Turned Infinitely Inward

[Ryan Rudolph]

Skipair,

You're right though. It is dangerous. That's why I like it. Riding the line.

The danger is based on you being addicted to finite forms, and attached to the degree that it weakens you psychologically, weakens you to the point where you lose your sanity, and such behavior poses the possibly of you behaving like a irrational animal, an animal that is all too human.

You claim that you speak consciously, but would a conscious person take such large risks with their own sanity unless they were addicted to life's pleasures?

In my opinion, you lack the strength to live without egotistical pleasures, so don't fool yourself, don't criticize Nick as if you possess a superior thought out philosophy. You are walking on a steep unstable precipice, and criticizing the individuals below you on the firm ground, as they watch you from below.

Its fine if you are addicted to sex, and the comforts women give, but don't try to pass it off as a well-thought out philosophy. You might be able to seduce unconscious unthinking women, but not many of the veteran thinking on this board.

you forget, we have the same thoughts as you, same battles, same biology. Being human isn't celebration time, its about caution and watching your behavior. If not, you will end up an irrational mess, clinging to form, missing some dead memory, longing to repeat some pleasure and so on...

"The fall is always equal in intensity as the climb, and the fall is inevitable, as we live in a finite world of everchanging forms"

[skipair]

Jesus, Ryan, you really are a downer sometimes. :-|

The danger is based on you being addicted to finite forms, and attached to the degree that it weakens you psychologically, weakens you to the point where you lose your sanity, and such behavior poses the possibly of you behaving like a irrational animal, an animal that is all too human.

Translation: "Blabla."

You claim that you speak consciously, but would a conscious person take such large risks with their own sanity unless they were addicted to life's pleasures?

There's actually not that much risk no matter what I do. Whatever the consequences will be, so they will be. Life is really not that big of a deal.

In my opinion, you lack the strength to live without egotistical pleasures, so don't fool yourself, don't criticize Nick as if you possess a superior thought out philosophy. You are walking on a steep unstable precipice, and criticizing the individuals below you on the firm ground, as they watch you from below.

Ryan, with all due respect, what the fuck are you talking about?

Its fine if you are addicted to sex, and the comforts women give, but don't try to pass it off as a well-thought out philosophy. You might be able to seduce unconscious unthinking women, but not many of the veteran thinking on this board.

I remember reading that you like to masturbate. I just prefer to masturbate using a woman instead of my own hand.

you forget, we have the same thoughts as you, same battles, same biology. Being human isn't celebration time, its about caution and watching your behavior. If not, you will end up an irrational mess, clinging to form, missing some dead memory, longing to repeat some pleasure and so on...

I am not here to be overly cautious. There is one life to live and I am going all out. You can push your fear-based morality on me all you like, but the fact is that I am confident and well prepared for the future. If you want me to be something else, you can fuck off.

"The fall is always equal in intensity as the climb, and the fall is inevitable, as we live in a finite world of everchanging forms"

Yep, and instead of sitting on the sidelines like a bitch, I like to play. I know it's just a silly game, but I like to play anyway. If I lose, I lose. If I win, I win. Do you still know how to have fun or not?

[Carmel]

Animus:
Is it wrong to beat someone up a bit to try to jar their thinking? I'm inclined to think it is if the person is engrossed by delusion and also not very productive.

Carmel:
I don't think it's a question of right or wrong, but rather, is it effective? It may work in some cases, but the person you're beating up may just become overly defensive, completely shut down and not listen to anything you have to say.

Animus:
Worst of all this is that I keep lamenting the facts I already know. That is the point, the point of wanting to change the world and knowing that it can't be achieved in the ways desired, that its like being tangled up in some respect.

Carmel:
The telling phrase here might be "tangled up". In the example you gave, I sense that you do have compassion for your friend's child, but you might be overly involved in the outcome of the advice you give. I think it's prudent to offer health information to the parents, but are you able to detach yourself from the effects? Give the advice, then just let go....

