Whoooaaaa....I had a major ass De Ja Vue' this evening. I am still in shock and disoriented....WOW.
I am still reeling, but at least now I can think straight. I need to think on it some before I post about it. WOW...I just don't know....This one threw me off a bit....In a good way though.
8-28-09 9:59pm
I thought about it and decided to keep it to myself for the time being. I want to see what happens next. Another sign or another feeling. That's what I need.
- Mood:
curious
About the Universe telling us things.....I am sick and fucking tired of people manipulating and twisting things to their advantage and the way they want it to be so they can manipulate another while continuing to delude themselves and saying this is what the Universe is telling them. This is BULLSHIT !!! I find that people do this because they have already seen what the Universe is trying to tell them and they just can't accept it. It isn't what they want or the way they want it to be. So they fashion it to con themselves and fool another into believing this is what the Universe wants. This is some dangerous and very bad Karmatic shit to be playing with here to bring upon yourself. Shelby did this shit during her little drama crap I posted below. She came by and asked Kris if she wanted to ride with her to a mall that was about an hour away in another town. I was thinking well there is a mall here why drive for an hour one way then one way back when you can go to this mall here. Well I found out why when they got back. Kris told me they ran into Rob and a couple of his friends. This is the guy I warned her about. Kris said they had a blowout but they talked and everthing is ok now.
See here's the thing I know from Shelby that she told Kris and myself that that day he was going to visit his grandmother and spend some time with her taking her to lunch and all. I also know that word got back to Shelby a week before this that he had been seen with another girl that works in a boutique in that particular mall. Kris said Shelby told her that their was a top she wanted and none of the shops there had it. That someone had told her a shop at that mall carried it. So off they go. I aksed Kris did Shelby get the top. She said no because of what all went down when Shelby saw him hanging out with that girl at her boutique. Things started falling into place at that moment. Shelby knew about the girl and knew that he would be there and she just inserted herself into that situation. Needless to say, here comes the twisting the Universe shit, they made up and Kris said that Shelby kept telling him that they were Soul Mates and that her being there was purely coincidental and that the Univserse is telling them that they should be together. So he agreed and all is cool. I started laughing my ass off. I told Kris that Shelby manipulated that whole situation to her liking. See Shelby is big into the Soul Mates stuff and all. I am also, but I don't think she truly understands what it means and how the Universe works. And if she does understand how the Universe, and it was working to tell her that he was no good and not right fro her , then she manipulated it to feed her own delusion and to try and emotionally blackmail him into staying with her.
I still laugh about the fact that she actually thinks the guy is stupid enough to buy all her " The Universe is talking to us and saying we were meant to be together " bullshit, which in fact, was her manipulation of going against the Universe to try and get him to buy into it, because she got caught spying on him. He doesn't buy that shit. I can tell you right now he don't. But he will tell her what she wants and needs to hear in order to get the heat off himself and keep her as one of his many pieces of ass. She created a coincidental situation, from what she knew was preplanned situation on his part, so that she could lie and manipulate him into believing this is the Universes way of saying we should be together. And I guarantee you that he doesn't believe it to be too damn coincidental either. I do not believe in coincidences. I do believe that people will take what they have already seen and can't accept and try and manipulate it to how they want it to be. Creat a delusion to try and change the truth.This is bad bad business fucking with the Universe in this manner. If it wasn't meant to be then you should never try and go against the Universe and force it to be. Bad bad Karma. But I have seen many people do it, men as well as women.
So this is what she did. She looked for something, found it, created the situation/coincidence, inserted herself into it and manipulated it and all involved to look totally innocent and like something that just happened and was meant to be. She continues to do this. I have come to the conclusion that if this is what she does and that is what he does, they are co-dependent enablers. They game each other, they actually seeem to get off on it, but it won't end good. It isn't good now, that's just the illusion she has created to make it and him look that way. They deserve each as far as I am concerned and they will also be deserving of all the bad that will come upon them for keeping it going for so long. For some, as the saying goes, there is no comfort in truth.
Julian 2009
- Mood:
annoyed
Oh fucking welll...... maybe I should just learn not to care....
As you go along and you get older and you get wiser, if only within a short time, you learn things. Some lessons learned are rewarding and useful. Some lessons learned are painful and stagnating. Some lessons start out looking like one thing, and end up another. But sometimes your main focus is the people in those lessons that really count, not so much the lesson to be learned. When you can discern the persons motivation, before things become a train wreck, that is utilizing acquired wisdom through knowledge.Intuition and knowing, it just is what it is and this is the key. Most times those on the outside, of any given situation, can see things so much clearer than the ones engulfed in the flames and burning at the center of the fire. Their own blindness, willfull ignorance and delusional notions, dulls their pain and warps their perceptions of the very true realities that stand right before them, that they continue to push down and out of sight. Out of sight out of mind right? In this case yes. I am one of those people that often speaks my mind, whether I am asked to or even expected to. I say what I think. I always trust and go with my first intitial feelings about any given situation. Especially if those first intial feelings are wrought with doubt outweigh the possibilities that there could be hope you may be wrong. I'll go ahead and be arrogant and say it, I am never wrong about the important things. My trust and faith in my knowing and intution have never ever failed me.
Here a couple of weeks ago another female friend of mine found herself in a painful situation that she can't say I didn't warn her about from the very beginning of it. My point is not to tell others what to do or what they should do, but to point out what I see and what will happen, based on what I feel. What they do with I tell them is their choice, not mine. I can't make that for them. When I was young I heard a song, some of the words stood out to me and even at that young age I knew exactly what they meant. " Do you always trust your first intial feelings, special knowledge, holds truth, bears believing " At that age I knew what I could see and know and what I couldn't. My instinct for and of the nature of people has always fascinated me. Back to the friend. I told her what I thought about this man she was seeing and what I felt. She had been seeing him for quite awhile so after I first told her what I thought, she blew me off and distanced herself from me. Her choice not mine. I couldn't change that. But I wasn't about to support her in her delusions about him and their relationship either. I know that sounds awful on my part because I truly wanted her to be happy and all. But I just couldn't play along with her game of denial and her con of herself. So I decided that the distance was probably the best anyway, because if not it would have created a bigger gulf between us than what I had tried to tell her already had. I ended up telling her that I knew what I was looking at and I couldn't deny that to help fuel her delusions and feed her hope, that I didn't have for the relationship.
Now there is nothing wrong with hope, that is as long as you use some common sense to base it on. And as long as that common sense leads to the possibilty that things can be the way you need them to be and not like how you would like them to be or want them to be. When people want something to be so bad, they try to sell their delusions to others. They do this to get validation of their delusions in order to continue them. It is far less painful to go with the delusions that to actually face the reality of it. If they get that then they think " Hey ok then there is hope, I am right in thinking this is good and I can change it and him to be what I want and think it should be " Wrong. Some people just don't like being wrong and thought of as having poor judgement in others. They see this as weakness. Maybe it is, but you take that weakness and make it a strength. I don't see this as negativity. I can see that those that want it to be how they wish it could be can view this as negativity on my part. It isn't. Most of my female friends have a tendency to forget I am more than a friend, I am a man. I know what I am looking at in another man. Most male friends wouldn't bother to even mention it to their female friends, not that they don't see it, they just don't get involved. I see this as not caring. I care. I can't and won't sit back and watch someone get hurt without putting my two cents in. What they do with it is on them. I don't expect them to just end it based on what I say and feel and see, but they can take what I have said and try and see what I am saying. If they do in fact see what I am saying and chose to continue then so be it, but don't begrudge me because of thier choice.
Common sense and trust in yourself that's all it takes going into anything. Some people will see blue and question the other the other will say no it's red, then doubt about yourself may start seeping in how you percieve things. This is because you love and want them so much you are willing to sacrifice what you think and your truths in order to continue the far less painful state of delusion over reality. That's cool if some do that but in the end, and there will be an end, it will all turn out the same. Only your pain will be doubled for having lived the lie for so long only to have the rug ripped right out from under you so abruptly and callously by the very one you trusted and caredd for all that time. I may be young but I have seen it way too many time. If you catch the other cheating and you get the old but I am only human it was only about sex with them I love you and want to be with you. If you truly love me you will forgive me and take me back. Buy this if you like, but it's a lie, an emotional blackmail of you and your feelings. And it enables them to continue to do it over and over again. If you catch them lying to you about anything, don't be so quick to buy the next lie they will probably tell to cover the first one and smooth it over. They will use your love, understanding, compassion and trust against you. These are some of the things I had told her in the beginning when she got the first warining signs which she chose to ignore and deny. Hence the cycle that is so hard for many to break. The first warning sign you get and that first not so good feeling you get in your gut, trust it. Listen to it. That is the Universe talking to you. And that's another fucking thing. That's my next fucking rant.
Julian 2009
- Mood: annoyed
Great new movie I can't wait to see.
