GENIUS FORUMS

Cory Duchesne wrote: The human population is alot like the products at wall mart.

Most of them are useless and would be better off not existing.

So are you saying that people who recognize ourselves as useless should kill ourselves?

insider,

Finally yes I do believe the wise can have a considerable impact on transforming society. I believe the wise have the responsibility to illuminate others.

You don't even need to add responsibility into the mix. Every person who is wise knows the importance of wisdom, and illuminates others simply by interacting with them. What it seems you are asking is for wise people to deliberately expend the effort to consciously shape the world to their own particular visions. Shaping society in any egotistical manner is not wise behaviour; furthermore, most politicians are more than up for the task of managing the distribution of wealth throughout civilization. There is no reason for wise men to get involved in shaping society. The bureaucracy works fine for what it is aimed to do.

This wont happen by ponificating on the net.

Indeed. It is very difficult to create sweeping changes in society through the Net, or any medium for that matter. The conversations of philosophers are just as useless as the novels of authors and the paintings of artists.

Aquiring the skills and techniques to effectively transmit your knowledge to mankind is the real challenge. Let go of your self and attend to your flock.To do this will be no easy task, but are you up for it?

Wisdom is not transmitted to mankind in the same way that knowledge is transmitted. We have all the material necessary for enlightenment in every library and bookstore I've been in. Why add more? Is the current literature not sufficient?

The knowledge is there. The only thing missing is the values. But it takes years and years for a single philosopher to build up the values in a single person; instilling right values society-wise is an impossible pipe-dream. It is destined to fail and become another ignorant religion.

Cory: The human population is alot like the products at wall mart. Most of them are useless and would be better off not existing.

Eliz: So are you saying that people who recognize ourselves as useless should kill ourselves

If you recognized your behavior as foolish, would you repeat the behavior, or would you try to overcome it?

Is it better to end your foolishness by killing yourself, or is it better to end your foolisness by overcoming yourself?

Usefull and useless are slippery terms. Different people have different ideas of what is good is and what is evil and what truth is.

Most people don't have a clear idea of what good & evil are and what truth is. They likely never thought about it too deeply.

These sorts of people live careless and foolish lives, and if we value wisdom, it might best to not have to share the earth with these people. They are a waste of time and energy, and their behavior is destructive and vain.

however, do you think these sorts of people are too hard on themselves?

do you think Paris Hilton or Justin Timberlake have any interest in killing themselves? These people are having a great deal of fun.

insider wrote:The use of sophistry is rife here I see. My point Dan seems to have been lost on you. My apologies. My post may have pricked the conscience of a few, but I fear, as you say, that in part it was poorly conceived.

Yes, that's the problem. Your point wasn't lost on me, it just wasn't a real point.

Let me try saying it another way. In my life I`ve met and known a few people who claimed to be wise. They in fact had dedicated their lives from an early age to discovering the truth and no doubt had a clear understanding of the nature of reality.

Hang on! What's your basis for saying this? How could you possibly know this was true unless you have such an understanding yourself? I get the feeling you're just making this up for the sake of your argument.

However as the years passed and my own thought and experienced matured I began to realise that their lives didn`t aspire to the ideals they held.

Well, you need to state clearly what constitutes a life wherein one's life and ideals are properly matched. You also need to show that this is actually possible in a practical sense and isn't just some airy fairy notion of what it is possible to achieve in a deelpy deluded world.

One particular person I know has spent the greater majority of his life condemning and demonising the values of femininity and women in general.

Hmm, sounds familiar.... (expect for the demonising)

He then went on to commence a long term relationship (years and years) with a single mother of two.

Hmm, sounds even more familiar.....

When questioned about this relationship he would remark " I`m having a bit of a holiday". Then at a time of his convenience he up and left, apparently absolving himself of any karmic effects. I know the children which rightly or wrongly looked at him as a father were devestated. What should I make of such a man?

I dunno. But I suspect you're speaking about Kevin. He's in Brisbane for a while and I'm catching up with him in a couple of hours so I'll ask him about it. But, I'm just wondering, since you seem to be in Japan, how do you know anything about how the children feel?

I digress. In my previous post I mentioned the job as a teacher (of any discipline ) as a vocation. This is just a example, if you broadened your horizons I`m sure you could find other possibly more suitable options.

You really need to give examples and show that they are more useful to the cause of Wisdom than what any of us are doing now (I know you've actually been talking about QRS - it's pretty obvious). If you can make a case for this I'm sure we'd all be open to it.