[Ryan Rudolph]

Skipair,

There's actually not that much risk no matter what I do. Whatever the consequences will be, so they will be. Life is really not that big of a deal.

I disagree, I believe that there are serious consequences to your actions, and life is a big deal because it is all you have. So rather than having a wishy washy attitude about life events, I take a much more proactive stand,

But if you feel you can play with women and not be attached, go ahead, try it, but be warned: the sun must always turn to night, just as the when the habit forming patterns of romance come to an end, there must always be suffering, delusion, and all the misery of losing something pleasurable. The mind clings to her, and won't let go. It isn't pleasant.

I only warn you because I've been there. An addiction to Women is very fun, and that is why they are dangerous, just as a line of cocaine is fun. Both alter your brains pathways in a negative manner.

As far as your brain is concerned, there isn't much difference between a hard drug and an addiction to a girlfriend. The girlfriend is probably the most addictive because as you say, there is thousands of years of evolution pulling you in that direction.

Our biology is anti-spiritual in that sense. We have evolved to spread our genes, and become habitualized in whatever patterns ensure that end.

[Nick]

It's just that I think that I'm aware that there is a state of consciousness beyond even this relatively heightened state, and you have yet to discover it.

Talk about this. I'll say up front that I suspect it will come down to living by a particular morality, one that's different than mine.

I guess that would depend on how we define morality. I define morality as living in alignment with truth. Any other kind of morality based on things like no killing, no raping, and no stealing is a superficial kind of morality that amounts to nothing more than social constraints.

Are you certain you're looking forward with clarity?

If we're talking logic and philosophy, yes. But there are many things in the emotional world I'm not very quick with.

Well I think this gets to the heart of our discussion. If we do not apply logic to emotion and what causes us to experience them, we're not going to get very far. So lets take for example a man who rapes a 5 year old child. Without understanding how everything has causes, it's very easy to get upset about this and want to slowly boil the man alive. But if we take the time to understand some of the causes; say for instance this man grew up in a broken home, was molested by his father, his mother did nothing to stop it, and he was picked on at school, we begin to have some compassion for this man and the emotions we were experiencing like anger and vengeance begin to subside. Obviously the man still needs to be dealt with in a socially responsible way to prevent him from doing any more harm, but we can do so in a calm, clear, and reasonable fashion.

With women I'll admit, it's much more complicated. You want to be pleased, she pleases. You want to feel powerful, she surrenders. You want to feel desired, she desires you. You want to feel on top of the world, she puts you there. So much about what attracts us to women has everything to do with our own self and our own insecurities, not them. Even the seducer, as much as he likes to think of himself as superior to other men, is just as much under her spell as anyone else is, she is still his gatekeeper and he inevitably makes himself a slave to her. So what if he doesn't want to get married to her? If it was just blowing his load he was interested in he wouldn't need a woman for that. I mean, I think we can agree that women are fairly mindless and superficial; so what does that say about us and why we want to be desired and admired by her? We create in our mind this illusion of what a woman is and project it on to the female form, and the poor thing is more than eager to oblige. It's really sick and twisted in a lot of ways! So by understanding the nature of Woman and how it is so intertwined with our own insecurities and dependencies, many of the emotions and desires we used to experience in relation to women begin to subside.

So my main point is that living consciously and free from ego and delusion is not so much a decision to renounce something on an imaginary moral basis, it's born out of understanding which naturally leads us to think and act in a way free from delusion and false thinking. In doing so we become secure knowing our place in the universe, no longer held down by the chains of ignorance and all the fleeting emotions and desires it causes. We transition from slave to master; and I can't think of anything more powerful than that.

[skipair]

I disagree, I believe that there are serious consequences to your actions, and life is a big deal because it is all you have. So rather than having a wishy washy attitude about life events, I take a much more proactive stand,

Just to clarify my view, since it seems you've missed it a bit: I accept the consequences of what I do.