It's been 12 long years since James Cameron's last narrative feature film -- a little flick called 'Titanic' -- sailed to $1 billion at the domestic box office and made its director the self-proclaimed "king of the world!" And for almost that entire time, Cameron has been working on 'Avatar,' an immensely ambitious sci-fi epic whose cutting-edge use of 3-D, performance-capture and CGI technology is supposed to revolutionize filmmaking AND film viewing as we know it.
Amid much ballyhoo, the first trailer for 'Avatar' has finally debuted online, offering fans their first glimpse at the movie, which opens Dec. 18 and stars Sam Worthington ('Terminator Salvation') as a paraplegic ex-Marine sent to the remote planet of Pandora to establish a human settlement. Once there, he takes over the body of one of the planet's indigenous, reptilian, blue-skinned Na'vi inhabitants (it becomes his avatar, or virtual stand-in), falls in love with the half-naked Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), joins the Na'vi in their battle against mankind and, basically, causes viewers' jaws to drop.
- Mood:
cheerful
I know I have touched on this matter in the past, but the more I live and learn about it and myself, the more it continues to fascinate me and enlighten me to my very own existences. Life after Life and Time after Time. Here is some interesting info I ran across. The Twin Soul for some reason or the other fascinates me more. It's like something I am drawn to to learn about. For what reason I do not know.
What is a Twin Flame?
Twin flames, also called twin souls, are literally the other half of our soul. We each have only one twin, and generally after being split the two went their separate ways, incarnating over and over to gather human experience before coming back together. Ideally, this happens in both of their last lifetimes on the planet so they can ascend together. So you probably haven't had many lifetimes with your twin. Each twin is a complete soul, not half a soul. It is their task to become more whole, balancing their female and male sides, and ideally become enlightened, before reuniting with their twin. This reunion is of two complete and whole beings. All other relationships through all our lives could be said to be "practice" for the twin, the ultimate relationship. Below is a shot from NASA's Hubble telescope.
What is a Soulmate?
Soulmates are our soul family, the ones we do have many lifetimes and experiences with, who help us grow and evolve, create and dissipate karma. According to ancient wisdom, when the soul is "born" or descended from Source, it is created in a group. The souls in this group are our soulmates, ones who are very like us in frequency makeup. Then each of these souls is split into two, creating the twins.
A soulmate is someone you are close to at a soul level, and with whom you have had many shared experiences in different lifetimes, in various kinds of relationships -- siblings, parent-child, best friend, as well as romantic relationships. There is a deep love for each other, and a spiritual bond that sets them apart from the superficiality of most other people in your life. Conversations are generally deep, about personal growth and service to make the world a better place. We can have many soulmates in our lives, and they come to us to help us grow spiritually.
Have I Met My Twin?
Twin Flame reunions are the most fulfilling relationships we can enter into as humans, on all levels. However, twin flame couples have been extremely rare on the planet, and for good reasons, which will be described later. Despite this, we are finding that more and more twins are finding each other now, because of the acceleration of spiritual transformation and opportunities for soul evolution we are all experiencing. People are evolving and learning and healing at such a fast rate that they are getting ready for their twins faster. What used to take lifetimes to learn and heal, people are now going through in years or even months. This is the astounding level of acceleration we and the planet are going through.
When twins get together, it is for some kind of spiritual service work. This is their primary reason for finding each other, because through their union a huge birthing of creative energy is released, to be used for their mission together. More and more twins are attempting to get together now to help the planet and humanity make a big shift forward in consciousness.
However, many of these attempts at reunion are unsuccessful because the individual people are not quite ready for the intensity of a twin flame union. It is more intense than any other union, and this intensity is at a soul level, not as much in the physical or even emotional bodies. This doesn't mean that there isn't a good attraction at those levels as well, but the strongest attraction is of spirit. This is one of the distinguishing characteristics of a twin soul. Many people think they have met their twin because the attraction is so intense, but it is a karmic attraction, one of need or bodily desire rather than the Divine Love of twins.
Your chance of meeting and staying with your twin depends on how evolved your soul is, and how much of your baggage from this and past lives you have cleared. The biggest reason twins have to separate after coming together is their individual emotional baggage. Because in the presence of your twin, there can be nothing between you, nothing blocking your closeness. This means that everything comes up for healing that you haven't previously healed. Everything!
When twins reunite, both of them experience an acceleration of their spiritual growth and awakening. They get on the fast track of learning about esoteric wisdom and experiencing other states of consciousness. They usually haven't been together all that often during their series of lives on the planet, and so their backgrounds may be different. Yet, there is a closeness and similarities of spirit that are almost uncanny, noticed in many ways, such as looking back at yourself when you look at your mate, and a remembering of the distant past when you first split up. Guidance is strong with these relationships, and usually one or both have a good channel for communication with Spirit. Their connection is telepathic, and hugging each other is like coming home for nourishment.
Below is a link to a good site about the difference between a Twin Soul and a Spiritual Twin.
www.angelfire.com/ct3/ascension/spiritua
" I AM YOU, YOU ARE ME, ONE SOUL TOGETHER WE SHALL BE "
Julian 2009
- Mood:
contemplative
- Mood: contemplative
This is just a little test in observation and perception and cognitivity. These are snippets of a dialogue, a real one from a blog, involving three individuals. We shall designate the subjects as A, B and C.
Here are the known details of the three subjects involved:
One is a professed xtian, a liberal at that.
One is a xtian turned Atheist, who now professes to be Agnostic, but presents as a xtian apologist in disguise.
One is an Atheist that admits leanings toward Agnosticism and is highly intellectual.
Criteria 1:
One of these subjects is a professed recovering alcoholic and drug addict who has been incarcerated many times in there past because of the addictions and undisclosed other behaviors. Had an abusive past with an abusive alcoholic father who manipulated and controlled. Who is married to an individual with the same type of history. This subject has had therapy and treatment for addictions and trauma.
Criteria 2:
One of these subjects has a past of alcohol abuse, drugs not sure, and struggles with the personal beliefs of their religion. Has not recieved therapy or treatment, but has relied on their religion to get through and heal them emotionally and spiritually.
Criteria 3:
One of these subjects has had no past trauma, alcohol or drug abuse.
It is of my opinion that two of these individuals, are Self Loathing Narcissist.
Read the dialogue and see if you can match up just who is who.
Ex: Subject X is the Atheist with Agnostic leanings, fits criteria 6 and seems to present as SLN.
Look over comments from YY it is the consensus that he is a lost cause. His logic is so flawed that it is humorous to the point of pitiful and I don't mean pitiful in the empathetic sense at all. He actually argues against using intellect to discern matters of life and belief.
A.
The idea that "humanity" is either not "essentially good in nature" or is not essentially good in nature is a religious notion.
Viewed outside of religions that hold those sorts of views we can say that human behavior fits many models with many different INDIVIDUALS.
Certainly there are like patterns and characteristics between some humans that we generally characterize as "good" or "bad", but to say humans are intrinsically bad just flies in the face of logic.
If your religion requires "original sin" and the sinful or unworthy nature of man as one of its tenets, then you may believe this, but as we all know, beliefs only make a thing to be so for the believer
C.
I wouldn't describe the essential nature of man to be evil but rather selfish.
A.
That is an arguement that is only flawed by the presence of humans who tend to be
predominately altruistic rather than selfish. It is the selfish ones that get our attention, the predominately altruistic personalities tend to fade into the woodwork of civilization. Certainly we make decisions everyday that could be characterized as either being altruistic or selfish or a mixture of both. For example, I do good because it makes me feel good, an example of what some might call " selfish altruism. " When " survival " comes into the picture, a different human behaviroral component comes into play that has nothing to do with good or evil.
B.
Living in self is destructive. That self is the cause of all that you see going wrong in this world. None of the "evil" is for the good of mankind. It is for the good of those who impose it. I am not trying to compare what the Bible speaks of. I am just stating what I feel is at the core of right and wrong and that would be self. It is not something that I feel can be avoided. We are prone to impose ourselves on the world. Some choose to impose their negative side. We all have both positive and negative thoughts. When someone intrudes and tries to impose something on us that we are not in agreement with then the negative side of us is set into action. I feel we are able to use either the positive or the negative when someone intrudes. Dont you feel that it is harder to remain positive? It is in our nature not to and so the trick is to figure that out and use self control. That self control is not natural. Some are better at going against their natural instinct to unleash on others.
A.
Many selfish inclinations are preservative and aid our survival, not our destruction. Not everyone is prone to imposing ourselves on the world and others are only this way on a limited personal basis and still others live lives of not imposing themselves on anyone or anything. Are most bad people or people doing bad acts egocentric? Sure they are, but that only tells you about bad people, not the entire human race. You say, " When someone intrudes and tries to impose something on us that we are not in agreement with then the negative side of us is set into action. " Well, don't you think that it should be set into action and don't you think that it could actually be the positive side that is set into action to preserve our own altruistic tendency and reject the others authoritarian tendency to control and dictate to us? You must tend to believe that people are intrinsically bad or tend towards badness or are continually tempted to badness because if and when they do stand up for themselves and speak their own minds. I do not, primarily because the evidence of human nature contradicts it.
