Telepathy
- Thread starter mistersloane
- Start date
-
- Tags
- i knew that already.
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
martin, I'm gonna use your sentences on saturday if that's ok
i'll post up what i've written after
i never really understood what leary was on about, unfortunately. I'm sure it's great, but i just never got it, and kinda wished i did i think.
i'll post up what i've written after
i never really understood what leary was on about, unfortunately. I'm sure it's great, but i just never got it, and kinda wished i did i think.
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
unfortunately I'm not allowed to use 'what a load of bollocks' at the tate apparently cos it's an open event, and there will be children there, and, um, children don't swear? i have no idea, i don't want to question the Ministry Of Art.
Well Leary, despite other aspects of his history that discredit him (although nearly all of these are by his interpreters which either didn't understand him to begin with or simply hounded him as a poster-boy for a drug epidemic), probably offered the world the most with his 8-circuit brain model. It is astoundingly veritable, and is the most up-to-date model for understanding and reconciling various aspects of scientific and psychological reason with the millenia of esoteric information that there is available. This is not to mention the new forms of perception that are being birthed as a result of the infomation age and the like.
Antero Alli, acting as the current proponent of the model (and Robert Anton Wilson who died 3 years ago) offer simply the most distilled version of the model - and, aside from the late G.I Gurdjieff, offer (unfortunately) one of the only genuinely no-bullshit systems of understanding and engaging with the 'psychic and telepathic' thing you are talking about. Unfortuneately, everything else you read on the subject is mostly complete tripe. I do not blame anyone for being aggressively critical of metaphysical themes - what else to do when most of it is utter crap.
Antero Alli, acting as the current proponent of the model (and Robert Anton Wilson who died 3 years ago) offer simply the most distilled version of the model - and, aside from the late G.I Gurdjieff, offer (unfortunately) one of the only genuinely no-bullshit systems of understanding and engaging with the 'psychic and telepathic' thing you are talking about. Unfortuneately, everything else you read on the subject is mostly complete tripe. I do not blame anyone for being aggressively critical of metaphysical themes - what else to do when most of it is utter crap.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
I ran a preliminary experiment on my (in)ability to sense whether someone behind me is staring at me or not - I guessed correctly 8/9 times (there is a 2% probability of getting 8 or more correct (?)). I couldn't guess whether they were nodding or shaking their head: 0/5 correct. Will do 100 trials tomorrow, using a random number generator to produce the staring behaviour.
Last edited:
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
I should probably have explained it better, I mean I've read Prometheus Rising and read alot of Gurdjieff - who I rate highly - I just never really got into breaking down systems of being into, um, systems of being, I don't really get it is the best way I can put it.
I understand about the Psionic Mind and I understand about True Emotional and True Intellectual states and whatever, but for me it's all such a masculine way of doing things, breaking things down into little compartments, which is I guess what I don't understand. I see why one would do it, but I'm not entirely sure that breaking things down like that isn't just a False Intellectual state in itself, y'know?
To respond as best I can: Abso-fucking-lutely
Maps such as the 8-circuit brain and gurdjieff's are exactly what they are: maps. They are useful for navigational strategies, and that alone. Gurdjieff's entire premise was the fallacy of deluding yourself into thinking you have achieved something merely by intellectual understanding alone. You have to work at it to get results - and for that work, maps can be useful.
As Nick Pell recently said in relation to working with muscular tension, 'if you aren't changing the body directly, you're just programming your mind with more and more bullshit'
Antero Alli has said often that the whole reason he wrote Angel Tech 20 years ago, and indeed his new book The Eight Circuit Brain, is because he felt that in Leary's excessive theoretical masturbation and in Wilson's excessive anthropological explanations - what was missing was a hands-on manual for accessing the states and territories of consciousness that the model itself highlights. A working manual that is biased towards the authority of direct experience, not any mere map or model.
Etc etc.
So if you've read a lot of Gurdjieff and Wilson, what was missing for you? Was it just that you're not that interested in the theoretical side of it? These days I tend to think that being too invested in the theory is a disease of the mind, so from what you've said perhaps your right on track
Maps such as the 8-circuit brain and gurdjieff's are exactly what they are: maps. They are useful for navigational strategies, and that alone. Gurdjieff's entire premise was the fallacy of deluding yourself into thinking you have achieved something merely by intellectual understanding alone. You have to work at it to get results - and for that work, maps can be useful.
As Nick Pell recently said in relation to working with muscular tension, 'if you aren't changing the body directly, you're just programming your mind with more and more bullshit'
Antero Alli has said often that the whole reason he wrote Angel Tech 20 years ago, and indeed his new book The Eight Circuit Brain, is because he felt that in Leary's excessive theoretical masturbation and in Wilson's excessive anthropological explanations - what was missing was a hands-on manual for accessing the states and territories of consciousness that the model itself highlights. A working manual that is biased towards the authority of direct experience, not any mere map or model.
Etc etc.