I only warn you because I've been there. An addiction to Women is very fun, and that is why they are dangerous, just as a line of cocaine is fun. Both alter your brains pathways in a negative manner.

I wouldn't do it unless it worked out in my favor. If you haven't figured out how to do that, you'd be right not to do it.

[skipair]

Nick, I agree with all that. I am extremely aware of the undermining process that rationality does to all worldly values. What it boils down to is not having much reason to do anything at all, except maybe helping to promote the same kind of thinking in others. I don't subscribe to that morality. I choose to be aware of this, and yet also choose to do something else - to participate in the human process in a more natural, animal-like way. This is what I have found brings ME happiness. This isn't what the common man does, doing it without much thinking. This isn't what the GF/QRSishness does. This is what I do because it maximizes my preferred interplay of thought-clarity and excitement. It's sometimes a strange world out there, how everything is set up, but fuck it, I'm gonna play, and I'm gonna know what I'm doing when I do it.

[Nick]

Skip,

I'm no stranger to this mentality, and I don't doubt it brings you happiness. What I disagree with is the idea that we have no choice in the matter, or that we can't overcome. You yourself through-out the course of our discussion switched your stance from "I have no choice but to satisfy my animal impulses" to one of "I consciously choose to satisfy my animal impulses".

[skipair]

Nick, I remember saying in another thread that I have no choice be be selfish. I think self-interest is the human operating system. In this thread I remember alluding to the notion that biologically some things will bring pleasure and pain whether we like it or not. I agree a person can choose to deny the things that will naturally bring them pleasure because of their morality, or simply because the see down that road that it would bring pain. I will only seriously play a game if I know I can beat it. Have my cake and eat it too.

[Nick]

Nick, I remember saying in another thread that I have no choice be be selfish. I think self-interest is the human operating system. In this thread I remember alluding to the notion that biologically some things will bring pleasure and pain whether we like it or not.

No doubt our biology demands certain things, but when it comes to our desires, most of them have deep psychological roots. Yes we are animals, but we are very cerebral animals, and because of this we have the ability to overcome and be free.

I agree a person can choose to deny the things that will naturally bring them pleasure because of their morality, or simply because the see down that road that it would bring pain.

Like I explained in my previous post, rejecting our unconscious desires can also be one born of understanding, and not necessarily a denial based on an arbitrary moral stance.

I will only seriously play a game if I know I can beat it. Have my cake and eat it too.

Indeed. What's the point of having cake if you can't eat it?

[Carl G]

You speak of one's own inner feminine, whom every man should marry.

[Carmel]

That's a good observation, Carl. I couldn't agree with you more.

Maybe, he has married his feminine side and that's why he is capable of appreciating the feminine qualities of his beloved.

(oops! Shame on me! I think I just engaged in speculation.)

[Nick]

There is a woman in my mind who eludes me, she is so beautiful, her eyes are more striking than mine, and she laughs! She laughs at me because she knows I'll always love her, no matter what she does. The witch!

Dude, didn't you know? Skip already fucked her way back when.

[skipair]

No doubt our biology demands certain things, but when it comes to our desires, most of them have deep psychological roots. Yes we are animals, but we are very cerebral animals, and because of this we have the ability to overcome and be free.

Like I explained in my previous post, rejecting our unconscious desires can also be one born of understanding, and not necessarily a denial based on an arbitrary moral stance.

Yes, I agree with this. IMO, it has mostly to do with becoming conscious of the logical borders people use for their definitions, and the implications of that. IME, it certainly does erase or at the least highly qualify the grounds to be emotional about many, many topics.

We create in our mind this illusion of what a woman is and project it on to the female form, and the poor thing is more than eager to oblige. It's really sick and twisted in a lot of ways!

I guess I find it beautiful. What you're talking about here is what I call frame control - the process of who will set the standard of reality-perception in any situation. I see this as something that happens with everyone, all the time, regardless of gender. Projection is really all there is.

So by understanding the nature of Woman and how it is so intertwined with our own insecurities and dependencies, many of the emotions and desires we used to experience in relation to women begin to subside.