C.
I wouldn't describe the essential nature of man to be evil but rather selfish.
B.
Exactly and I am not talking about being greedy. I am talking about preserving our self image. It is only an image. The true self is seen as being selfish and it is natural to be that way.
C.
I'm just talking about our natural inclinations, not the cases when we rise above those. Selfishness can express itself in both positive and negative ways. It can lead to both good and bad action.
B.
Again I am in agreement that it is a natural inclination. Those cases when we rise above are done purposely and against our natural inclination. Being good takes effort. being bad is natural and easy. So whats that tell you? I don't think there is anything good in being selfish. The only way it leads to good is when you remove the natural instinct. Now I am not saying that people are always going to naturally go negative. I think we have an equal amount ot positive energy or at least the ability to balance ourselves so that we are not tipping the scales to the negative side. being positive takes work.
C.
I don't disagree from a natural perspective. I'm just saying as we pursue our self-centered goals we may actually do some good as part of a means to attain them. The difference between that and good done for good's sake alone is simply a matter of motivation and intent.
B.
Of course. Our goals are not always negative in nature. Though is it easy to set a course and have our goals change due to a negative bump in the road. I will go back to how this would apply to those who are "correcting" another person. Let's say that the original goal or intent was to help. The course to the goal is going according to plan. Everyone is feeling good about themselves. Now lets say that the person you are trying to help has a problem with accepting and feels that people do not understand them. They also do not feel accepted. Pretty tough to remain on course when you are trying to fix a problem if their problem is about people trying to fix them. So it becomes frustrating for those who had set a goal to do something that appears to be creating something that they are trying to fix. After awhile the good intentions go out the window. They gravitate towards the negative and feed the fire. This is a form of manipulation. It begins with being manipulated and ends being the manipulator. Of course this was the manipulators goal. To feel anger and to feel misunderstood and to feel justified. The problem I see is that once a person is aware that they can not help this person they then shun them. That tells me they never understood the situation in the first place and their original intentions or goals were based on the fact that they were not aware of the true nature of the problem to begin with. Not that this was their fault. When the fault comes into play is when they try to lay the blame of their bad plan onto the person they said they cared about. To me that is due to something the fixer needs to fix about themselves.
C.
I'm just talking about our natural inclinations, not the cases when we rise above those. Selfishness can express itself in both positive and negative ways. It can lead to both good and bad action.
A.
That doesn't account for truely altruistic behavior where humans act against their own best interest or even safety in the service of others. This is not merely a form of selfishness, it is altruism. Some people's natural inclination it towards altruism, not selfishness. Many others have both inclinations, but that doesn't mean the inclinations are ever in conflict. You aren't necessarily rising above anything when you preform an altruistic act, there is not always a conflict between doing good and doing bad or doing what is right or what is wrong.
B.
I am not talking about being greedy. I am talking about preserving our self image. It is only an image. The true self is seen as being selfish and it is natural to be that way.
A.
Not necessarily, we see all different degrees of selfishness as you define it here, with some individuals demonstrating very little selfishness if any at all.
C.
Well it is often stated that even altruism has its selfish component. Perhaps selfishness cannot be fully overcome only transmuted and channeled in a positive direction.
A.
This is a difference that we won't resolve easily since you must believe that man is basically sinful and has to overcome a sinful nature and I do not accept that as being the case at all. I think you need to study the nature of altruism and reconsider that even altruism has a selfish component. Those who must have mankind be intrinsically sinful or evil and needing other forces to overcome this selfishness and turn it to selflessness will always exclude the possiblity that some humans and human acts are merely born of pure altruism.
C.
Again, it all comes down to scriptural procedures. You may not agree those are good but they are what we are required to follow. And I see the wisdom in them. I guess one disagreement we have is whether or not this is a case of abuse. I, and others, clearly see it as that. If you agreed then I am sure you would agree a person should remove themselves from an abusive situation and not further enable it. What is clearly being stated by the one abusing is this: because I am member of your group you must allow me to beat the shit out of you and you must love and accept me anyway even though I refuse to change. As far as I am concerned I will not go along with that.
B.
:::thumping mic, testing, testing is this thing on?:::
Does scripture tell you anything about what to do when you dont understand the problem that you trying to fix? Does it tell you that if you have no understanding of the situtation that you are then to turn your back on it? I doubt it. If you are being lead by the spirit then you would then be more helpful. You need to leave their dirty rags and yours outside the door so that the spirit can look at the real problem. The rags are not the problem. The rags are a result of the problem. Like I said before, unless a person is qualified in situations such as this, they are not going to be helpful.
C.
Again it all comes down to our disagreement that abuse is occuring. As far as help is concerned I and many others have bent over backwards trying to help and be understanding. You cannot help those who refuse help. When someone is metaphorically standing over you with a butcher knife that is not a time to offer understanding, acceptance, and love
B.
I dont see it as a form of abuse. I see it as a lack of understanding the situation and also not recognizing that lack.
C.
A, we clearly do see human nature very differently and I don't think we will come to any kind of consensus about it.
A.
That's what I was suggesting. I am not saddled with the assumption of original sin or the possiblity of an evil one making us do bad things and a good one sometimes rescuing us from doing bad things.
A (is in black) B(is in red):
Many "selfish" inclinations are preservative and aid in our survival, not our "destruction."
Not everyone is "prone to imposing ourselves on the world" and others are only this way on a limited personal basis and still others live lives of not imposing themselves on anyone or anything.
Everything we say and do has an impact. Purposely or not we are imposing something upon others all the time.
Are most "bad" people or people doing bad acts egocentric? Sure, but that only tells you about "bad" people, not the entire human race.
You say, "When someone intrudes and tries to impose something on us that we are not in agreement with then the negative side of us is set into action." Well, don't you think that it could actually be the positive side that is set into action to preserve our own altruistic tendency and reject the others authoritarian tendency?
If you are not feeling positive then they have triggered your negative side. What you do with that is up to you. Depending on how deep that negative feeling goes will determine how hard it will be to pull yourself out of it. The only way out is to trigger the positive side take a conscious effort. It doesnt take a concious effort to go negative. I need to run but I will try to pick back up on this later.
You must tend to believe that people are intrinsically bad or tend toward badness or are continually tempted to badness, but I do not, primarily because the evidence contradicts it.
A.
We coexist in a society, if you like to think of that as imposing ourselves on others as a way of describing the nature of human interaction that is fine, flawed logic, but fine. But it is just one of the ways we interact with others and isn't always bad and of a negative nature. In regard to it being easy to do bad and harder to do good, again this is flawed logic, and it is not what has been and is observed in human nature and the the study of behavioral sciences. I frequently see people and even myself do good without even considering a bad act prior to doing the good one or having to overcome a feeling in conflict with , which you call our intrinsically bad natural behavior, in order to do the right thing. I even do selfless acts without thinking of myself first or even at all, as I am sure that most people do. I guess I just don't have as much deep negativity as you two seem to have.
C.
What you are talking about comes through social training and indoctrination. Sometimes we don't get proper training or the training doesn't take. So we end up with sociopaths. I know some argue differently but infants do not display altruism. Their only goal is the satisfaction of their own needs. This is how we all enter this world.
A.
I totally disagree with you here. I will agree it has everything to do with nautre and nurture, hand in hand, that creates the sociopathic tendencies in people. I will go so far as to say that in some cases nature plays the only part in sociopathic tendencies, meaning, some people are just naturally born that way. Sociopathy doesn't always deveop as a result of improper training, so I don't really get what you are saying here. Your logic does seem flawed in this area. See, infants don't display many of the emotional nuances we see in adults, so I don't really think the lack of display of altruism in babies means anything in this context. There is a point in human developement where these and other emotions and behaviroal tendencies to appear. And as I said training, as you call it, and nurturing have something to do with this, but the individual also determines much of it in the long run. If this weren't the case, children would always be what the parents made them with no responsibilty for their own acts.
YY.
You still don`t get it huh???
You think that every matter under the sun can be reduced to intellectual persuasion and therefore if you talk in circles long enough, fill the air with specious argumentaion, that you can rationalize every matter away or reduce it to equations within your control...And then, you will be roundly offended when I point out that this attitude is no more than man`s natural pride enhanced, reinforced by indoctrination???
A.