So if you've read a lot of Gurdjieff and Wilson, what was missing for you? Was it just that you're not that interested in the theoretical side of it? These days I tend to think that being too invested in the theory is a disease of the mind, so from what you've said perhaps your right on track
In the context of both these models - it can be said this way.
Working with understanding a map can be useful if it is helping your mind become more flexible to the value of indivisibility. In the context of the 8cb - that means rendering Circuit 3 (the intellect) more flexible so that it might anchor the emanations of Circuit 7 (the cosmos). The trick is that this also takes meditation to achieve, which is the 'act' of developing receptivity (non-action) so that the mind might be put at rest and 'surrendered' to serve a force higher than itself.
In any case - one learns the intellect is only useful if it learns to 'understand' the emotional centre, just as our volatile emotions can only be useful if we learn to tame them to the reason of our intellect.
In the case of Gurdjieff, the false intellectual centre is put to work alongside the emotional and physical centre - towards surrendering to the responses of the physical body and the movements of the emotions. Once a syncrony has been developed enough and false-identification weeded out, crystallisation of the higher emotional and intellectual centres can be 'achieved'.
Working with understanding a map can be useful if it is helping your mind become more flexible to the value of indivisibility. In the context of the 8cb - that means rendering Circuit 3 (the intellect) more flexible so that it might anchor the emanations of Circuit 7 (the cosmos). The trick is that this also takes meditation to achieve, which is the 'act' of developing receptivity (non-action) so that the mind might be put at rest and 'surrendered' to serve a force higher than itself.
In any case - one learns the intellect is only useful if it learns to 'understand' the emotional centre, just as our volatile emotions can only be useful if we learn to tame them to the reason of our intellect.
In the case of Gurdjieff, the false intellectual centre is put to work alongside the emotional and physical centre - towards surrendering to the responses of the physical body and the movements of the emotions. Once a syncrony has been developed enough and false-identification weeded out, crystallisation of the higher emotional and intellectual centres can be 'achieved'.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
No. For two reasons:
A result called the no-communication theorem (the link is pretty technical but the first paragraph gives a basic description of the premise) shows that it's impossible to use entangled states to actually transmit information instantaneously, or at any speed faster than light. That's not to say that entangled states can't be used for other cool applications like quantum encryption, but here the information is still transmitted by light down an optic fibre in the normal way.
Secondly, it's incredibly difficult to maintain an entangled state between two particles over distances much greater than the size of an atom, because the moment either particle interacts with its environment, the state collapses and entanglement is lost. There's no way a particle in one person's head could be entangled with another particle in the next brain cell along, let alone with a particle in someone else's head.
I don't actually mind the the occult and the mystical, or the fringe psych stuff like Leary's 8-circuit brain - it's the pseudoscience that really drives me up the wall.
Last edited:
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
Um haven't talked much about quantum physics but did mention the theory by Penrose-Hameroff, which I think people are still arguing about, but only kinda mentioned it in passing that that was what they thought, not that it held as any 'fact'. I think I want to marry Roger Penrose, I bet he does shitloads of really good hallucinogens.
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
I must check Antero Alli, I got to him in my reading 'travels' but never delved, the *-Circuit Brain looks like fun.
I was very interested in the theoretical side for about 10 years. I think I stopped wanting to read didactic tracks by men (Wilson aside, who was so obviously fun) who I just thought I'd really hate if I met them in real life. As much as I think Gurdjieff was probably the only original thinker in that realm in the 20th century, I didn't want to learn what he wrote, it's the master/disciple thing. I agree with the maps thing - 777 etc are amazing too. I think I just got bored actually, which coincided with me starting to make my own work, which I found changed my brain and made me much more aware than reading someone's elses thoughts on their own brain.
I think ultimately I find it all really subjective, put forward as objective, and it just pisses me off.
Actually maybe I just got lazy.
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
Ah no I meant in this thing I've been writing for the Tate!
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Yeah I just checked back through the thread and realised that, sorry!
Penrose's ideas are really exciting, I mean trying to meld together a neural basis for consciousness with QM (edit: quantum GRAVITY, no less!), like he's chosen the two most weird and poorly-understood areas of science and tried to use one to explain the other...proper genius-cum-nutter stuff.
Your thing sounds pretty cool, I've got nothing on during the day so I might well pop along. Is it a one-off event?
Last edited:
wetty!
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
Yeah I just checked back through the thread and realised that, sorry!
Penrose's ideas are really exciting, I mean trying to meld together a neural basis for consciousness with QM (edit: quantum GRAVITY, no less!), like he's chosen the two most weird and poorly-understood areas of science and tried to use one to explain the other...proper genius-cum-nutter stuff.
Your thing sounds pretty cool, I've got nothing on during the day so I might well pop along. Is it a one-off event?
It's in the evening from 7 - 10, www.tate.org.uk/youngtate
I feel like such a Glitter for doing something at a 'young people's' event. I'm sooooo far from that. There's bands (my nephew's band!) and um, Bill Oddie's daughter's band.