Birch

"Not everyone is interested in scientifically validating their results...that doesn't mean they don't still get results. " I reckon it's worth getting back into that 'what is' 'scientific validation' discussion:-) I mean, of itself, the 'single hypothesis' based experiment has to be the most difficult thing to even attempt to bring about as a basic experimental condition before you even get to the rest of it. --Opinion alert ----

Ur, Mr President, I was somewhat serious http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120507154114.htm

Wow, that was very cool. "Much of what you believe 'you' thought of is because of other conditions occurring in the 'meta-consciousness' or field generated by other civilizations, beings, peoples at other times, spaces, dimensions, etc.,. that are crossing through your current stream of consciousness. Some of the ways these manifest are in situations like synchronicity, dejavu, coinciding incidences. These are all variations and aspects of time, space and dimension of self transmitting or 'infiltrating' the sphere of present time and present consciousness into your awareness." I have direct experience of knowing that a thought I 'thought' (sic) was mine actually originated elsewhere. In fact it's a pain in the butt trying to get at what are really one's 'own' thoughts and guarding oneself from the ambient BS. Seems to me that some traditions like to say that the best way to get over this issue is to stop thinking entirely. I tried that and I didn't do very well - or rather I often got to this point where I thought 'hey, I'm not thinking' - which is IMO that classic joke buddhists like to get people to play on themselves while meditating. So sometimes I wonder if it's perhaps worth me learning different ways of thinking (per 5E systems thinking for example) than this 'no thought' thing.

https://www.summaries.com/index/Talent%20is%20Overrated.pdf

Dear Mr President, Have you read that article about the increase in child allergies due to them not being allowed to eat dirt and living in 'over-sanitized' conditions? -K-

MPG, I was thinking that if you would like more 'scientific' experimental conditions, you might lean more towards the current trend in 'social science' where folks are experimenting with stuff like curses. Only half-kidding, the experiment I'm referring to is the one where kids' math scores get affected 'just' by telling them stuff they can identify with prior to the test. I believe it has been tried with lots of variants like race, gender, etc. 'girls aren't good at math' apparently made a difference. A testable one. As did some 'racial' comments. Yes, it requires identification with the 'curse' but if you're 'obviously' already a member of the 'cursed' category, it's no big step to believe something else about 'yourself'. I guess it doesn't 'sound' like 'proper magic' much but it's the kind being done everyday. So far, I haven't seen an answer (that I can understand as one) to the question I asked about the nature of the unconscious 'archetype' above. I kind of sort of get the idea that Seth thinks the entities are independent of whatever unconscious 'qualities' a person gives them and from what DNB says, it looks like one should be making all efforts to render the archytype as 'conscious' as possible with the images, symbols and sounds etc. I'm sort of on the fence:-)

I was under the impression that for liberated beings there was in fact no 'karma', no 'rebirth' etc. The 'siddhis' I'm not sure. Sam Harris is a hottie:-)

Right, thanks. I was going to address this earlier but being on a phone n' all... DNB your answer sort of kind of speaks to what I was trying to get at. Seth, I agree too with what you're saying BUT, here's what I'm concerned with presently. Let's just say I'd like to contact an "archetype" of some kind BUT my previous unconscious exposure in the time and place I, er, 'turned up in' puts me in touch with a specific flavor of it. I mean, the very changes forced upon various 'paradigms' (per the DNB link) make it much more likely that I'd 'dial up' the one that's been there 'with me' since I was exposed to it (includes other people's exposure and them telling me, either by words or otherwise, about it) than other, earlier variants of the 'thing'. I wouldn't call a stop sign 'ritual magic' but it's def a magical symbol IMO/IME :-) Especially noticeable in rural areas. When I lived in the country, we found that cars weren't slowing down enough in front of our road entrance, so we put some signs in front of it.

You've mentioned the "egregore' before but I can't find the other posts right now (and not actually looking hard enough, forgive:-)) I was wondering for quite a while whether the 'tapping in' to some kind of 'entity' (for example an archetype, for example a deity of some kind) brings ALL of the 'stuff' associated with that deity to a person whether the person tapping in knows about them in detail or not. Whether the result is highly dependent on the individual's understanding/ideas of the deity. You know, the fun questions:-) In other words, let's say I'm attempting to 'incarnate' 'Diana the huntress' (the kind of thing I don't do these days) and decide to 'tap in' - am I going to end up with ALL of Diana's qualities or just the ones I think she has (dependent on my prior understanding of her)? I'm all for using my own imagination, not so happy about it being used, if you see what I mean.

