Temet Nosce or Life Is a Book of Lies
“I’m fine.”
“Really I am.”
“Nothing is wrong.”
“I have a good excuse.”
“I’ll do it tomorrow.”
“It’s good enough.”
“I’m happy.”
“It doesn’t bother me.”
“I can’t do anything about it.”
“I deserve it.”
“It is the best I can do.”
“It is your fault.”
“You don’t understand.”
“It wasn’t me.”
“It isn’t fair.”
To the would-be Masters of the Universe, how are we to begin to control anything if we have no control of ourselves? How can we control ourselves if we have next-to-no idea who we are? How can we know who we are if we allow ourselves to be constantly changed by the winds of influence?
“Not me”, you say? Think your in control? I won’t argue with you, or even try to prove you wrong. Your fine just as you are. Better you remain the master of dreams.
To the rest that have the awareness of Socrates, who know that we do not know, how do we change?
We are living a lie, generally speaking. We are animals that have evolved to a point were we have relative mastery of our environment. The natural environment no longer defines us. Instead, we define it. We have been raised in an artificial environment, an artifice that goes beyond merely lights in the deepest night and cool breezes on the hottest summer day. Our mental idea of our environment, our world, our society and culture, is based not on observation and experience, but on what we have been told it should be. As animals, it is only natural that we have adapted to that environment, and the result is that we are artificial people.
As artificial people, we are not “Human” as I recognize the term, but something else. Perhaps we are like machines wearing human masks. What does a machine do? A machine follows a predetermined pattern. A machine follows an established program. A machine performs a preset function when it is activated externally, or when conditions merits action. The action of a machine is neither right nor wrong. The action of a machine is either appropriate to the situation or it is not. Happenstance, or luck, is the only difference between action that fits the situation and action that is inappropriate.
One of the most important functions of these machines, a function that is key to their programing, is the ability to lie. The lies they tell that matter are to themselves, lies about what they “know”, or what is right or wrong. More over, the lies we as machines tell ourselves are cumulative. The more we tell them, the more we believe them. The more lies told, the more convincing the body of lies we create. Our lies support the lies of others, ensuring the safe and proper function of the system. To stop lying, and to stop tolerating the lies of others, is anathema to that system. The machines respond harshly to having their masks revealed. The artifice of self is a reflection of the artifice of the system. To have the lie revealed is to take responsibility for what is wrong with both the self and the world we are in.
Most have been programed not to want that kind of responsibility.
Based on my observation of these kinds of machines, I think for most the mask of lies does not fit. The few I have met who’s mask fit well I have felt a momentary sympathy for. They are truly trapped, cogs in the system that will probably grind them down to dust. Most masks do not fit, and when we sense it, we begin to wonder what is wrong with us, what is wrong with our world. Usually, we are distracted by something… our function as machines is activated by external forces, or someone comes along and helps adjust our mask and briefly relieves the feeling of discomfort our slipping mask causes. For some, the sensation of the mask slipping is enough to make us aware of it. We feel that something is wrong, and we become focused on that sensation. Our discomfort becomes enough that we can resist the distractions and the urges to conform from our peers.
We risk ostracism, but chance gaining real power and maybe even freedom.
The first step in avoiding a trap is knowing of its existence. The lie of the system is a trap. It is a mire that sucks the actual Self deeper and deeper into darkness, leaving only the machine in our place. In order to begin to deny the artifice of the system, we must start with denying the lies we tell ourselves. In esoteric circles, this process is often referred to as “the third-eye turned inward” or “the perspective of Baphomet”. It is nothing more than a sincere, objective, and deliberate observation and study of the self. While this may sound simple, truly achieving an objective and honest perspective of the self takes immense effort. The lie is initially far more comfortable than the truth. We all want to believe that we are better than we really are. The system encourages this kind of lie. We are fully invested in our masks, preferring to believe that the artifice is who we really are; we are our social status, our Facebook account, our job, rather than being something unique, independent, and consistent. Excising the lies about ourselves requires an intentional destruction of our false sense of self that we are invested in.
If we have a hope of even beginning this struggle, then we begin with a marginal sense of who or what we may be. Our goal is to know, not to guess, assume, or pretend that we have qualities we do not. We must stop dreaming of being Human, and begin to wake to being. Our program has internal fail-safes against the thoughts that suggest real independence, real observation, and real self-assessment. External processes also exist to encourage us to accept the lie, to doubt the truth, and to respond violently to those who try to reach too far too quickly. It is a dangerous process.
In observing the lies we live, one of the first things that will become apparent is how much of our time is engaged in activities that we find distasteful. Where is our zest for life? Where is the passion for those things we pursue? For so many of us, our lives are simply one compromise after another, one accommodation after another, settling for what is easily within reach rather than striving to fulfill our desires (if and when we know enough about ourselves to know our own desires and not chase what we have been told is worthy of our pursuit!). We do things we hate, and in turn learn to hate ourselves. A self loathing person is easier to control. If you are never good enough, never complete, never content, and you never know what any of those things mean, then any commercial that promised ambiguous fulfillment generates from you a mechanical response.
If this is true on the most superficial level, how much more deeply are we influenced? How much longer will we allow ourselves to be told that the missing piece to our lives is in our next purchase, cause, or political effort, instead of seeking to find it in ourselves?
