GENIUS FORUMS

You, Carl, are you more interested in passing on your genes, or in passing on your ideas?

Kelly, why would you say such a thing?

Wasn't it you who, a little while back, interpreted Kevin's idea of "estates" for thinkers, as places for breeding ?

And now you've interpreted my ideas on how to survive the effects of unchecked breeding, greed, and unthinking, as setting up communes - typically places where a lot of breeding goes on.

So I wondered if breeding was on your mind.

Carl G wrote:

"Maya" is illusion, but the things I mentioned are not illusion, are they?

In that they are mere appearances, yes.

The things I am speaking of are not just appearances. Reality itself is not an appearance.

Yes, it is certainly "God's work" (the workings of the Totality). But it is also God's work that some people identify what is happening, and try to solve problems when they arise, and try to negotiate hurdles to their survival.

But I guess you are not one of them. You are simply "deeply concerned."

I do what I can. And I'm always looking for ways to do more.

Kelly Jones wrote:Wasn't it you who, a little while back, interpreted Kevin's idea of "estates" for thinkers, as places for breeding ?

No.

And now you've interpreted my ideas on how to survive the effects of unchecked breeding, greed, and unthinking, as setting up communes -

I may have misinterpreted your words. You said:

Among these more rational persons, it is more rational to promote wisdom. The main issue I foresee is how those communities start. If they are founded on principles like keeping things simple, thinking, and being able to cope calmly with discomfort, then things should go better.

I thought you were implying that the rational people of the future who couldn't stay in the crazy cities and couldn't escape to other planets should start communities of their own, founded on rational principles.

typically places where a lot of breeding goes on.

So I wondered if breeding was on your mind.

I don't believe this is typical of communes historically. I mean, the Shakers, as an extreme, did not even allow breeding. And monasteries, also communities, the same. The commune on which I spent a few years and which is still going, I don't believe, has exceeded average birth rates for the area in which it is situated.

The things I am speaking of are not just appearances.

Oh. Then I may have misunderstood some vital part of your philosophy. I thought pretty much everything we see is an appearance, and that the greater whole is something different, a sort of infinite continuum of energy.

Carl G wrote:

The things I am speaking of are not just appearances.

Oh. Then I may have misunderstood some vital part of your philosophy. I thought pretty much everything we see is an appearance, and that the greater whole is something different, a sort of infinite continuum of energy.

When everything is an appearance then appearances are themselves reality.

Just pondering something Kevin said earlier...

He reckoned it'd cost $50,000 to set up Freethinkers.tv and he's about right. Using Dan's method for televised programs, and with 10 people making programs, it would cost: AU $500 video camera (might only need 5 cameras, if shared) = 2500; AU $1000 - fast computer with good graphics card and Linux software = 10,000; AU $50/m - fast broadband (for ten years) = 60,000; AU $15pa - A domain (for ten years) = 150. The computers and broadband connections will be in-place, so we can halve that cost (leave a margin for replacements). Total: AU$ 2650 upfront with 35,000 over the next ten years (3500pa).

It's quite doable, since the upfront cost isn't 50,000. All it needs are people who can create intelligent videos.

Streaming tv is a bit more hassle, so I wouldn't do it that way.

Carl G wrote:

Kelly Jones wrote:Wasn't it you who, a little while back, interpreted Kevin's idea of "estates" for thinkers, as places for breeding ?

No.

Slavedom thread, page 4:

Sue wrote:When I hear people speak of ‘a group of individuals’, alarm bells go off in my head. ‘A group of individuals’ – what a joke!

Yes, I guess I did miss your point. You meant there could hardly be found today enough true individuals to make a group. I thought you meant that group of individuals was a contradiction of terms, which is actually slightly humorous if individuals is defined in a certain way. In any case, Brokenhead is right, many Americans do consider themselves individuals. Are they? Depends on definition. I actually think this is a good topic in itself, what is an individual -- from a Genius perspective -- and how best does one go about being one in today's "joiner" society. And no, I don't think this is being covered in Ryan's "Dumpster Diving for Sages" thread or Kevin's "Raise a Family in the Arizona Desert" (this) thread.