Works for me (Safari) What's the thing in the tree? It wasn't there before.

Who said horse?

More of this "how cultures [deliberately] misconstrue such concepts for their own personal gain." please:-)

What's the 'real' desire? I suggest if you dig deep enough, you may find it's something very different from what you think it is. IME desires are often born of the want to resolve something in the past. But not always. Because part of oneself is timeless, this is not understood. To 'fix' something that was unsatisfactory at some other point in time in some other place (I'd even go as far as to include 'learning' - further 'evolving' in this process). ---opinion alert---

I'm sure you could find a pdf somewhere. I haven't bought his book either but I heard a radio interview that I found interesting. I don't think I would have come up with any of his ideas myself but I found some of them kind of well done.

You may also wish to dig into the "cigarette substitute" industry, just for fun. Also http://trustmeimlying.com/

I've had bad experiences with meditation but I've found one of the keys is education about where each type comes from and its typical effects. I still 'meditate' but not with a view to raising kundalini or chi. To be honest, I don't know what I'd do with it. There are so many different types of meditation and I wouldn't say every type suits everyone. Some techniques are suppressive, some tap into resonances that one may or may not wish to deal with. Some leave you wide open to handing over your brain to let someone else drive. I think it's good to know what does what. It's like being your own brain surgeon.

One way to find out if it does or not is to deliberately do things that run counter to it and see what happens. Doesn't have to be something dangerous. Of course I sort of agree with you that ultimately it 'doesn't exist' in and of itself. That's why we 'need' constant reminders of the 'fact' that it does exist and what is expected of you by it. You'll notice under my pseudo there's a statement about 'sheep-pen and dog whistle". For a while I thought I had succeeded in transcending most of my conditioning. At this point, I couldn't be more wrong.

Yes it's a tough one for me too. One way I thought I would get around the structures was to study them. These days I don't think that's the way either. My family experience was very much of the "Look at Jennifer, you should be more like her." Or things like "We liked you better when you smiled all the time". School was mostly about studying things that have now been proved wrong and not about anything particularly useful. In some ways I don't rail as much as I used to about 'society' because I know that most people have pretty much been through the same blender. We could look at "Elites" and see what their training was but I'm not convinced their education is a whole lot different. Maybe some TTB who was brought up in that social strata could weigh in. I've often found it strange that Bhudda, who was supposedly a prince, didn't consider the social structure of his (likely) feudal system to be a source of suffering.

Double post

Thanks Gerard, I'm actually interested in the 'intensive neijia' as my 'gnarly leg meridians have been giving me gyp. I went from being up and about to having to sit on my butt in front of a computer for hours on end this week and I can def feel that my lower spine and my legs don't like it.

Ok, I should qualify the latter. My personal opinion is that the Tao moves in its own way regardless of people. However, people are pretty much into attempting to foresee the future, posit ways of predicting it etc because of the (obvious?) advantage that gives one over others who are unable (which is also why you might want to screw with a calendar, but I digress:-)) The other way of doing things is not to predict the future but to dictate it in ways that are advantageous to oneself (or group). IMO this is what many of our current 'leaders' are attempting at present (for fun, you can go online and read the various 'trend' and 'strategic' reports from a variety of 'think tanks' - many of whom also serve in advisory roles to government/industry.)

Bible schmible.

Prior to reading the TTB's I had no idea that guys were going at it that much. And then at one point the 'kundalini' fired 'just so' for a while and I suddenly and painfully understood what it might be like to be a young dude (in my case, I used 'MCO' as a catch-all for pretty much everything for a while). Where I am curious about male masturbation (or even sex for that matter) is that it seems to get co-opted as a 'stress-management' behavior for pretty much everything. The stuff I've read on here suggests that ejac is itself stressful for men and so some kind of 'non-virtuous circle' is established where the guy feels terrible/stressed, whacks off, feels better, then feels terrible/stressed, rince and repeat. But then there's the whole 'socio-cultural-religious' 'overlay' which apparently makes it stressful for men to pleasure themselves from very early on (as soon as someone says 'Don't touch that') - making neurotics of many. So, to the contrary, I think it's a valid topic on TTB's (especially since so many practices use 'sexual energy' in one way or another).

"There is nothing in this universe that is supernatural, there is only that which we don't understand. I could rant on for hours about the biology of the the mind and the spirit, but not many people here really care and I would just be wasting my breath." I agree with the first part. I'd quite like to hear you rant on the second part and I disagree on the third part. 'biology of the spirit' - this is the kind of stuff I dig. Of course you'd probably have to call it something else ;-)