Your entire system of beliefs is an intellectual exercise, which you continually demonstrate. You indoctrinate yourself in your religion by accepting, without question, certain things as "facts" that cannot be questioned. You then intellectualize your beliefs by interpreting scripture in a manner that coincides with your personal views and philosophies. Certainly you give line and verse, but you also give your interpretaion or bias on what it means, thus intellectualizing and justifying your system of beliefs. You pull out your Greek Lexicon and Strong's Concordance to aid you in this intellectualizing of your personal beliefs. So, when you mention "intellectualizing" a concept, don't forget that all your system of beliefs amounts to is your personal intellectulization of religion. Doing this allows you to continue to see dark-skinned people and women as occupying a status subservient to white males; beliefs that you held before you were ever a Christian. You have intellectualized other scripture to allow you to retain other prejudices so that becoming a Christian has cost you little in really becoming a more moral or altruistic person, which I suppose, is some accomplishment in itself. I am not offended that you suggest that any concept "is no more than man`s natural pride enhanced, reinforced by indoctrination", this is one of your favorite claims, but I've never seen you present any rational arguement that justifies such a claim. I will concede that you know a great deal about your own natural pride, but you guess at other people because you judge them based on your motivations and personality being the baseline for all human beings, which leads you into gross errors. That you hate formal education is apparent and I think you've exposed time and again why, but never have given anything but opinion to support your prejudices against it. You are entitled to that opinion, but just because you hold an opinion doesn't make it so.
YY.
I`m sorry, but this just warrants comment;
So, in translation; Basically, if we click our heels together and repeat often enough, "In spite of all evidence, there is no God"... Then it will be so??? If all is reduced to nothing more than intellectual persuasion, then that which I can "persuade" myself in will by default become reality??? Heard the one about the Baptist, the Catholic, and the Christian Scientist who found themselves in hell???
A.
I'm glad you were inspired to comment, but your comments indicate that you didn't understand my post at all. I never indicated that altruism or selfishness were the results of intellectualization or "intellectual persuasion", in fact I was arguing quite the opposite. I never mentioned anything about the existence or non-existence of any god or gods, so I don't know why you are raising that as an issue here; what I'm saying it true whether one believes in the existence of a god(s) or not.
C (is in blue) to A (is in balck)
Well, sociopathy doesn't come develop from improper training, so I only partly get what you are trying to say there.
What do you see as its source?
Infants don't display many of the emotional nuances we see in adults, so I really don't think the lack of display of altruism in babies means anything in this context.
I disagree. They only develop through social conditioning.
There is a point in human development where these and other emotions and behavioral tendencies to appear. Certainly training and nurturing have something to do with this, but the individual also determines much of it in the long run. If this weren't the case, children would always be what the parents made them with no responsibility for their own acts.
Parents are not the only source of social training. Children will pick up cues from other sources as well.
A.
Well, you have the right to disagree, but a discussion on sociopathy is a long one; not because the knowledge is arcane, it is not, but because the mechanisms of sociopathy, both physical an psychological are largly understood and can be complex. You made it sou nd as if children are inately sociopathic unless trained to have certain emotional responses. Emotional responses not are merely the result of "social conditioning" or socialization; even young babies can become angry or happy without being "conditioned" to be so or by learning how to be happy or angry by observing the emotions being displayed by adults. I never indicated that parents were the "only source of social training", in fact I somewhat refuted that several posts ago. I thought you suggested it in your previous post.
A ( is in black) C (is in blue)
Well, you have the right to disagree, but a discussion on sociopathy is a long one; not because the knowledge is arcane, it is not, but because the mechanisms of sociopathy, both physical an psychological are largly understood and can be complex. You made it sound as if children are inately sociopathic unless trained to have certain emotional responses.
I believe that would be the course without social conditioning. And I think more and more children are exhibiting sociopathic symptoms due to abdication of parental responsibilities.
Emotional responses not are merely the result of "social conditioning" or socialization; even young babies can become angry or happy without being "conditioned" to be so or by learning how to be happy or angry by observing the emotions being displayed by adults.
I'm not referring to the ability to express emotion but the ability to fit into society as a responsible member.
I never indicated that parents were the "only source of social training", in fact I somewhat refuted that several posts ago. I thought you suggested it in your previous post.
If I did I didn't mean to.
A.
Actually they have found that the brains of sociopaths work differently than, for want of a better term, "normal" brain; the brain chemistry and area of activity are different. So the best parents in the world can bring a sociopath into the world. It is not all nurture, it is, in a great part, nature. Anti-social behavior, which is not sociopathic, may certainly stem from either the attention or inattention of the parents. The socialization process starts at home and we see the results of poor socialization at home right now in our educational system. The parents can even teach the child to be anti-social. Ever see a picture of neo-Klan babies in their white hoods, attending neo-Klan rallies?
INNOCENT BYSTANDER:
Selfishness can be seen as a negative, as in "I'm gonna take care of myself first!" but it is not necessarily a negative. Did you ever pay attention to the safety announcements when you fly? The cabin attendants ALWAYS tell you to put your own mask on first before you help someone else! They tell you to be selfish and see to yourself first or you will do no good for anyone else!
C.
I'm using "sociopathy" in the extended sense of the word. Even if someone is not a fullblown sociopath they can exhibit sociopathic traits.
A
Just my misunderstanding. The two display distinctly different pathologies. I studied psychology formally and am stuck with the clinical meaning of the terms. A sociopath and an anti-social individual may exhibit the same behavior, which is what I believe you mean, which is absolutely true, but there is something altogether different going on in the noggin of the two that makes all the difference in the world. Such behaviors are also classified as personality disorders too, like antisocial personality disorders and dissocial personality disorders, which I recall discussing with someone on the other board several years ago. Just add those to the psychopathic and sociopathic disorders and you have a cornucopia of disorders to choose from.
Ok so there you have it. Who is who and what is what.
- Mood: curious
Something is in the air. I can feel it. It feels dark and foreboding. It is hard to explain to others what you feel when this occurs and sometimes it is just best not to try and tell or explain it at all. But it is there I just know it. I don't know who, what, why or where yet, but I guess I will know soon enough.
- Mood:
anxious
You know I don't know quite how to describe this other than an Awakening or Enlightenment. I suspect I have always known this but for some reason or the other it seems so profound and true to me now. Last night something occured to me, and like I said it is not like I haven't always know this or even thought about it before but it is totally relevent to me now. Pagan beliefs do not get in the way or contradict understanding the very real and observable laws of Nature. In fact the observable laws of Nature are the basic foundations of many Paganistic belief systems. Unlike xtianity and it's avoidance of and negativity towards all things in Nature, Individualism and our own Human Nature. Paganism not only is rooted in it but worships and respects it as well as the human being and our ways. This is the whole reason why I could never be and can never be xtian. How can you vilify and bastardize those things in life and Nature that you love and respect most about yourself and others ? I can't. I am not compelled or imposed upon by any Pagan dieties or beliefs to be punished for any bad deeds I do or rewarded for any good deeds I do. I don not sin because I do not believe in it nor am I guilted into subsevrviance by any creeds or dieties in Paganism. I do not fear any horrors after death for living only a so so life because I know it is not the end. I will continue to go on and learn what I must learn in order for my Soul/Spirit to further my knowledge to get me closer to the All and one totally with the Universe. I am free. I am no slave to any god, I am my own.
- Mood: contemplative
Happy Birthday to a most Gracious Lady. You are a Beautiful Soul inside and out. The world is truly lucky to have you in it.
- Mood: happy
- Mood: annoyed
I have totally come to the conclusion that you must be either mentally ill or at least a dysfunctional human being to be a xtian. It is all about subsevrviance to it's leaders gulit, shame, hypocrisy, murder, rape, incest, theft, lying, control, power and mysogamy. It is about enabling, co-dependency, denial, and dysfunctional cognitive behavioral traits, hence the flaw in their logic and ration and reason. As long as it is done in the name of and for the horrible god it's adherants and followers worship then it is called righteousness and morality.
As a Pagan I am not imposed upon to forgive the unforgivable, to suffer the insufferable, to comprehend the incomprehensible, to tolerate the intolerable, to love the unloveable,and to overcome that which cannot be overcome. These are paradoxes in religion and flaws of logic. If someone forgives something that is unforgivable then it is not unforgivable. If someone suffers something that is insufferable, then it is not insufferable. If someone comprehends something that is incomprehnsible then it is not incomprehensible. If someone tolerates something that is intolerable then it is not intolerbale. And if someone overcomes something which cannot be overcome then it is not something that cannot be overcome. This is the illogic behind it all. At least behind xtianity.
In order to be able to to any of those things you have to have faith and hope that is what religion is all about in the first place. Something above and beyond yourself that will help you or show you how to do these impossible things. But they are in fact impossible because the logic behind faith and hope in this context is flawed when it comes to religion and religious beliefs and that is mostly due the creators of religion and religious beliefs and our human nature operating at it's most dysfunctional and biased levels to further our peoples and our personal causes. It is a catch 22. You are in fact damned if you do and damned if you don't in the eyes of the xtian dieties.
.jpg)
I think this last picture says it all about xtianity and the mental state of it's followers. Not to mention his sign but the look on his miserable face tells me more about it than anything.