Carl wrote:

Kelly wrote:And now you've interpreted my ideas on how to survive the effects of unchecked breeding, greed, and unthinking, as setting up communes -

I may have misinterpreted your words. You said:

Among these more rational persons, it is more rational to promote wisdom. The main issue I foresee is how those communities start. If they are founded on principles like keeping things simple, thinking, and being able to cope calmly with discomfort, then things should go better.

I thought you were implying that the rational people of the future who couldn't stay in the crazy cities and couldn't escape to other planets should start communities of their own, founded on rational principles.

Yes, but it's more about the culture of thinking, or rather communities of thinking individuals, rather than closed-gate and exclusive groups made up of psychologically disturbed persons.

Carl wrote:

typically places where a lot of breeding goes on. So I wondered if breeding was on your mind.

I don't believe this is typical of communes historically. I mean, the Shakers, as an extreme, did not even allow breeding. And monasteries, also communities, the same. The commune on which I spent a few years and which is still going, I don't believe, has exceeded average birth rates for the area in which it is situated.

Yet you interpreted Kevin's ideas about freedom as basically, finding somewhere cheap to raise a family......


KJ

Kelly Jones wrote:Just pondering something Kevin said earlier...

He reckoned it'd cost $50,000 to set up Freethinkers.tv and he's about right. Using Dan's method for televised programs, and with 10 people making programs, it would cost: AU $500 video camera (might only need 5 cameras, if shared) = 2500; AU $1000 - fast computer with good graphics card and Linux software = 10,000; AU $50/m - fast broadband (for ten years) = 60,000; AU $15pa - A domain (for ten years) = 150. The computers and broadband connections will be in-place, so we can halve that cost (leave a margin for replacements). Total: AU$ 2650 upfront with 35,000 over the next ten years (3500pa).

It's quite doable, since the upfront cost isn't 50,000. All it needs are people who can create intelligent videos.

Streaming tv is a bit more hassle, so I wouldn't do it that way.

Kevin has his head where the sun is shining with Charles Manson. And we ain't talkin' jezus saves nobody.

It's cost is too prohibitive.

Too few people care anymore. Get the lurkers here to donate real $$$ and the great game is happening. Otherwise, nada.


.

Here's the cheapest way to do it.

A website that simply provides links to the best, thought-inspiring youtube videos.

This could be very effective if done properly.

It should ideally be done using something like Joomla, so that it is easily manageable.

We're in luck. I just purchased 50 billion dollars on ebay. (seriously)

How's that, Kevin?

-------------------
Using the CMS sounds better if you wish to control it more.

My vote is for a Youtube look with the search function very easy to find; rather than, say, a Picasa photo gallery. Other thoughts: big, clear, logo at the top. Sci-fi font, coloured like water in a tropical atoll. Clickable themes in a menu bar along the top (e.g. Men of the Infinite, science, atheism, masculinity, truth, buddhism, cause and effect). Small thumbnails underneath of recently uploaded videos then 5-star videos. A link to order DVDs. When video search results come up, they should order series of videos, as Youtube doesn't do that. Anyone can submit programs for inclusion.

I plan to contribute a series of video interviews, probably next year, after buying a video camera.

For now, I am going to limit my time in philosophical discussions to one or two sessions per week. I've some other stuff I ought to be doing.

Kelly Jones wrote:I plan to contribute a series of video interviews, probably next year, after buying a video camera.

You only need a very cheap camera, since internet video resolutions are very low compared to the 1080 high definition broadcasting standard.

...

This from a recent news article:

Zimbabwe is no place for the mathematically challenged. A few weeks ago, a six-year-old was given Z$500 billion for pocket money and said: "Mommy, you know I can't buy anything in the tuck shop for less than a trill." This demonstrates mathematical aptitude far beyond her years but is now the norm in schools across Zimbabwe.

Kelly Jones wrote:Kelly: Wasn't it you who, a little while back, interpreted Kevin's idea of "estates" for thinkers, as places for breeding ?

Carl: No.

Kelly: Slavedom thread, page 4:

Sue: When I hear people speak of ‘a group of individuals’, alarm bells go off in my head. ‘A group of individuals’ – what a joke!
Carl: Yes, I guess I did miss your point. You meant there could hardly be found today enough true individuals to make a group. I thought you meant that group of individuals was a contradiction of terms, which is actually slightly humorous if individuals is defined in a certain way. In any case, Brokenhead is right, many Americans do consider themselves individuals. Are they? Depends on definition. I actually think this is a good topic in itself, what is an individual -- from a Genius perspective -- and how best does one go about being one in today's "joiner" society. And no, I don't think this is being covered in Ryan's "Dumpster Diving for Sages" thread or Kevin's "Raise a Family in the Arizona Desert" (this) thread.