Finally yes I do believe the wise can have a considerable impact on transforming society. I believe the wise have the responsibility to illuminate others.

Why?

This wont happen by ponificating on the net.

Hmm, won't it? Exactly how did you experience benefit from the "wise" men you spoke of earlier?

Aquiring the skills and techniques to effectively transmit your knowledge to mankind is the real challenge.

Yes. Do you think we've never thought about that before? Why do you think I speak on talk radio? Why do I write to newspapers, why did QSR do a radio series, why are we looking into the possibly of Net radio and podcasts? Why did I start [an ultimately worthless] local philosophy group? Such things reach the whole world and therefore give us the best statistical chance of finding people whose karma is ripe for development.

Let go of your self and attend to your flock.To do this will be no easy task, but are you up for it?

"Flock"? You want us to stand on street corners and preach the truth like those lunatic Xian types. No thanks.

Hi Glen. How's it going?

-

You win Dan. I was hoping there was a chance you`d contemplate the answers to your questions like the thinking man you strive to be.

G`day David. Yes mate I`m good. Did Kev come up to watch the cricket?

Cory Duchesne wrote:

Cory: The human population is alot like the products at wall mart. Most of them are useless and would be better off not existing.

Eliz: So are you saying that people who recognize ourselves as useless should kill ourselves

If you recognized your behavior as foolish, would you repeat the behavior, or would you try to overcome it?

Is it better to end your foolishness by killing yourself, or is it better to end your foolisness by overcoming yourself?

Usefull and useless are slippery terms. Different people have different ideas of what is good is and what is evil and what truth is.

Most people don't have a clear idea of what good & evil are and what truth is. They likely never thought about it too deeply.

These sorts of people live careless and foolish lives, and if we value wisdom, it might best to not have to share the earth with these people. They are a waste of time and energy, and their behavior is destructive and vain.

however, do you think these sorts of people are too hard on themselves?

do you think Paris Hilton or Justin Timberlake have any interest in killing themselves? These people are having a great deal of fun.

maybe you're the fool, cory. Did you think of that? Yet here you are, preaching mass murder, you sick freak.

Milli wrote:

maybe you're the fool, cory. Did you think of that?

Yes, I did think of that. I've thought of that often. That's why I'm wiser than most. Foolish people don't give much thought about what foolisheness is. It would be too painful! It is painful.

Milli: Yet here you are, preaching mass murder, you sick freak.

Come on now honey - dont start throwing dishes. I never once advocated murder, nor have I advocated suicide.

I advocate that people acknowledge their imbecility and thus begin training to overcome their feminine instincts, thats all.

Cory Duchesne wrote:Milli wrote:

maybe you're the fool, cory. Did you think of that?

Yes, I did think of that. I've thought of that often. That's why I'm wiser than most. Foolish people don't give much thought about what foolisheness is. It would be too painful! It is painful.

Milli: Yet here you are, preaching mass murder, you sick freak.

Come on now honey - dont start throwing dishes. I never once advocated murder, nor have I advocated suicide.

I advocate that people acknowledge their imbecility and thus begin training to overcome their feminine instincts, thats all.

So how do you get to the point of disdaining agriculture because of all the human survival it enabled? You're really quite genocidal.

millli: So how do you get to the point of disdaining agriculture because of all the human survival it enabled? You're really quite genocidal.

Would it be better for a man and woman to have 10 children, and thus not have the time or money to focus on their own education, nor have the time or money to give even one of those children proper attention and good education?

Or would it make more sense to have only one or two children, and have the time to do your best raising them?

It might even be better to have no kids at all. In that way, you'll have all your time and energy and to focus on your own development and thus be the parent to (and the son of) mankind.

Keep in mind - - just because I see 95% percent of the products in wall mart as foolish - doest mean I advocate we try to change wall mart by using brute physical force.

The same goes for humanity.

Cory Duchesne wrote: Keep in mind - - just because I see 95% percent of the products in wall mart as foolish - doest mean I advocate we try to change wall mart by using brute physical force.

The same goes for humanity.

Right. You advocate slow starvation through elimination of effective agriculture and "global warming" anti-human propaganda.

Milli wrote,

Right. You advocate slow starvation through elimination of effective agriculture and "global warming" anti-human propaganda.

wrong again.

I advocate that men refrain from giving woman what they want: "marriage, children, a nice house, a nice car, lots of presents under the christmas tree, etc, etc".