- Mood: annoyed
" The beginning of Wisdom is knowing that you do not know "
" If I am to be judged by those who come after me, let me be judged by the truth. I dedicate my love and my life to the one who gave me life, but another forever owns my soul. "
I wanted to tell her that sometimes, in my long sleep, I dreamt of her and she said to me " Some of us are not destined to meet again in this world! The future changes as we stand here, else we are the game pieces of the gods. Things can never again be the same between us. Do not question. I can not tell you the answer because I do not know it myself." I weep as I wept once, long long ago. Then I will realize, as I did so long ago, that it does no good. No one hears you, sobbing in the night alone. Whatever happiness and joy was in my life, came from magic and love. Of them both I give to her. These blue eyes gave everything, yet expected nothing. They held too much knowledge. They had seen too much in their short years, too much sorrow, too much pain. I like the feeling of magic inside me. Without the magic, there could be no future. I will do this. Nothing in my life matters except this. No moment of my life exists except this moment. I am born in this moment, and if I fail, I will die in this moment. The magic is in my blood, it flows to and from my heart to yours. Every time you use it, part of yourself goes with it. Only when you are prepared to give of yourself and receive nothing back will the magic work for you. So the dark. The seemingly endless darkness, will not be eternal. It was not the absence of light that is so frightening as the absence of thought, of knowledge, of comprehension. Our lives, the lives of the living will go on. The sun shines, the moon she rises, we will laugh and talk, and they will know nothing, feel nothing. Nothing. So final. It will come to us all. It will come to me. Alone together. It was all two people could ever be to each other, I suppose. Alone. Together. For the dreams and secrets of our heart may be spoken but words are poor handmaidens. Words can never truly say what we want them to say, for they fumble, stammer, and never come out right. The best one can hope for is to along the way meet someone to share the path, content to walk in silence, for the heart communes best when it doesn’t try to speak. You know that place between sleep and awake? The one where you can still remember your dreams? That’s where I’ll be waiting for you as I have forever. That’s where I’ll always love you.
Raistlin: " Her gates will always open for me. "
Some very good video links below. Well worth a view. I love the music of Enigma.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG7Bs_BCC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG7Bs_BCC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rj6kyMO2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGH_7CXNW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8ri14rw3
- Mood:
melancholy
Below are the basic definitions of what is known as " Tabula Rasa ":
By famous Atheist and Freethinkers:
- Main Entry:
- ta·bu·la ra·sa
- Pronunciation:
- \ˌta-byə-lə-ˈrä-zə, -sə\
- Function:
- noun
- Etymology:
- Latin, smoothed or erased tablet
- Date:
- 1535
Ta·bula rasa (tab′yə lə rā′sə) : a blank tablet; clean slate: used esp. of the mind when regarded as blank until impressions are recorded upon it by experience.
Ta⋅bu⋅la ra⋅sa :
1.a mind not yet affected by experiences, impressions, etc.
2.anything existing
By beleiving in the Tabula Rasa line of thinking does this allow for an individual to be born with a soul? Does this line of thinking allow for thought and belief in the reincarnation of a soul from one life to the next? Does it allow for being born with inheirited traits from a mother or father to a child,such as intuition or psychic abilities or mental genius or intelligence? It does seem to me to be a different twist, old or new, on the old Nature vs Nurture debate. As a Pagan I do not see how it could even be considered FreeThinking if it so ridgidly adheres to the blank slate theory of consciousness at birth.
- Mood: curious
( Disclaimer: This is not about saying that Balance is a Fallacy. It is saying that how some perceive and depict balance is a Fallacy. )
One of the best pieces of advise anyone ever gave me was " I cannot teach you anything. I can only help you find it within yourself " I just can't remember who originally coined the phrase. And one of the most profound things I have ever heard is " I know what I have given you but I do not know what you have recieved " This one really made me think and I decided to carve into the stone within me. Over the course of time I have come to realize that some people view a lot of what I say as negativity. When it is only me calling it AS I SEE IT. Giving me point of view or opinion on something. POV's and opinion's are neither positive or negative they are only what they are my POV and OP and nothing more. Now nothing can hold more truth than that last statement " I know what I have given you but I do not know what you have recieved " that is the key. We know what our motivations and intents are when we say and do most things to or for another, but we really do not know how they take it (recieve it). That burden does not lie with the giver but the taker (reciever) when it comes to POV's and opinions. I hear people say all the time, when someone has voiced an OP or POV about something that touches close to their hearts , " Don't be so negative all the time . I try to see the positive in all things that helps create balance " I laugh my ass off when I hear this because viewing all things in any given situation all the time in a positive light the furthest thing from balance there is. Maybe they think if HOPING in a POSIVTIVE manner and focusing on a positive outlook will somehow magically make it so. Maybe they think avoiding those negative thoughts or people will somehow make it so (positive). Things are what they are and people avoiding things and others who they view as negative will not make what they want to be true true. Balance cannot be all things positive all the time, because nothing and no one is perfect. This isn't balance at all. It is hope and faith that some people sometimes delude themselves and their lives with.
No matter how much we delude ourselves into thinking or wishing it so it just can't be right ,good and so all of the time. The really sad thing is that some people don't know when to see the scales tipping or they like to pretend that they don't. I think it is an Oxymoron to focus soley on a persons positive aspects and state th at they seem to be or are a well balanced individual. I believe it is pretty weak and fragile thinking and feeling if you avoid, reject and or deny any negative aspect of any individual or any given situation you should find yourself involved with or in. To do so to me is a disservice to yourself. Don't waste your time or your money on any of these New Age Guhru groups and seminars, that teach you how to continue to be a victim by showing and telling you how to con and delude yourself into thinking you can change people or any and all bad situations you may find yourself in in life by focusing on it with a positive attitude and expecting a positive outcome. Take that money and set up a few private sessions with a trained and liscensed therapist who can help you to focus on the realities of life and truth and how to deal with it whether it is good or bad. That is much more fulfilling and beneficial.
I think people do reject, avoid and deny much of what they do because it is in fact the real truth that they are afraid of and they think that if they look at all the positive that the situation has produced it will somehow make all the negative go away or be less painful. But that just isn't so. This all has to do with Karma and The Universal Balance that needs to be maintained. For instance Nature, the balance cannot be maintained without accepting the bad along with the good provided that bad doesn't tip the scales too much in direction of one really bad negative aspect. Then something has to be done to assure the balance is restored. As in nature you cannot have light without dark or visa versa. A ton of all positive can in fact outweigh a ton of some rather meanial negatives and a perfect balance be maintained. But as I have stressed before 10,000 positive aspects of any individual or any given situation cannot outweigh and overcome one really big bad negative. All before that becomes null and void when it becomes known.
( Example of one bad outweighing all the good before it: A man or a woman for that matter that has been known most of their lives of the pillar of the community, who actively participate in community fund rasing and humanitarian efforts to aid others in needs. The one who is very active and involved in church affairs and community. Loving mother or father who would do anything for their wives, husbands, children or family. And they are found out to be other than what they have led the world and family and friends to beleive. A rapist, a murderer, an abuser (physical or mental), a serial killer, a thief, con man/woman or someone who has had multiple affairs behind your back with other men and women. It doesn't matter if they were thought of as a saint or hero or decent or well balanced man/woman they are what they are and unbalanced. All that good that they did for public images sake becomes null and void. It is part of their MO. To create that delusion. That one bad thing makes all the rest insignificant. But there are still the delusional people under their spell that will declare and decry the loudest " But he/she was a good man/woman, husband/wife and father/mother to their children. " I laugh like crap at this kind of shit. " No they were not good mothers and fathers husbands and wives behind closed doors. That was the lie they sold to the public and maybe even you " )
Is it possible to do all the right things with all the positive aspects in mind and still get a bad result ? Sure it is. Is the bad result because somewhere you got exposed to or let a little negativity seep into the picture ? No it isn't. It is because that was the way it was destined to be from the beginning and no amount of faith, hope or wishfull thinking through being positvely motivated will or could change that outcome. It just is what it is and what it was meant to be. But for some I suppose it is better to hide behind the veil of wishfull thinking than to deal with reality.
Julian 2009
" There is no comfort in truth "
- Mood: cranky
I think in many instances we we tend to overthink and our imaginations end up getting the best of us. I think in many instances we tend to underthink and don't pursue a sound and legitimate explanation. Learning to discern when to do what in any given situation is the key. I think as far as intuition and premonition are concerned the scientist as well as the sage are both at stake. Both have value and the difference between the two at times are either very small or very wide, depending on the nature off the of the situation at hand. I think it is imperative that we as humans learn to be both at the same time as well as one or the other when the situation arises to use logic and rationale verses wisdom and philosophy. Not that philosophy and wisdom isn't logical or rational, but sometimes it has no place in science as well as science has no place in wisdom or philosophy at others. I think our emotions as well as our poor judement causes us to overthink and underthink and overreact or underreact when it comes to our intuition and premonitions as well as the intuition and premonitions of others.
