PDA

View Full Version : Dangerous Knowledge



solomon levi
01-02-2011, 02:32 AM
http://fulldocumentaries.com/2009/05/11/dangerous-knowledge/

It's interesting because it is the problem of the mystic as well - how do we live in
a world that is both finite and infinite? How has our spirit become identified with the body?
How does the ego appear though I've seen it has no existence?
How do we interpret/filter infinity into personal reality?

John Nash also comes to mind. The movie "A Beautiful Mind" is about him.

III
01-03-2011, 06:42 PM
http://fulldocumentaries.com/2009/05/11/dangerous-knowledge/

It's interesting because it is the problem of the mystic as well - how do we live in
a world that is both finite and infinite? How has our spirit become identified with the body?
How does the ego appear though I've seen it has no existence?
How do we interpret/filter infinity into personal reality?

John Nash also comes to mind. The movie "A Beautiful Mind" is about him.

Hi Solomon,

Actually you make a good point here. There is dangerous knowledge, or perhaps Dangerous Visions and Again Dangerous Visions. This is what makes some things incredibly difficult to talk about or to be able to wrap one's mind around. As Alchemy might be validly called "applied enlightenment" it is in the application most get into trouble with that ever elusive thing, "the petty ego". I make it very clear to my students and co-workers that pursuing a specific outcome, ie wealth, fame. beauty, anything the ego wants is dangerous for reasons of how the system works. Making "connections" between the infinite eternal and our space-time existence has it's risks. We tend to think of the eternal as also being unchanging which it isn't. It's just that the eternal changes in a quantum manner, suddenly and completely, and once it changes it has ALWAYS been that way. Even more confusing in that is that for a very few who are pure enough to safely learn to travel along the "cosmic tic" axis, prior states can be sensed sort of as a ghost image, but can't be "restored" from. The Absolute is always and always been the infinite eternal NOW and yet can also evolve. One can wrap up a lot of infinity in an "object". Trying to understand it by what might be called "human logic" doesn't work very well. However, object oriented simulation appears to be more productive of understanding.of a kind.

How do we interpret/filter infinity into personal reality?

John Nash is an interesting cautionary tale. Seeing patterns in things can be dangerous if meaning is imposed on a pattern that doesn't really have that meaning, ie spies being connected to all sorts of ordinary news stories.. Another hazard is in missing of meaning of a pattern that has it.or of assigning an incorrect meaning. It is in this manner that we build our "processor". In a way then, the purification processes are all about repairing the bugs we build into ourselves because if we build ourselves with flaws in the foundation and the levels of ourselves it's like building a skyscraper with 1 degree of additional tilt at each floor. Pretty soon it doesn't work and there is a catastrophic failure. Nash had to learn what to ignore and what to pay attention to.

So the fact that one can perceive and even understand the infinite shouldn't be expected to mean a damned thing in one's finite life. That and $4 will get one the same fancy cup of coffee as $4 alone.

Andro
01-03-2011, 07:36 PM
It's just that the eternal changes in a quantum manner, suddenly and completely, and once it changes it has ALWAYS been that way.

Very true and beautifully spoken, to my ears of course :)


[...] prior states can be sensed sort of as a ghost image, but can't be "restored" from.

I agree and disagree. But I agree :)

They can't be 'restored' from 'As Is/Was', because this ghost image is not actual memory (of the 'what happened' variety), but infinitely compressed ('Ghost') Archetypal 'memory'.
We can derive and apply from it, but not 'restore'.

Quote from 'Inception': "Never re-create from memory, always imagine new places"... Not exactly in perfect context, but still fits the bill somehow...


So the fact that one can perceive and even understand the infinite shouldn't be expected to mean a damned thing in one's finite life. That and $4 will get one the same fancy cup of coffee as $4 alone.

So the field/tension between drink and drinker is of no consequence from your perspective?
Maybe it is the 'same' cup of coffee or whatever other experience, but I doubt it would taste the same, or that you would drink it in the same way.

Has not your sex life, and life in general, been different after discovering and understanding Sexual Alchemy?

Have you not inevitably and choicelessly applied your glimpses into infinity outside the sexual paradigm and into the coffee shops, and into everything else for that matter?

III
01-03-2011, 08:15 PM
Very true and beautifully spoken, to my ears of course :)



I agree and disagree. But I agree :)

They can't be 'restored' from 'As Is/Was', because this ghost image is not actual memory (of the 'what happened' variety), but infinitely compressed ('Ghost') Archetypal 'memory'.
We can derive and apply from it, but not 'restore'.

Quote from 'Inception': "Never re-create from memory, always imagine new places"... Not exactly in perfect context, but still fits the bill somehow...