Conscientiously having children is 'generally' a failed attempt at throwing one's unresolved shame, loneliness, anxiety and fear onto one's progeny, and then calling it love.

Instead of doing this we should work on overcoming ourselves.

The woman won't be happy with our decision, but they will have to deal with it somehow.

To borrow from Nietzsche:

Observing the behavior of monkey's and apes is often funny and embarassing. The overman will look down on the humans in the same way that humans look down on the apes.

Cory Duchesne wrote:
Conscientiously having children is 'generally' a failed attempt at throwing one's unresolved shame, loneliness, anxiety and fear onto one's progeny, and then calling it love.

Seems like you're really saying it's a successful attempt at that.

Cory: Conscientiously having children is 'generally' a failed attempt at throwing one's unresolved shame, loneliness, anxiety and fear onto one's progeny, and then calling it love.

Milli: Seems like you're really saying it's a successful attempt at that.

What I mean by failed attempt is that the parents by no means get rid of what they were trying to get rid of.

The parents soon realize that having kids wasnt the dream they imagine. Shame, loneliness, anxiety, fear, and low-self esteem, all of which were covered over by the idea of having a family, bubble back up to the surface, often tenfold.

The parents have suceeded only at multiplying their misery via progeny. The intention was to get rid of it completely, instead it becomes multiplied.

Self esteem is a big one. Aspiring parents often have low self esteem and they deal with this by wanting to be the center of someone elses universe, in this case, their childrens. Parents get to feel surges of self esteem by taking my kid to disney world, or buying my kid these sneakers, etc, etc.

Parents get to be the hero in at least somebodies eyes!

Tragically, the child grows up to be a casaulty to shallow gratifications and forms of treatment that he would have been better off not been subjected to. He ends up hating the parents, and the parents, if they are honest with themselves, hate their child.

People's self esteem trips take victims, in this case, the fantasies that parents have about raising children, often drain the spirit and good will of the children.

Likewise, gurus do the same to their diciples, politicians to their sheepish hopeful listeners, priests to their congregation, etc, etc.

Re yours to insider:

Dan Rowden wrote:..., but I'm afraid it was too poorly conceived.

Could be. But who'd take the challenge?

Teacher of what, exactly?

Of wisdom, no less.

And in what way should a wise person transform the world ...

Because of the nature of true wisdom, a wise man would say, drop dead, and you would.

Those who look to the realm of the disembodied dead find much knowledge. But no true wisdom comes from that grand collective, even though there are many more among the dead than among the living, or those said to be living who are just as dead.

If death is known and life isn't, why not live and not die at all? The human psychophysiological construct already contains the mechanisms of life. It's just that it's encumbered. It isn't that there are things that should be added, rather a lot of things need taken away.

Don't people go around with all their doors and windows open, dutifully inviting all kinds of influences into the home carcass? Who needs all those switch-flippers? Shouldn't there be a better way than consulting the dead? I mean, you could get yourself killed doing that. And in fact, that's the case, universally accepted, and quite apparently so, by everybody but me and mine.

You quoted from "THE SERMON AT RAJAGAHA":

"He who knows the nature of self and understands how the senses act, finds no room for selfishness, and thus he will attain peace unending.

How is self defined, or 'the self'? And if selfishness is limited to an inward bent towards self-preservation, why is it faulted?

The world holds the thought of self, and from this arises false apprehension.

Who's to say self-awareness isn't confused with other awareness, of the sort that belongs to a disembodied person, or a no body influence of electrical proportions? Isn't the whole universe electrical? Why can't "spirituality" be understood as electrical phenomenon? Aren't thought forms electrical by nature? Those are transmitted in human venues in ways the ancients couldn't have imagined.

As a young man I learned very quickly that certain vibratory oscillations coming from certain girls was intended to tease my whatchamacallit. And if my fishy pickle took the bait I'd likely be enslaved to romance and end up owned and operated by an unending series of shell games and promises without substance.

So I looked to my own oscillations and discovered the first clue about the lively nature of the backwoods. What a classroom. And what a place to begin understanding what makes a man and his woman different from the buck and doe as it has to do with the raw power of accurate information. Built on that, knowledge leads to understanding and wisdom makes a threesome in the Hay Diddle Dell.

Some say that the self endures after death, some say it perishes.

If the self isn't the self it endures after death because that's where it came from in the first place. If the self perishes that's only because it wasn't taught how to become somebody else's self -- and ends up a tormented floater out there in the sparky ether of human disembodiment.