I agree with this. I do NOT need a woman to feel complete and happy. But they are fun to play with. I do think there are still sensory cues that automatically trigger curiosity and attraction no matter how free a man is. At least, this definitely seems to be the case with me! I like blowing a load with women because doing it with the real thing is more intense than doing it with the imaginary thing.

[Animus]

What you're talking about here is what I call frame control

Spoken like a true douchebag. Yo playa, being smooth with the ladies don't make you enlightened.

Having a sophisticated understanding of the psychological processes, conscious and unconscious may give you the upper-hand in exploitation, but that's all it is, exploitation.

I know all the tricks too, so much so that the lingo rings bells in my head. But only assholes take advantage of women for personal sexual satisfaction. Even if the women think its what they want, you know you don't give a fuck about them and are just playing them. What prevents me from using my superior understanding of the feminine mind to exploit them is called conscience.

[skipair]

Spoken like a true douchebag. Yo playa, being smooth with the ladies don't make you enlightened.

No, definitely it does not.

I've never claimed to be enlightened. I think it's a misleading term. But I do claim to know what I'm talking about.

Having a sophisticated understanding of the psychological processes, conscious and unconscious may give you the upper-hand in exploitation, but that's all it is, exploitation.

Everyone is in the world and exploits it in their own way all the time. IME, being more aware of psychology and more logically conscious can potentially make a person more efficient at this. But in the spirit of this forum, and certainly in my own experience, the initial value of consciousness is for its own sake. That's how it was arrived at in the first place.

I know all the tricks too, so much so that the lingo rings bells in my head. But only assholes take advantage of women for personal sexual satisfaction.

I know, I'm an asshole. But a very nice asshole.

Even if the women think its what they want, you know you don't give a fuck about them and are just playing them. What prevents me from using my superior understanding of the feminine mind to exploit them is called conscience.

Conscience is another word for morality. You know that's totally relative and subjective, right? If what I do is bad business for you, maybe we can talk about it and work something out. If not, I don't see a problem.

[Carl G]

Conscience is another word for morality. You know that's totally relative and subjective, right

That's debatable. It's not a given. I happen to think they are different, and that conscience is less relative and subjective, and may be objective. In other words, conscience may be universal among humans. That is why the philosopher G.I. Gurdjieff considered it perhaps man's best chance to escape the hole he is in.

[Tomas]

.


-dejavu-
I think Skipair does care about the girls he plays with.

-tomas-
Wham, bam. Thank you, maam. So said Tiger Woods.


-dejavu-
He may not want to wed them, but I'm fairly sure he must care!

-tomas-
He doesn't approach the nice girls. Just the good/bad girls.


-dejavu-
If he doesn't, he'd better watch out.

-tomas-
Condoms break. Disease spreads both ways.

[Nick]

We create in our mind this illusion of what a woman is and project it on to the female form, and the poor thing is more than eager to oblige. It's really sick and twisted in a lot of ways!

I guess I find it beautiful. What you're talking about here is what I call frame control - the process of who will set the standard of reality-perception in any situation. I see this as something that happens with everyone, all the time, regardless of gender. Projection is really all there is.

It's not "frame control" itself I find sick and twisted, it's the unconscious "frame control" people use to bolster their ego I find sick and twisted, especially in the case of women. Mainly because men project everything they need to support their ego on to women, creating this super-natural being, and then make their self a slave to their own unconscious creation, WOMAN! So what I think you're doing is "consciously" (if you can call it that) getting what you unconsciously desire. You carefully apply logic to maximize the satisfaction you get by exploiting women, but you fail to fully understand the unconscious desires and creations that cause you to want women in the first place.

This is why this place talks so much about nature of the sexes, and why Weinenger's papers are so significant. WOMAN is too deeply embedded in our subconscious and too intertwined with the ego that it would be impossible to not talk about, not think about, and not tear down if we want to make any real headway in living consciously and free from delusion.