You are apparently referring to the last line in that quote where I humorously reference a sentence from Kevin's opening post, "How many women want to live and raise a family in the Arizona desert?" I happen to live in the Arizona desert myself and breeding is not on my mind. Nor did I really believe it was on Kevin's, as evidenced by the thrust of my post, which was about individuals!

Kelly: And now you've interpreted my ideas on how to survive the effects of unchecked breeding, greed, and unthinking, as setting up communes -

Carl: I may have misinterpreted your words. You said:

Among these more rational persons, it is more rational to promote wisdom. The main issue I foresee is how those communities start. If they are founded on principles like keeping things simple, thinking, and being able to cope calmly with discomfort, then things should go better.

I thought you were implying that the rational people of the future who couldn't stay in the crazy cities and couldn't escape to other planets should start communities of their own, founded on rational principles.

Kelly: Yes, but it's more about the culture of thinking, or rather communities of thinking individuals, rather than closed-gate and exclusive groups made up of psychologically disturbed persons.

Okay. No worries.

Kelly: [communes are]...typically places where a lot of breeding goes on. So I wondered if breeding was on your mind.

Carl: I don't believe this is typical of communes historically. I mean, the Shakers, as an extreme, did not even allow breeding. And monasteries, also communities, the same. The commune on which I spent a few years and which is still going, I don't believe, has exceeded average birth rates for the area in which it is situated.

Kelly: Yet you interpreted Kevin's ideas about freedom as basically, finding somewhere cheap to raise a family......

Don't you think I know Kevin better than that?

That aside, he did say "I believe that land in the Arizona desert isn't all that expensive, but most people are brainwashed into believing they must live near Starbucks and the Cinema," and "How many women want to live and raise a family in the Arizona desert? Man is an animal that needs to build his nest where the females are."

Kind of a mixed message there, don't you think, first speaking of freedom among the cactus, and then throwing in something about women? Maybe Kevin does have some underlying issues about solitude? Maybe subconsciously he mourns the fact that few females would wish to share the ascetic lifestyle he prefers?

Ryan Rudolph wrote:what is the best way to allocate wealth to the future generations of humans?

I'd use my wealth to reform the public school system. Teaching would become the highest paid profession to be very competitive, and I would personally set up the qualification standards and appoint screeners.

Then maybe a day would come when public schools aren't needed.

In general, I see two acceptable ways to go. Work with the system and make changes from that angle, such as gaining wealth and attempting the above. Or, leave the social system entirely in order not to compromise the more idealistic goals of total honesty and reason.

It's arguable which creates more "significant" ripples. A quantity vs quality issue I think.

Carl G wrote:That aside, he did say "I believe that land in the Arizona desert isn't all that expensive, but most people are brainwashed into believing they must live near Starbucks and the Cinema," and "How many women want to live and raise a family in the Arizona desert? Man is an animal that needs to build his nest where the females are."

Kind of a mixed message there, don't you think, first speaking of freedom among the cactus, and then throwing in something about women? Maybe Kevin does have some underlying issues about solitude? Maybe subconsciously he mourns the fact that few females would wish to share the ascetic lifestyle he prefers?

I think Kevin was looking for the most logical reason for why people are so willing to living in huge debt.

What is the greatest source of debt for the average person? Property (mortgage), then raising a family. These things cost enormous sums.

It has to be admitted that not everyone with massive debts has family-related expenses. Then the question is, why don't singles live in the desert where property costs are small? Jobs. Then why can't single persons move as a large group to the desert? .... see below ...

Why don't families move to the desert ? Jobs. Then why don't they move as a large group to the desert? .... see below ...

Women don't want to live in the desert. Singles (e.g. men who don't want to get married) want to be attractive to women. Husbands and fathers can't leave the wife and mother behind, who doesn't want to move.