So the field/tension between drink and drinker is of no consequence from your perspective?
Maybe it is the 'same' cup of coffee or whatever other experience, but I doubt it would taste the same, or that you would drink it in the same way.

Has not your sex life, and life in general, been different after discovering and understanding Sexual Alchemy?

Have you not inevitably and choicelessly applied your glimpses into infinity outside the sexual paradigm and into the coffee shops, and into everything else for that matter?



So the field/tension between drink and drinker is of no consequence from your perspective?
Maybe it is the 'same' cup of coffee or whatever other experience, but I doubt it would taste the same, or that you would drink it in the same way.

Has not your sex life, and life in general, been different after discovering and understanding Sexual Alchemy?

Have you not inevitably and choicelessly applied your glimpses into infinity outside the sexual paradigm and into the coffee shops, and into everything else for that matter?

You are quite correct; actually EVERYTHING is completely changed including that cup of coffee. I rarely have coffee that I don't brew because of those differences. Food becomes an activated artifact. The food I prepare tastes more and better to almost everybody. Everything has level upon level of added information, detail, indefinable differences and how could it not be? My whole life has been like that. I honestly don't remember what it was like before

However, my intended meaning was different from this one.

I agree and disagree. But I agree :)

Always, since I, or anybody, can only speak a very limited subset approximation of the infinity of anything..

Quote from 'Inception': "Never re-create from memory, always imagine new places"... Not exactly in perfect context, but still fits the bill somehow...

I have not seen INCEPTION yet. However, I might approach the same as advice to always remember the original event, not the memory of how you understood it previously which becomes changed and/or reinforced each time it is recalled. See it with "new eyes" each time is how others have said it.

Trying for a specific meaning again I might say that the things we perceive/experience and the way we perceive them have to be their own reward as nobody in the world owes one anything for seeing more and more deeply, etc. Most appear happiest if they don't know of any such differences or have to acknowledge them.

Has not your sex life, and life in general, been different after discovering and understanding Sexual Alchemy?

I was remembering such things by 9 years old and had a little kid's "yuck" response. I started practicing Sexual Alchemy at puberty. I don't remember a "before" condition of a sex life though with my wife for many years it was likely that because our times of real connection were rare. I was always trying for things she couldn't or wouldn't play the other half to.

solomon levi
01-04-2011, 03:38 AM
:) Everything changes, and everything stays the same. I've seen that one.
Or as Blake put it - "To see the world in a grain of sand, and to see heaven in a wild flower,
hold infinity in the palm of your hands, and eternity in an hour."

This is the quantum "popping" - like how Cantor could both prove and disprove his theorem - the uncertainty principle...
observer can't observe without affecting it. :)

solomon levi
01-04-2011, 08:50 PM
A little off topic, but i couldn't help thinking of this while watching Dangerous Knowledge :D
monty python - the funniest joke in the world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gpjk_MaCGM

III
01-05-2011, 01:44 AM
A little off topic, but i couldn't help thinking of this while watching Dangerous Knowledge :D
monty python - the funniest joke in the world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gpjk_MaCGM

Hi Solomon,

Then there is THE ULTIMATE MELODY by Arthur C. Clarke in Tales From the White Hart, a melody so compelling it crowded everything else from a person's brain permanently.

solomon levi
01-05-2011, 04:00 AM
Hi Solomon,

Then there is THE ULTIMATE MELODY by Arthur C. Clarke in Tales From the White Hart, a melody so compelling it crowded everything else from a person's brain permanently.

Wow. That sounds cool! :)

solomon levi
01-06-2011, 04:31 AM
Being "sane" is really just being fixed, stable in any given reality.
Going "insane" is simply volatilizing the fixed, returning order to chaos, elements to QE (quintessence).

This is why in "proper" alchemy our mercury and sulphur act on eachother simultaneously,
fixing the volatile and volatilizing the fixed, spiritualizing matter and materializing spirit, creating a perfect rebis/androgyne.
If you push it too far, too many eagles, our subject will go insane - i.e. volatilise right through the vessel and be 'lost'.

In Castaneda terms, your shields/ego/doing gives you stability/security. You have to find a 'crack' (not-doing) in this
'world'/egg shell/protection/armor and expand it to glimpse infinity. But don't throw away your shields all at once.
You have to lose your mind/human form gradually, pushing, yet maintaining, sanity. It's walking the razor's edge.

Plant allies are used when necessary to begin the 'crack', but reliance upon them is insanity/addiction. Some are very "jealous Gods".
In "proper alchemy" one should learn to use their will/sulphur to follow the path that has been shown by the ally/mercury.
This will make one strong and pliant enough to not be ripped apart by infinity - a balanced rebis.