And please, don't think I'm trying to demonize you, make you feel guilty, or anything else like that. I just want you to understand that our unconscious desires have deep psychological roots, and to say we have control of them just because we logically go about satisfying them is a far cry from actually understanding and uprooting these unconscious desires. And I'm not trying to make it seem like I have completely sorted out and uprooted my own unconscious desires and creations, but I have made some significant progress and it's going to take a hell of a lot more work before I can ever say I'm finished, or "beyond thinking" as you put it.

I do NOT need a woman to feel complete and happy. But they are fun to play with. I do think there are still sensory cues that automatically trigger curiosity and attraction no matter how free a man is. At least, this definitely seems to be the case with me! I like blowing a load with women because doing it with the real thing is more intense than doing it with the imaginary thing.

Yes there are definitely some physical characteristics of women we have evolved to appreciate, but without believing in WOMAN, the physical form of a female would not be enough to cause you and every other man to behave the way you do.

[skipair]

I think Skipair does care about the girls he plays with.

That's true. I have extremely strict boundaries, and I am extremely affectionate within them. Though, I've learned the hard way to only "care" about girls, and people in general, in proportion to what they deserve and the value they bring.

[skipair]

Yes there are definitely some physical characteristics of women we have evolved to appreciate, but without believing in WOMAN, the physical form of a female would not be enough to cause you and every other man to behave the way you do.

I guess I'm calling bullshit on this, and only add that it's not just the form, but also intonations, language, movement, and thoughts that also automatically trip switches in a guy's head. I'll admit what you say might be possible, but nothing in my own experience or in observation of anyone else on the planet would lead me to this conclusion. It really sounds more to me like someone decided they wanted or wished this to be the case, played the part of it, and professed that it was. I definitely would think there'd be less of a chance for a guy to become more conscious if guys were never around, and he was always surrounded by women and sex in his youth. There's also something to be said for understanding very well the difference between woman as a social advertisement, and what she's really up to. But really, other than that, you force me to call bullshit! :)

I do know there are some people who just naturally have incredibly low sex drives, so maybe that has also played a part in this rumor spreading, as I see it.

[Carmel]

skipair:
It really sounds more to me like someone decided they wanted or wished this to be the case, played the part of it, and professed that it was.

dejavu:
To me also. 'Woman as delusion' is delusion.

Carmel:
Yes, it veritably reeks of delusion...and worse.

[Beingof1]

A few years back I was inspired by videos on youtube from the channel Menoftheinfinite to pursue a completely new way of thinking. I was previously very limited in perspective -- lacking genuine introspection. I was soon after struck by an image of a person holding their own face turned around looking inside their head, presumably trying to see themselves. This inspired me to make a video under the user name Willfuiignorance. It occurred to me that this would be an infinite regress and began to grasp the nature of mind. However, it was a while yet before I really began to realize the consequences of this view. I started this process of attacking myself, my motives, trying to grasp my own origins introspectively. I question my motives and emotional influences. I can remember thinking I was already unemotional and clear headed, but this has proven to be false. There comes a point when the biting of one's own tail is infinitely unbearable in the most personal manner. One cannot even stop doing it because its inevitable. How could anyone stand to turn away from it is beyond me. The gnawing at the ankles of one's own existence becomes the only thing worth doing and yet is the most unbearable! I've found myself thinking, just thinking about some circumstance and then smirking about my role in it. Finally upon introspection I realize that my smirking was a result of my appearing innocent when I in-fact was not. How dishonest and egoic of me? I caught myself telling lies, they were small lies, but lies none-the-less. The act of becoming true is far more difficult than it would seem by just talking about it and I personally remain skeptical of anyone's claim to have done so given the infinite magnitude of the task. I don't see an easy way out of this, I've considered at times that I was free of egoism but it shows up in peculiar places without forethought. There is a very real and deliberate process of self-denial at play in order to root out this elusive subconscious biases. Even though I think all is one and there is no self so I shouldn't be egoic, it is not that easy to actualize it, to become true without some kind of auroboric self-denial.