But my real delima is this. Is Intuition and Premonition one and the same? If it is could Premonition be Intuition operating on a higher and more effecient level within us? Are these inherent traits that we are born with or do we learn to develop them as we grow and learn? Why are some of us more intune with this part of ourselves more so than others ? Whether we are born with them or not are they stimulated by an external supernatural nature or are they stimulated from an internal supernatural nature? Are they even of a supernatural nature at all? If they are two different things then what is the point of Premonition at all, if someone believes that things happen for a reason ? Whether they be good or bad. And if they happen for a reason then what are the consequences should we use this information to try and change the outcome? Surely there must be consequences in trying to deter and or change Fate and Destiny? I have yet to find sufficient answers to these questions or sufficient explanations for these occurences. Oh well I may never know at least not in this lifetime. Stay tuned my next installment will be The Pagan, the Atheist and Tabula Rasa.....
- Mood: contemplative
Since the Nebra Sky Disk (also known as the Nebra Sun Disk) of Germany emerged into public knowledge in about the year 2000, archaeologists and astronomers have put forward their theories about how it worked and what it meant to the ancient society that fabricated it.
I have assessed it from the standpoint of the scientific knowledge that was encoded into ancient European megalithic sites or early edifices, such as those of the Giza Plateau, and so will now give an account of how I, personally, would have used this artefact as a memory device, based upon easily decipherable, ancient mathematical methodologies.
The nearby forest contains perhaps 1000 barrows or princely graves from the period, but little else is known about the lost people, who are not mentioned in ancient Greek or other Mediterranean sources.
The culture of people from the Bronze Era was lost in the course of time and only material evidence of their existence is saved - the places where settlements, graves and treasure used to be. Scientists claim that it is impossible to assume which language they used.
The Nebra Sky Disk of Germany, recovered from a cache of illegally acquired artefacts in the possession of an antiquities dealer in 1999. The dimensions of the Nebra disk tell us how it functioned as a memory device for recalling principles of navigation and the lunisolar calendar system. Similar mathematical systems of calibration are built into the Ring of Brodgar in Scotland or the Southern Circle at Avebury Henge*, etc. The Nebra disk is thought to have been fabricated 3600-years ago.
Sample Celtic gold coins, which carry astronomical symbolism very similar in design to the Sky Disk of Nebra. These features include:
- Knops: These are circular humps or indentations, which could represent markers (standing stones, cairns or mounds) within a standing stone circle, henge-type observatory or overland alignment system. The "knops" could also represent individual stars and groupings of knops could represent constellations. "Knop" humps are found profusely in the design work of Celtic Crosses or Wessex pottery of ancient Britain and its very similar, contemporary counterpart, Lapita pottery of Oceania. Knop humps were also used for counting functions on ancient calculators, such as the "Brasen Sea" structure in the Temple of Solomon forecourt, built during the "Hebrew" epoch of Israel before the Babylonian conquest and latter imposition of "Pharisee" Talmudic based religion*. The Brasen Sea calculator, built by a Hebrew-Phoenician (Hiram the Widow's son from Tyre) had 300 knops (pomegranates), in two offset rows, under the brim. It was perfectly sized for calculating positions arrived at within the lunisolar Sabbatical Calendar system. It was also used to code the equatorial circumference of the Earth.
*Footnote: Unfortunately, there is now much confusion as to who the "Hebrews" actually were, due to the unscholarly swapping, adoption, mixing or assumption of erroneous titles. The Hebrews were not the latter era Judaean Babylonians and the Judaeans of Christ's time, regardless of their several varied ethnicity's, had no known blood or pedigree affiliation whatsoever to the people who today go by the ethnic or religious title of Jews or Jewish. - Crescents with pointed ends: These represent the Moon.
- Large Orbs: These represent the Sun. On some henges, such as Stonehenge or at Serpent Mound in Ohio, USA, the "orb" or "egg" is depicted as being swallowed by a serpent.
- Crescents or banana shaped objects with blunted or rounded ends: These represent several things including the embankments of henge-type observatories, which (at Stonehenge) were in the similitude of two snakes with gateways separating them. They can also represent the "Sun boat" of RA or Helios. In the case of Helios, he flies his Sun chariot across the sky from East to West each day until it settles in the sea, whereupon he sails his boat around the world to make the selfsame journey anew. This is similarly depicted on the Celtic Torque of the Princess of Vix.
- Mood:
ecstatic
The Nebra Sky Disk is a bronze disk of around 30 cm diameter, painted blue-green and inlaid with gold symbols. These are interpreted generally as a sun or full moon, a lunar crescent, and stars (including a cluster interpreted as the Pleiades). Two golden arcs along the sides, marking the angle between the solstices, were added later. A final addition was another arc at the bottom surrounded with multiple strokes (of uncertain meaning, variously interpreted as a Solar Barge with numerous oars, as the Milky Way or as a rainbow).
The disk is attributed to a site near Nebra, Saxony-Anhalt in Germany, and associatively dated to c. 1600 BC. It has been associated with the Bronze Age Unetice culture.
The disk is unlike any known artistic style from the period, and had initially been suspected of being a forgery, but is now widely accepted as authentic.
Discovery
The disk appeared as if from nowhere on the international antiquities market in 2001. Its seller claimed that it had been looted by illegal treasure hunters with a metal detector in 1999. Archaeological artifacts are the property of the state in Saxony-Anhalt and following a police sting operation in Basel, Switzerland, the disk was acquired by the state archaeologist, Dr Harald Meller.
As part of a plea bargain, the illicit owners led police and archaeologists to the site where they had found it together with other remains (two bronze swords, two hatchets, a chisel and fragments of spiral bracelets). Though no witnesses were present at the first discovery, archaeologists have opened a dig at the site and have uncovered evidence that support the looters’ claim (in the form of traces of bronze artifacts in the ground, as well as matching earth samples found sticking to the artifacts). The disk and its accompanying finds are now in Halle in the Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte (State Museum for Prehistory) of Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. The two looters received a four months and a ten months sentence by a Naumburg court in September 2003. An appeal court raised these to six and twelve months, respectively.
The discovery site identified by the arrested metal detectorists is a prehistoric enclosure encircling the top of a 252 m elevation in the Ziegelroda Forest, known as Mittelberg (”central hill”), some 60 km west of Leipzig. The surrounding area is known to have been settled since the Neolithic, and Ziegelroda Forest is said to contain around 1,000 barrows.
The enclosure is oriented in such a way that the sun seems to set every solstice behind the Brocken, the highest peak of the Harz mountains, some 80 km to the northwest. It was claimed by the treasure-hunters that the artifacts were discovered within a pit inside the bank-and-ditch enclosure.
Dating
The precise dating of the Nebra skydisk depended upon the dating of a number of Bronze Age weapons, which were offered for sale with the disk and said to be from the same site. These axes and swords can be typologically dated to the mid 2nd millennium BC (Unetice culture). Radiocarbon dating of a birch bark particle found on one of the swords to between 1600 and 1560 BC confirmed this estimate. This corresponds to the date of burial, at which time the disk had likely been in existence for several generations.
According to an analysis of trace elements by x-ray fluorescence by E. Pernicka, University of Freiberg, the copper originated at the Mitterberg in Austria, while the gold is from the Carpathian Mountains. Copper from Bottendorf in the immediate vicinity of Nebra has definitely not been used. But few copper objects are found where they were originally smelted.
History
The disk as preserved was developed in four stages (Meller 2004):
1. Initially the disk had thirty-two small round gold circles, a large circular plate, and a large crescent-shaped plate attached. The circular plate is interpreted as either the Sun or the full Moon, the crescent shape as the crescent Moon (or either the Sun or the Moon undergoing eclipse), and the dots as stars, with the cluster of seven dots likely representing the Pleiades.
2. At some later date, two arcs (constructed from gold of a different origin, as shown by its chemical impurities) were added at opposite edges of the disk. To make space for these arcs, one small circle was moved from the left side toward the center of the disk and two of the circles on the right were covered over, so that thirty remain visible. The two arcs span an angle of 82°, correctly indicating the angle between the positions of sunset at summer and winter solstice at the latitude of the Mittelberg (51° N). Given that the arcs relate to solar phenomena, it is likely the circular plate represents the Sun not the Moon.
3. The final addition was another arc at the bottom, the “sun boat”, again made of gold from a different origin.
4. By the time the disk was buried it also had thirty-nine or forty holes punched out around its perimeter, each approximately 3 mm in diameter.
Significance
Possibly an astronomical instrument as well as an item of religious significance, the disk is a beautiful object; the blue-green patina of the bronze may have been an intentional part of the original artifact.