Albion
01-06-2011, 06:42 PM
http://fulldocumentaries.com/2009/05/11/dangerous-knowledge/

It's interesting because it is the problem of the mystic as well - how do we live in
a world that is both finite and infinite? How has our spirit become identified with the body?
How does the ego appear though I've seen it has no existence?
How do we interpret/filter infinity into personal reality?

John Nash also comes to mind. The movie "A Beautiful Mind" is about him.

Excellent documentary, Solomon-Levi - thanks [just finished watching it].

Recently, I saw another fine BBC documentary "The Trap" in which John Nash's not-so-beautiful contribution to the modern menu of social engineering premises is highlighted:

The Trap: What Happened to Our Dreams of Freedom?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_zk2X92kxY

The series consists of three one-hour programmes which explore the concept and definition of freedom, specifically, "how a simplistic model of human beings as self-seeking, almost robotic, creatures led to today's idea of freedom."

Episode 1. "F**k You Buddy"

In this episode, Curtis examines the rise of game theory during the Cold War and the way in which its mathematical models of human behavior filtered into economic thought. The program traces the development of game theory with particular reference to the work of John Nash, who believed that all humans were inherently suspicious and selfish creatures that strategised constantly. Using this as his first premise, Nash constructed logically consistent and mathematically verifiable models, for which he won the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences, commonly referred to as the Nobel Prize in Economics. He invented system games reflecting his beliefs about human behavior, including one he called "Fuck You Buddy" (later published as "So Long Sucker"), in which the only way to win was to betray your playing partner, and it is from this game that the episode's title is taken. These games were internally coherent and worked correctly as long as the players obeyed the ground rules that they should behave selfishly and try to outwit their opponents, but when RAND's analysts tried the games on their own secretaries, they instead chose not to betray each other, but to cooperate every time. This did not, in the eyes of the analysts, discredit the models, but instead proved that the secretaries were unfit subjects.

What was not known at the time was that Nash was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, and, as a result, was deeply suspicious of everyone around him—including his colleagues—and was convinced that many were involved in conspiracies against him. It was this mistaken belief that led to his view of people as a whole that formed the basis for his theories. Footage of an older and wiser Nash was shown in which he acknowledges that his paranoid views of other people at the time were false.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trap_(television_documentary_series)

III
01-06-2011, 07:39 PM
Excellent documentary, Solomon-Levi - thanks [just finished watching it].

Recently, I saw another fine BBC documentary "The Trap" in which John Nash's not-so-beautiful contribution to the modern consensus reality is highlighted:

The Trap: What Happened to Our Dreams of Freedom?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_zk2X92kxY

The series consists of three one-hour programmes which explore the concept and definition of freedom, specifically, "how a simplistic model of human beings as self-seeking, almost robotic, creatures led to today's idea of freedom."

Episode 1. "F**k You Buddy"

In this episode, Curtis examines the rise of game theory during the Cold War and the way in which its mathematical models of human behavior filtered into economic thought. The program traces the development of game theory with particular reference to the work of John Nash, who believed that all humans were inherently suspicious and selfish creatures that strategised constantly. Using this as his first premise, Nash constructed logically consistent and mathematically verifiable models, for which he won the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences, commonly referred to as the Nobel Prize in Economics. He invented system games reflecting his beliefs about human behavior, including one he called "Fuck Your Buddy" (later published as "So Long Sucker"), in which the only way to win was to betray your playing partner, and it is from this game that the episode's title is taken. These games were internally coherent and worked correctly as long as the players obeyed the ground rules that they should behave selfishly and try to outwit their opponents, but when RAND's analysts tried the games on their own secretaries, they instead chose not to betray each other, but to cooperate every time. This did not, in the eyes of the analysts, discredit the models, but instead proved that the secretaries were unfit subjects.

What was not known at the time was that Nash was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, and, as a result, was deeply suspicious of everyone around him—including his colleagues—and was convinced that many were involved in conspiracies against him. It was this mistaken belief that led to his view of people as a whole that formed the basis for his theories. Footage of an older and wiser Nash was shown in which he acknowledges that his paranoid views of other people at the time were false.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trap_(television_documentary_series (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trap_%28television_documentary_series))


Hi Albion,

I plan to watch THE TRAP soon. I think that politics in the USA at present are an excellent example of millions of people being convinced to vote radically against their own best self interests. If politicians spoke like engineers in terms of solving problems we would have a very different situation in this country today in which game theory might have more practical application. Same with researchers for instance. There two forms of natural vitamin b12, the real natural b12s found in humans and all other animals. These two forms are 100 to 10,000 times more effective than the officially defined "vitamin b12" forms of cyanocobalamin and hydroxycobalamin. Codex Alimentarus would make these two natural and massively effective forms illegal. Game theory, with people looking out for their own enlightened self interests (I prefer "enlightened" to "best" in this terminology) would pick the effective natural forms every time. However, 60 years of research including a Nobel prize back the lab mistake of cyanocobalamin and it's photolytic breakdown form, hydroxcoblamin because it technically fullfils the roles of real b12 even though very poorly and we have all these research reputations to protect. It comes down to turf battles and profit, the two non-active forms are more stable as they are more oxidized or already at photolytic breakdown, giving them the shelf life of a petrified twinkie instead of merely a couple of years. This may actually be causing a substantial part of the diseases of certain kinds seen in the USA, UK and other countries.