Even so, there's a better way. Funny how so few are willing to apply their wits to the rigors of intellectual assimilation of ideas and the practical ways they're proven viable.

Good and evil would be indifferent.

That's never the case. Evil is properly understood to exist as a masquerading stand-in for Good. In such a case, or by understanding the nature of Evil, it follows, for instance, that Antichrist and Christianity are one and the same thing. In the Greek the prefix 'anti-' doesn't mean 'against.' It means 'instead of,' hence the institutional masquerade -- and the greatest prick tease of them all.

If such is their self, then it is perfect and cannot be perfected by deeds.

Begging a proper definition of self, isn't it held to be the sum of its autonomic knee jerks and the gut feelings thus generated in what's said to be the heart? But why think from the bottom up when the better way is from the top down? Who knows what a socioreligious monstrosity or a system of spiritual brainwashing might program into the system?

If there is no permanent self that does our deeds, then there is no self; there is no actor behind our actions, no perceiver behind our perception, no lord behind our deeds.

If? Yet the labors necessary to establish a permanent self are shunned right off the hapless bat as humanity rushes off to find something or somebody to lead them by the little sticky baby hand. Yet intellectual intercourse leads first to a peculiar orgasm, a sublime oneness, and a pregnancy all its own. The offspring of the woman Wisdom, if fed the milk of discipline, do not suckle at the huge breasts offered by the Great Fertilizer System of death.

The senses meet the object and from their contact sensation is born.

The brain, while yet functioning as the organ that sustains biological animation, lays down a rogue dynamic in the electrical matrix. It's connected to the subconsciousness, the backroom where all kinds of unexamined and intrusive paraphernalia are stored. Deception ensues because people meet unidentified frickin' objects and get got.

Thence results recollection.

Could be it's somebody else's recollection.

Thus, as the sun's power through a burning-glass causes fire to appear, so through the cognizance born of sense and object, the mind originates and with it the ego, the thought of self, whom some Brahman teachers call the lord.

There's some deal making going on there, where what is thought to be the (a) self that isn't (dubbed ego), gets traded for another self that isn't. Why make deals with the active realm of the grave?

Such is the birth of animated life.

Such is the occupation of invisible others of a warm, wet human container where the legal owner of the premises has been seduced into oblivion.

Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:

Cory Duchesne wrote: The human population is alot like the products at wall mart.

Most of them are useless and would be better off not existing.

So are you saying that people who recognize ourselves as useless should kill ourselves?

Warmongers take care of that problem, along with Mother Nature. In the intermin, who doesn't support Wal-mart? Yet the only people who don't support Wal-mart are the super-rich who support the warmongers. Those who destroy the earth are super-rich.

The enivironment, not nearly as fragile as some like to think, was never harmed by redneck men in FWD vehicles or ATV's. It continues to be harmed by big government and big money, as in the Army Corps of engineers and Peabody Coal Company. Should I mention Monsanto and Cargill? What about those who sell gasoline and those who support them by buying it for the wrong reasons? Or more so because they're enslaved to a rapidly dying suburbia.

As things come to a head I do my best to help out by driving a 345HP SuperSport Silverado pickup. Shareen drives a high performance car with inordinate power for its size. For my part though, it takes a year to accumulate 5000 miles on the odometer.

Cory Duchesne wrote:Likewise, gurus do the same to their diciples, politicians to their sheepish hopeful listeners, priests to their congregation, etc, etc.

That's a good post. Thanks.

But you left out two of the players, romance and commerce. Don't women rule over both those venues?

Cory Duchesne wrote:

Cory: Conscientiously having children is 'generally' a failed attempt at throwing one's unresolved shame, loneliness, anxiety and fear onto one's progeny, and then calling it love.

Milli: Seems like you're really saying it's a successful attempt at that.

What I mean by failed attempt is that the parents by no means get rid of what they were trying to get rid of.

The parents soon realize that having kids wasnt the dream they imagine. Shame, loneliness, anxiety, fear, and low-self esteem, all of which were covered over by the idea of having a family, bubble back up to the surface, often tenfold.

The parents have suceeded only at multiplying their misery via progeny. The intention was to get rid of it completely, instead it becomes multiplied.

Self esteem is a big one. Aspiring parents often have low self esteem and they deal with this by wanting to be the center of someone elses universe, in this case, their childrens. Parents get to feel surges of self esteem by taking my kid to disney world, or buying my kid these sneakers, etc, etc.