It also seems to me that various other thinkers hit upon this in different guises. Jed Mckenna refers to "Spiritual Autolysis" in which a person attempts to write something true about themselves and keeps scrutinizing what they write until they do write something true. Or Soren Kierkegaard refers to the "essentially Christian" as a process of "turning infinitely inward". I have a feeling many here will agree with part or all of this. I have a question that I think is interesting to ask one's self in complete honesty; "Am I being true to what I know?"

We cannot solve a problem from the level it is created from, true?

If we return to the source of all thought, rather than what you choose to invest in, you may make a conscious choice to think a certain thought, yes?You may think of words or images and if we really focus, sounds and smells. You invest in your experience and bring focus to energize whatever your mind is told to create.

The wandering mind gets board or is unsatisfied with its current focus, it seeks to create a brand new attachment to overcome anxiety, fear, and aloneness. People become attached to words, identity, and icons and seeks to create ideal reality from a fleeting desire. How can this be accomplished? It cannot and will lead one to deep unsatisfied desire.

If you return to the source of all thought, where words are created, you can choose what and where to aim your focus. When we realize that whatever we focus on becomes our reality - it would be wise not to invest in something that is fleeting, yes?

What is unchanging in your experience?

[jufa]

Beingofone you have expanded!!!

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength jufa

[Animus]

I had a discussion already today on the subjectivity of morality. I'll just paste what I wrote on the TYT youtube channel:

Wow, there seems to be a thin line between "Creep" and "Man" in your moral compass. If its two lesbians making out in a school, its appropriate to watch and record it, that's "Manly", but if the girls are a few years younger and then he's a "Creep". Don't you see the hypocrisy? You promote lustful thoughts on one video then turn around and condemn them on another. The consequences might be different, but the source (lustful thinking) is the same. It grows and consumes.

What does physical attractiveness have to do with moral correctness? Be sure you are thinking with your head and not your schlong.

[Morality is in the eye of the beholder]

It may be in the eye of the beholder, but there might be a thick log in that eye as well. Humans are endowed with a brain, that brain responds to sexual stimuli, social stimuli, food stimuli and so forth. We also have a frontal cortex which is our thinking mind. Often these may be in conflict and sometimes we allow things like sexual stimuli to affect our thinking mind. We all have the same basic brain and to greater or lesser degrees see beyond the veil of our animal impulses.

I would think because we are anatomically similar, cut from the same cloth, that there is a shared morality which we could call "objective" for lack of a better word. Although "shared' is probably a better word. The problem is the degree to which people are able to sort out their own minds to see clearly. If 50 million other people thought sex with an infant was acceptable, that wouldn't mean they are correct or that they have different morals. It may only mean that they don't think clearly.

Allow me to give an example. Consider NAMBLA. These are people who can be clinically diagnosed "pedophiles", meaning they have a primary and involuntary sexual attraction to prepubescents. The members of NAMBLA allow their sexual attraction to interfere with their understanding of the inferiority of a child and the potential for abuse of power. Instead, they think with their impulses and argue the rest of us have flawed morals. In the same vain, Cenk has no problem with female sexual misconduct.

To wit; I think this problem spans a lot of social issues. It is ironic to hear women complain about the objectification of women, then turn around and gawk at a muscle-bound fire-fighter. They don't see the hypocrisy because, all-the-while, they are thinking with their emotional impulses and not their heads. If the objectification of women is wrong, then its wrong for men too. The rules don't change because one stimulus makes a girl wet and the other makes her feel like meat.


So, basically I argue that morality doesn't change that much, rather people are blinded to the moral intuitions by things like sexual desires which are demonstrably subjective. but, don't mistake this for an objective morality, as I indicated its more of a shared morality. There will be exceptions to this of course, such as psychopathy. But by-and-large there is not much difference in morals in a given culture, what's different is the individual's perspective in a given situation.