If authentic, the find reconfirms that the astronomical knowledge and abilities of the people of the European Bronze Age included close observation of the yearly course of the Sun, and the angle between its rising and setting points at summer and winter solstice. While Stonehenge and the Neolithic “circular ditches” such as the 5th millennium BC Goseck circle were used to mark the solstices, the disk is the oldest known “portable” instrument to allow such measurements.
Another view is that the Nebra disk can be linked to the solar calendar reconstructed by Alexander Thom from his analysis of standing stone alignments in Britain. MacKie has argued that several aspects of the disk support this view, following up the work of Prof. Wolfhard Schlosser. The first is that the Mittelberg – the hill on which the disk is supposed to have been found – is so situated that when the sun sets at two distant mountain peaks in the north-west, both midsummer and May Day are accurately marked (and therefore also the old Celtic harvest festival on Aug. 2nd); these are three important dates in the 16 ‘month’ Thom solar calendar. The second feature is the two golden arcs on either side of the disk which subtend angles of about 82 degrees; this is the angular distance between sunrise and sunset at midsummer and midwinter at the latitude of Mittelberg. This surely implies a detailed knowledge of the yearly solar cycle on the part of the disk’s designer. The third feature is the 32 golden ’star spots’ on the disk. Although Thom found really clear evidence for only sixteen subdivisions of the solar year (of 21 or 22 days) in the standing stone alignments, there were some indications of a further subdivision into 32 parts of 10 or 11 days.
Authenticity
There were initial suspicions that the disk might be an archaeological forgery. Peter Schauer of the University of Regensburg, Germany, argues that the Nebra disk is a fake. He is quoted as saying:
“If you urinate on a piece of bronze and then hide it in the ground for a few weeks you can produce the same patina as on the disk.”
Richard Harrison, professor of European prehistory at the University of Bristol and an expert on the Beaker people allowed his initial reaction to be quoted in a BBC documentary:
“When I first heard about the Nebra Disc I thought it was a joke, indeed I thought it was a forgery. Because it’s such an extraordinary piece that it wouldn’t surprise any of us that a clever forger had cooked this up in a backroom and sold it for a lot of money.”
Though Harrison had not seen the skydisk when he was interviewed, it was a reasonable skepticism at that point, but the disk is now widely accepted as authentic and dated to roughly 1600 BC on grounds of typological classification of the associated finds. As the item was not excavated using archaeological methods, even its claimed provenance may be made up, hence authenticating it has depended on microphotography of the corrosion crystals (see link), which produced images that could not be reproduced by a faker.
Dr Harald Meller, lecturing to the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland in April 2008, gave a list of reasons for the authenticity of the disc and for its find spot being on the Mittelberg. The most persuasive of the latter was the discovery by the archaeologists – in the pit in which the looters said they had found the metalwork – of a fragment of gold leaf which exactly fits the gap which existed in the gold leaf covering on the ’sun’ symbol when it was originally recovered.
Archaeologists have revived the debate over whether a spectacular Bronze Age disc from Germany is one of the earliest known calendars. The Nebra disc is emblazoned with symbols of the Sun, Moon and stars and said by some to be 3,600 years old. Writing in the journal Antiquity, a team casts doubt on the idea the disc was used by ancient astronomers as a precision tool for observing the sky. They instead argue that the disc was used for shamanistic rituals.
- Mood: curious
The Star Disc is the most significant archeological find ever in the history of the profession. It was found in a grave in central Europe by grave robbers in 1999. This is why it is so important. It combines the beliefs of three very significant cultures that thrived and boomed during what was known as the Bronze Age. Some of man's greatest text, inventions, philosophies, science, math, and astronomy were born out of this time. This disc encapsulates and combines ideologies from the Ancient Greeks, Ancient Egyptians and the Ancient Scottish and Irish cultures, So how did it come to be in grave in Germany in what is known as the Dark Forest? By testing the age and the metals it has been determined it was definately made from metals found in Europe and not the Middle East. They found exactly where they think the copper used on it was mined from. The big copper disc represents the Sun which played a big part in the cultures of Ancient Egypt as well as Ancient Greece. Draw two lines from the center of the sun that is even with the top and the bottom of the copper bar on the side of the disc. This measures a perfect 82 degree angle which is the difference between the rising and the setting of the Sun in astrological terms during two of Ancient Europes most important times of the year. The Winter Solstice and The Summer Slostice. The cluster of seven copper dots represent a galaxy of stars known as the Pleiades. This galaxy I believe was actually firsst discovered by Ancient Chinese Astronomers, but played a most important role in the culture of the Ancient Greeks. They called this group of stars or planets The Seven Sisters. The boat at the bottom of the disc is what is found in Ancient Egyptian culture and is called a Sun Boat. It beleived by the Eyptians that the sun road on that boat around the earth when the moon started to rise in the sky. And of course there is the symbol of the Moon which was worshipped more so in the Ancient European cultures as well as the Ancient Greeks. They are still puzzling over this most wonderful arifact that came out the Acient World. I am one that belives in reincarnation and this just tells me that what I have always felt for some reason that I could never explain that the Ancient Greeks, the Ancient Egyptians and the Ancient Scots have a very very important connection we have yet to make. I know I have been there...
Mythology of the Seven Sisters (Pleiads)
Pleiades Mythology
Possible Name Derivations
- plein, `to sail', making Pleione `sailing queen' and her daughters `sailing ones.' The cluster's conjunction with the sun in spring and opposition in fall marked the start and end of the summer sailing season in ancient Greece.
- pleos, `full', of which the plural is `many', appropriate for a star cluster.
- peleiades, `flock of doves', consistent with the sisters' mythological transformation.
Genealogy
Individual Sisters
- Alcyone or Halcyone - `queen who wards off evil [storms]' - Seduced by Poseidon and gave birth to either Hyrieus (the name of Orion's father, but perhaps not the same Hyrieus) or Anthas, founder of Anthæa, Hyperea, and Halicarnassus.Another Alcyone, daughter of Æolus (guardian of the winds) and Ægiale, married Ceyx of Trachis; the two jokingly called each other Hera and Zeus, vexing those gods, who drowned Ceyx in a storm at sea; Alcyone threw herself into the sea at the news, and was transformed into a halcyon (kingfisher). Legend has it the halcyon hen buries her dead mate in the winter before laying her eggs in a compact nest and setting it adrift on the sea; Æolus forbids the nest to be disturbed, so the water is calm for 14 days centered on the winter solstice, called the Halcyon Days. The actual bird does not build nests however; instead the story probably derives from an old pagan observance of the turning season, with the moon-goddess conveying a dead symbolic king of20the old year to his resting place. Though this Alcyone and the Pleiad Alcyone appear to be separate individuals, they may be related: in 2000 BC, a vigorous period of ancient astronomy, the Pleiades rose nearly four hours earlier than they do today for the same time of year, and were overhead at nightfall on the winter solstice, when the Halcyon supposedly nested; their conjunction with the sun during spring equinoxes at that time may have something to do with the association of the cluster with birds, which are often used as symbols of life and renewal.
- Asterope or Sterope - `lightning', `twinkling', `sun-face', `stubborn-face' (Indo-European ster-, `star', `stellar', `asterisk', etc.) - In some accounts, ravished by Ares and gave birth to Oenomaus, king of Pisa. In others, Oenomaus was her husband, and they had a beautiful daughter, Hippodaima, and three sons, Leucippus, Hippodamus, and Dysponteus, founder of Dyspontium; or, Oenomaus may instead have had these children with Euarete, daughter of Acrisius.Another Asterope was daughter of the river Cebren.Still another was daughter of Porthaön, and may have been the mother of the Sirens, who lured sailors to their deaths with their enchanting singing.A possible alternate name is Asterië (`of the starry sky' or `of the sun'), which may also be a name for the creatrix of the universe, Eurynome, in the Pelasgian myth. Graves mentions her as a Pleiad only in passing, with no other mention in the other references. Perhaps she was at one time a Pleiad when different names were used, or an earlier version of Sterope, whose name is similar; or perhaps Graves is incorrect. He also in passing calls the titan or oak-goddess Dione a Pleiad, without explanation or corroboration. Does the term have a broader meaning in some contexts?
- Celæno - `swarthy' - Had sons Lycus (``wolf'') and Chimærus (``he-goat'') by Prometheus. No other data.
