a plotline in The Filth about this?

Oh yeah, terrorists kidnap the president of floating libertarian paradise, give him lots of LSD, breast implants, and brainwash him into doing a "happy birthday mister president" dance on TV

the way 2018 is going, that will seem tame compared to reality

« on: May 17, 2018, 06:29:28 pm »

what about his weird old balls

I've been thinking about that too -- they don't have to knowledgably collude with anybody, they just have to drop some ammo crates for opposition to load into the accusation gun.

I don't know how we recover from this, that kind of trust/faith in the electoral institution (or the parties) is easy to destroy but hard to rebuild.

Personally, I'm feeling a bit warmer towards Comey's opinion - that maybe Trump shouldn't be impeached, because it lets Americans off the hook too easy. Trump is like an overdue wildfire. In his wake, new things will grow, things which have been in the shade for a long time. Maybe we've gotta let the fire burn?

I'm of the Discordian opinion that Aftermath only comes after Bureaucracy breaks itself. Let acceleration play itself out. The shitty parts of the system have to come to the surface and express themselves there, so they can be understood and confronted in honest terms. Trump is the walking personification of what's wrong with the current system. We could walk away from the Trump years with a strengthened immune system.  Maybe...

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 794