----

As to Kevin's underlying issues about solitude, he has admitted in the past some bitterness that women are incapable of judging the quality of his thought. He also tends to slighly exaggerate a person's level of individuality and rationality. From my perspective, both these could come from the enormity of being "one small robot in a badly deluded world". But there is something else, that speaks more to the truth of the situation - from my perspective:

If virtually everything one experiences - the society one lives in, its culture, the people you meet while out and about - reminds one of deluded thoughts, and distracts one from God, then that is a serious impediment to progress on the path of enlightenment. One has to kick in a new perspective, and remember God first. So what the sage has to do, is reconstruct how he interprets things. He tends to look for wisdom, any reminders of wisdom, and becomes something of a poet. Instead of listening to romantic love songs, he is now listening to music about Infinite love. Instead of watching a mediocre comedian trying to reel in girlfriends, he is now listening to the incarnation of the wild free-thinker. Instead of listening to an arrogant and hypocritical orator, he is now listening to a bold, Nietzsche-like apostle who has given his all for Truth. This new perspective still does stem from some attachment to being accepted by the world, but it is far less passive, stagnant, and pessimistic. The small robot is actively and creatively overcoming the issues he faces.


Kelly

One of the main reasons people buy expensive land is to get away from the most ignorant, uneducated of people. They can be very intrusive and problematic. If you aren't like them there is a good chance they will attack you, and try to get rid of you. It's called "Class wars".

Another reason people buy expensive land is for better access to services. Cheap land is usually a long way from services which either creates a lot of extra costs or compromises. So much that you will wonder if it was better to just spend more on land.

But i don't want to squash the idea of cheap land, Kevin as one example seems to be doing okay.

In significant measure i have been on the run for the last four years, and in some sense, since i was about seventeen, or less, so finding a way to get away from people is important, and a house can be a good way to do that.

To use my recent experiences as an example, about four years ago i was asked to leave a share house by people that many might consider to have 'pure' hearts. It was time to leave anyway. That pretty much ruled out share houses for me.

Then i went to a boarding house, and the caretaker quickly developed an inferiority complex, and started attacking me, by asking for drinking money loans and being aggressive, etc. I decided to leave the place, for other reasons as well, and there is a question in my mind whether i could ever stay at one again. I probably could, but they are usually horrible places to live, often smelly, very small, maybe under a flight path, etc.

Then i went to live on a land sharing cooperative, sometimes otherwise called a multiple occupancy, or hippie colony, 'community', etc. I talked about wisdom there. Some of the problems i encountered there have been documented on this forum. City people tend to get the impression these are progressive, idealistic places, but those in the country know they are a repository for the disadvantaged, and are a hellish place to live. I cannot see possibility for me to live on one of these again and have absolutely no desire to try. I left, and thankfully made enough money to have a deposit for a house.

In the interim, while looking for a house, i used my father's place for storage and stayed there for a few months. I didn't talk about wisdom to him, but he raised it with me, and was quite rude and attacking.

I finally bought and moved into my own house, and have been there for twelve months. I have only used the word truth once, and have never used the words wisdom, enlightenment, rationality, ultimate truth, masculinity, femininity, spirituality, philosophy, or the like, in conversation with anyone in the town. It is a lower socio economic area, and the ignorance is phenomenal. There have been regular attempts to stand over me, some related to materialism, others related to my values/choices and demeanour. These people 'meditate' on work, materialism, sex, and family. If you don't want to talk about these, there isn't much if anything else to talk about other than the weather. The word 'different' is a real trigger for them, as they are desperate conformists, so you don't even want to describe yourself in this way. Sometimes they grunt disapproval at you, which is hard to respond to. Some are trying to force me to leave, and i don't know how it will pan out. In these situations you need to understand them, even though they may be very different to yourself. You need to be hard. You need to be tough. You need to understand politics, and have the utmost discretion. You need to show you are not someone to mess with; you will need to combat people and not be stood over. And you need to minimise contact with people, especially those most ignorant, and be aware withdrawal may enrage people further. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. One saving grace is that they won't all act together, because there will be heaps of other wars going on everywhere else, and they are so short-sightedly self-focused.


I agree with the idea of a fund for bequests. There may already be a number of people here without children, and even if they have children they may wish to leave something for wisdom. I figure i will be looking for someone to donate my stuff to in a will.

Rhett, that was an interesting and insightful rap. Good luck with your current situation.