Parents get to be the hero in at least somebodies eyes!

Tragically, the child grows up to be a causality to shallow gratifications and forms of treatment that he would have been better off not been subjected to. He ends up hating the parents, and the parents, if they are honest with themselves, hate their child.

People's self esteem trips take victims, in this case, the fantasies that parents have about raising children, often drain the spirit and good will of the children.

Likewise, gurus do the same to their diciples, politicians to their sheepish hopeful listeners, priests to their congregation, etc, etc.

Most people actually attempt to be happy, and have a family to express love of life and each other. Of course there is abuse in some relationships and that's unfortunate, but you have your shit filter set to ten, buddy. WHo abused you so badly? Lighten up, Francis.

Insider wrote:

G`day David. Yes mate I`m good. Did Kev come up to watch the cricket?

I rather doubt it. So what is it exactly that you want Kevin to do - get a job teaching school kids or something?

-

Milli,

Most people actually attempt to be happy, and have a family to express love of life and each other

Your on the wrong board bro, here's something more up your alley

http://boards.oprah.com/WebX?14@@.ef45793!

Cory Duchesne wrote:Milli,

Most people actually attempt to be happy, and have a family to express love of life and each other

Your on the wrong board bro, here's something more up your alley

http://boards.oprah.com/WebX?14@@.ef45793!

But you advocate genocide.

Cory Duchesne wrote:I'm not anti-agriculture - - I just think that ever since it was implemented, man has been lead to create bigger and bigger problems for himself.

For those who can think critically, these big problems lead to big solutions, and so, in that sense, any problems that man creates for himself, are opportunities for education, further enlightenment.

By studying the problems of man, I am convinced that he would be better off if he focused more on establishing forest gardens, maximizing perenials that produce food, maximizing tree crops and laying back on the annuals. Rabits, bird game, fish, dear and maybe goats might all be worth focusing on.

By doing so, we would reduce labor greatly, however, we might want to start waning the population down a bit, and eliminating superflous labor and products.

Just step into wallmart, your typical supermarket, or your typical mall and see how superflous the products are.

The human population is alot like the products at wall mart.

Most of them are useless and would be better off not existing.

You are anti-agriculture, and you're anti-human. You're a sick freak.

Milli wrote:
You are anti-agriculture, and you're anti-human. You're a sick freak.

Milli, seriously, I felt bad about the oprah comment.

Because I hadn’t heard from you in a while, I was nervously wondering if you (after listening to that goo-goo dolls song iris a dozen times) jumped off a bridge or something.

Well I'm glad to see you're still alive (even if you did sincerely belt out that goo goo dolls song on karaoke 3-4 consecutive weeknights straight, drunk enough to find yourself sleeping in the arms of a different 50+ year old cougar each morning)

Look, I respect your sincerity and earnestness, however I stand by all of what I've said.

When I see someone flailing in attack mode with the earnestness that you have been exhibiting lately, I know that that person is suffering a great deal - and so I feel sympathy.

It's a tough time of year milli, I know. (yes, it's that tough that I will allow myself to feel sympathy even for highly sincere and very drunk attempts at karaokeing to Bon-Jovi, Meat loaf and Goo-goo dolls)

Milli, are you one of those people who wanted to buy a Nintendo Wii really bad for a relative (little brother, nephew, etc) so you could play it each night approaching Christmas until 4 am, then re-package it and wrap it up on Christmas eve, and then, after the kids open it on Christmas day, kick all their little asses while stoked on cofee and kahlua?

Those Nintendo’s are all out of stock you know. :(

Maybe that's what got you so grumpy.

Well, there is still plenty to look foward to.

Snow Angels and snow men with boobs and penises.

And if you don't get any snow, well then there is still going to be quality Christmas time with the relatives where there will be plenty of slow motion moments of pointing in astonishment, suprised wide eyed smiles, hugging, laughing, and confused misunderstandings where all parties involved laugh insincerely and uncomfortably before switching the conversation to some gossip about the latest divorce.

And lets not forget to mention that embarassing alcoholic uncle that every family has who seems to begin with a sufficient ammount of wit and good cheer, but quickly degenerates into a series of embarassingly incoherent and angry attempts at heart to heart communication. (for all I know milli, you are that uncle)

Oh yes, it's that jolly god-foresaken time of year.

I feel sorry for you, marinating in your hatred for humanity.