- Electra or Eleckra - `amber', `shining', `bright' (Indo-European wleik-, `to flow, run', as a liquid); electrum is an alloy of silver and gold, and means amber in Latin, as does the Greek elektron; Thales of Miletus noted in 600 BC that a rubbed piece of amber will attract bits of straw, a manifestation of the effects of static electricity (outer charge stripping via friction), and perhaps the origin of the modern term - Wife of Corythus; seduced by Zeus and gave birth to Dardanus, founder of Troy, ancestor of Priam and his house. Called Atlantis by Ovid, personifying the family. May also, by Thaumas, be the mother of the Harpies, foul bird-women who lived in a Cretan cave and harried criminals, but this could be a different ocean-nymph of the same name.Another Electra was a daughter of Oedipus, though this may not be the same Oedipus who killed his father and married his mother. She is said to be mother of Darda nus and Iason.Yet another Electra was a daughter of Agamemnon and Clytæmnestra, with an alternate name of Laodice, and with brother Orestes and sisters Chrysothemis and Iphigeneia (or Iphianassa), though the latter sister may have been Clytæmnestra's niece, adopted from Theseus and Helen. Agamemnon was king of Mycenæ and led the Greeks against Troy; he was murdered at his return by Clytæmnestra and her lover Ægisthus, both of whom Orestes and Electra killed in revenge, whence the psychological term `Electra complex'. This Electra was also wife to the peasant Pylades, and bore him Medon and Strophius the Second.
- Maia - `grandmother', `mother', `nurse'; `the great one' (Latin) - Eldest and most beautiful of the sisters; a mountain nymph in Arcadia. Seduced by Zeus and gave birth to Hermes. Later became foster-mother to Arcas, son of Zeus and Callisto, during the period while Callisto was a bear, and before she and Arcas were placed in the heavens by Zeus (she as Ursa Major, he as either Boötes or Ursa Minor).Another Maia was the Roman goddess of spring, daughter of Faunus and wife of Vulcan (his Greek counterpart, Hephæstus, married Aphrodite instead). Farmers were cautioned not to sow grain before the time of her setting, or conjunction with the sun. The month of May is named after her, and is coincidentally(?) the month in which the solar conjunction happens. By our modern calendar, the conjunction occurred in April in early=2 0Roman times, with the shift since then due to the precession of the Earth's axis; but calendars too have changed over time, especially before the time of Julius Caesar, so the month and the cluster's solar conjunction may have lined up then as well.Married Sisyphus (se-sophos, `very wise'), son of Æolus, grandson of Deucalion (the Greek Noah), and great-grandson of Prometheus. She bore Sisyphus sons Glaucus, Ornytion, and Sinon; she is sometimes also said to be mother of Dædalus, though others in the running are Alcippe and Iphinoë. Sisyphus founded the city of Ephyre (Corinth) and later revealed Zeus's rape of Ægina to her father Asopus (a river), for which Zeus condemned Sisyphus to roll a huge stone up a hill in Hades, only to have it roll back down each time the task was nearly done. Glaucus (or Glaukos) was father of Bellerophon, and in one story was killed by horses maddened by Aphrodite because he would not let them breed. He also led Lycian troops in the Trojan War, and in the Iliad was tricked by the Greek hero Diomedes into exchanging his gold armor for Diomedes' brass, the origin of the term `Diomedian swap'. Another Glaucus was a fisherman of Boeotia who became a sea-god gifted with prophecy and instructed Apollo in soothsaying. Still another Glaucus was a son of Minos who drowned in a vat of honey and was revived by the seer Polyidos, who instructed Glaucus in divination, but, angry at being made a prisoner, caused the boy to forget everything when Polyidos finally left Crete. The word glaukos means gleaming, bluish green or gray, perhaps describing the appearance of a blind eye if glaucoma (cataract) derives from it. Is the name Glaucus a reference to sight, or blindness, physical or otherwise? It is also curious that meropia is a condition of partial blindness.Another Merope was daughter of Dionysus's son Oenopion, king of Chios; Orion fell in love with her, and Oenopion refused to give her up, instead having him blinded. Orion regained his sight and sought vengeance, but was killed by Artemis, or by a scorpion, or by some other means (many versions).Yet another Merope and her sister Cleothera (with alternate names of Cameiro and Clytië for the two of them) were orphaned daughters of Pandareus.Still another was mother of Æpytus by Cresphontes, king of Messenia. Her husband was murdered by Polyphontes, who claimed both her and the throne, but was later killed by Æpytus to avenge his father's death.One last, more often known as Periboea, was wife of Polybus, king of Corinth. The two of them adopted the infant Oedipus after his father Laius left him to die, heeding a prophecy that his son would kill him, which, of course, he eventually did.
- Merope - `eloquent', `bee-eater', `mortal' -
- Taygete or Taygeta - ? tanygennetos, `long-necked' - Seduced by Zeus and gave birth to Laced æmon, founder of Sparta, to which she was thus an important goddess. In some versions of the story, she was unwilling to yield to Zeus, and was disguised by Artemis as a hind (female red deer) to elude him; but he eventually caught her and begot on her Lacedæmon, whereupon she hanged herself.Another Taygete was niece to the first. She married Lacedæmon and bore Himerus, who drowned himself in a river after Aphrodite caused him to deflower his sister Cleodice. One of the Taygetes may have been mother to Tantalus, who was tormented in Hades with thirst and hunger for offending the gods; however his parentage is uncertain; his mother may instead be Pluto (not the Roman version of Hades), daughter of either Cronus and Rhea or Oceanus and Tethys, and his father Zeus or Tmolus.
Astromorphosis
Lost Pleiad
The Pleiades also known as the "Seven Sisters", is the most famous of all star clusters. The group is very conspicuous, and has been known and regarded with reverence since early times. It was first mentioned by the Chinese in their annals of about 2300 BC, but the earliest European references are somewhat later, in a poem by Hesiod about 1000 BC and in Homer's Odyssey. The myth tells that the Pleiades where seven nymphs, which were saved by Zeus from the pursuit by the giant Orion, by being transformed into a group of dove s and placed among the stars. And in the heavens, to this day, Orion still chases the Pleiades across the sky. To a casual glance, the Pleiades appear as a misty patch, but good eyesight reveals six or seven individual stars and some observers with exceptional eyesight have recorded ten or more under excellent conditions. In all, twenty Pleiads shine at sixth magnitude or brighter, although some are too close to other stars to be resolvable without optical aid. On the next night, try your luck at Pleiades stalking and see how many you can count.
- Mood: ecstatic
This was some very interesting information I ran across concerning Karma and Cause and Effect. Due to the fact that there is no such thing as a conicidence Karma is in fact occuring as a direct result of Cause and Effect that we in fact started in motion. Now it is my belief that our intial motivation for having set something in motion will be the deciding factor as to whether it will result in good Karma or bad Karma. That Cause and Effect is what we are directly responsible for, and our motives for doing so will be the ultimate end affect of what we reap in return by way of Karma.
If we accept that the logical ethical consequence of the law of karma is to behave responsibly, and the tenet of the law of karma is essentially "if you do good things, good things will happen to you — if you do bad things, bad things will happen to you," then it is possible to identify analogs with other religions that do not rely on karma as a metaphysical assertion or doctrine. A consequence (karma) of drinking poison is to become ill. This law of karma has nothing to do with faith or belief. Doing good or bad and getting back the reaction in this sense is automatic and does not require anybodies intervention. Belief does not change the reality. What is challenging to understand is when multiple actions are added together to form very complex systems and to see what will be the form of the reaction. When this complexity exceeds our intellectual capacity and when time needed to see the reaction vastly exceeds the span of human life, is when things become interesting and this is where belief and faith, doctrine and metaphysical start taking place.
The law of cause and effect forms an integral part of Hindu philosophy. This law is termed as 'karma', which means to 'act'. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English defines it as the "sum of person's actions in one of his successive states of existence, viewed as deciding his fate for the next". In Sanskrit karma means "volitional action that is undertaken deliberately or knowingly". This also dovetails self-determination and a strong will power to abstain from inactivity. Karma is the differentia that characterizes human beings and distinguishes him from other creatures of the world.
The Natural Law
The theory of karma harps on the Newtonian principle that every action produces an equal and opposite reaction. Every time we think or do something, we create a cause, which in time will bear its corresponding effects. And this cyclical cause and effect generates the concepts of (or the world) and birth and reincarnation. It is the personality of a human being or the jivatman - with its positive and negative actions - that causes karma.
Karma could be both the activities of the body or the mind, irrespective of the consideration whether the performance brings fruition immediately or at a later stage. However, the involuntary or the reflex actions of the body cannot be called karma.
Your Karma Is Your Own Doing
Every person is responsible for his or her acts and thoughts, so each person's karma is entirely his or her own. Occidentals see the operation of karma as fatalistic. But that is far from true since it is in the hands of an individual to shape his own future by schooling his present.
Hindu philosophy, which believes in life after death, holds the doctrine that if the karma of an individual is good enough, the next birth will be rewarding, and if not, the person may actually devolve and degenerate into a lower life form. In order to achieve good karma it is important to live life according to dharma or what is right.
Three Kinds of Karma
According to the ways of life chosen by a person, his karma can be classified into three kinds. The satvik karma, which is without attachment, selfless and for the benefit of others; the rajasik karma, which is selfish where the focus is on gains for oneself; and the tamasik karma, which is undertaken without heed to consequences, and is supremely selfish and savage.- Mood: contemplative
Profile
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
woifsbaine- Julian
Syndicate