The schema Nash saw might be said to represent the exploitative misogynistic sex magic view of Crowley rather than the divine feminine cooperative view of some tantric alchemists, such as myself.. I believe that learning to cooperate is of massive importance in spiritual alchemy. All sorts of things can't be done alone. It takes two to tango.

When I was trying to recover from lifelong illnesses and decades of disability I did data mining on the internet, applied game theory and easily found the solutions to the problems in 9 months that more than 100 physicians of mine (and most all the rest in the world) had been unable to find in 50+ years. Game theory can be a very powerful tool if used carefully. Of course the defect from the industry point of view is that my solution cut my pharmacy bill by $1000/month and I am healthy, consuming a minimum of medical services, an undesirable outcome from the industries point of view.

I remember back to the very beginning of HMOs and managed care. I suggested to an HMO for whom I was a consultant that they do "data mining" to identify women that had certain types of results in childbirth, ie neural tube defects and jaundiced babies, and give them prenatal vitamins supplying the nutrients that would prevent those problems. I was told that such a solution was "unthinkable" as it implied that their lousy diets could have caused their babies to have problems. Ten years later they got around that by prescribing prenatal vitamins to ALL women not using birth control rather than merely identifying the ones with a demonstrated dietary problems. They were perfectly willing to continue having babies with problems for another 10 years until they decided upon a politically correct solution. Now they have gone so far as to put folic acid in white flour, further "fortifying" it with a fraction of the vitamins removed in making it "white" flour. And it did cut neural tube defects by 27%, about half of what they expected, because they ignored the fact that they used the least effective form of folate and ignored the other factors contributing or used the relatively inactive and worst forms of those. White flour of course doesn't support life generally and has an almost indefinite shelf life if kept dry whereas whole wheat flour supports life but spoils.

Personally I don't associate with or play with those playing by the "Fuck You Buddy" schema if I can avoid it.

Andro
01-06-2011, 09:20 PM
the divine feminine cooperative view

If it's a 'cooperative' view, then shouldn't the phrase read: "The divine masculine/divine feminine cooperative view"?

Elsewhere, you wrote you are a Priest of Goddess (if I remember correctly...)

Is your partner a Priestess of God? (to use your terminology...)
Does she use the term 'Divine Masculine' like you use the term 'Divine Feminine'?
If yes - You seem to have nailed this phase :)
If not - The equation is unbalanced and there is still work to be done.

III
01-07-2011, 08:42 AM
If it's a 'cooperative' view, then shouldn't the phrase read: "The divine masculine/divine feminine cooperative view"?

Elsewhere, you wrote you are a Priest of Goddess (if I remember correctly...)

Is your partner a Priestess of God? (to use your terminology...)
Does she use the term 'Divine Masculine' like you use the term 'Divine Feminine'?
If yes - You seem to have nailed this phase :)
If not - The equation is unbalanced and there is still work to be done.

Hi Androgynus,

Both/each of us are both/each priest/priestess of God/Goddess. The equation is balanced in multiple dimensions. We each/both play all parts in this fractal. Then we do it all again and again ad infinitum, alchemical marriage, then alchemical union and synthesis done over and over in an endless fractal. It is good to see that you see the possibility. Most get the wrong idea when I tell them this. A lot of "men" find my energy to be upsetting. As the illusion of such is created by reflecting the reflection back and forth to infinity, the result is genderless as the two have become the same and become one, each totally inclusive of the other in many versions and variations. The deeper this is done the finer the granularity being worked with. Words kind of fail me in describing.

Andro
01-07-2011, 09:00 AM
Thanks for clearing this up :)


Words kind of fail me in describing.

This is a really good sign for someone as eloquent :)


A lot of "men" find my energy to be upsetting.

I can relate...

solomon levi
01-07-2011, 06:16 PM
Love has no gender. :)
Which is why it is sufficient unto itself.
But like God, it can divide itself and play the seeking game.

III
01-08-2011, 12:21 AM
Love has no gender. :)
Which is why it is sufficient unto itself.
But like God, it can divide itself and play the seeking game.


Hi Solomon,

Love has no gender. :)
Which is why it is sufficient unto itself.
But like God, it can divide itself and play the seeking game

The laws of thermodynamics seem to apply, there must be a division and difference for the LOVE to flow.