We must stop being machines, easily manipulated through our programming by other machines. We must stop dreaming that we are Human. The lies we tell ourselves must end. Once we are each secure in our own truth, we find ourselves in a fortress that cannot be shaken. Mastery of the self is Mastery of the Universe.
Klan
January 28th of 1985 – The all-star cast of USA for Africa records its egalitarian mega-anthem “We Are The World”. A young couple is walking out of a cinema, having just seen; Star Trek III. Yes, indeed, the air wreaks like a youth group camping retreat filled with interlocking hands and unity songs. Just 13 days prior, Tancredo Neves was elected as the new Brazilian President ending its 21 year military rule. 5 days later, President Ronald Regan was sworn in for his second term. Later that year Regan will sit down for the first time with Gorbachev. The first Nintendo game system is released, complete with Super Mario Bros. Calvin and Hobbes appears in 35 papers. Microsoft released Windows 1.0. The peace sign adorns most ‘pop’ merchandise and accessories. People far and wide are bombarded with a constant media exposure to two ideas.
Terror was the first of these ideas. The Cold War, Japan Air # 123, The quakes of Santiago and Valparaiso, and the UK’s National ‘Glow-Worm’ Day are exemplary evidence to support this idea. Civil unrest, cultural tension, and the threat of a nuclear world war; flow constantly and are ever present in television, radio, newspapers, movies, music videos, and comic books. It seemed as though all of humanity had finally opened their eyes to the brutal nature of the world. The bleeding hearts cried loudly for equality, the religious zealots preached fire and brimstone, and Coca-Cola fans protested to get the original formula back in production. Society was paralyzed by the fright of what cruelties our fellow man is capable of.
The second of these ideas, the undercurrent of the first, was either directly featured or the assumed logical solution for the abhorrent state of the world; Unity. Interestingly an multifaceted allegorical representation of this idea exists; 1985 was the year the GNU Manifesto was written. Stallman got it on some levels, but the software community back then was relatively small. Imagine if the whole world was in fact reflective of open source software. Suppose we all started off as this kernel of a person and then small modifications were made to our functionality, and finally we were given different aesthetics; would we not still be the same as the rest? After all Ubuntu and Fedora are still both Linux based, just repackaged and accessorized differently.
Strangely however, this does seem to be the case. Perhaps we are content in our individuality being surface deep. We are taught that prejudice, intolerance, immorality, and many other potentially beneficial modes of thinking are wrong; this forces us to make modifications beyond their debugged kernel. You will see this repeat on many different levels, and it always points back to the same idea. We here at Eminent Mind might even be no better; but we are striving to be different. We recognize that sociopolitical pressures force a certain debugging process to our core self. The GCr mandates behavioral and cognitive protocols. The Puritan Mandate and the Assimilative Automation are two of such protocols which are counter to the natural Calling and Intentional Considering.
The Puritan Mandate demands that your thinking processes be subordinated to whatever psychonautic archetype embodies the set of traits derived by the nonsecular and considered paramount to the self. The notion is that we are born imperfect and must strive to bare the traits of this particular conceptual construct. In our society today, the successful entrepreneur is considered the psychological equivalent of the saints of Eastern Orthodoxy. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of the American Dream are rendered the freedom to dream of becoming the ruthless corporate gladiator. The Seven Deadly Sins are no long lust, greed, gluttony, envy, wrath, vanity, and sloth. They are late payment, poor credit, inexperienced, overqualified, nonconformity, violation of order, violation of regulation, and illegal. You can find the new 10 Commandments in ever Terms of Use Agreement.
You are expected to comply by the order of Assimilative Automation. We are convinced that we cannot exist outside of the system. You must be participatory, and should you choose not to be; well we all know they’ll slap you right back in line. To forward this agenda, we are constantly encouraged to do 3 things; reestablish, conform, and be compliant. History shows that for people in lower social classes the best strategy is communal living. Living in the extended family (clan) gives reinforcement of security and resources, yet we are told to go off to college and then settle wherever a position opens in the particular field of training you’ve received. In the event you establish in your home town, certain factors will always arise to break a part the clan unit.
Employers will offer the opportunity for advancement at the cost of relocation. Regulations are placed on how many people can occupy one building, and how many buildings can occupy one piece of land. In 1971 another factor was put in place that also continued the dilution of community, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that forced busing of students may be ordered to achieve racial desegregation. Which in 1985 was nearing its peak. Not only was this forcing cultural conformity, but because of the difficulty parents were having with distance of schools from their residence and layered times different grades would start and end; it was wearing on the harmony of the traditional nuclear family. Creating a feeling of alienation from heritage and family, an insurmountable detachment; left what little security and reliance had remained vaporized.
Songs like “Everybody Wants To Rule The World”, “We Don’t Need Another Hero”, and ” Jungle Love” saturate the airwaves of 1985 running rampant on the billboard. At the same time a team of executives are discussing the viral success of the then 4 year old MTV. Never before had it been so easy to commercialize popular trends. What would come next was the result of a century long thrust.
To Be Continued…
Emergence
From this, we are given the impression; that everything is hinged together in a logical sequence of events which accidentally produced man. The universe is nothing more than a senseless systematic chain reaction that is blind and without purpose to the logical. As we attempted to accurately detail the processes and mechanisms of the universe, we fail disastrously to take into account in our calculations; conscious experience. We cannot capture the meaning of perception, nor depict the nature thought. The abstract and mental system of mathematical symbols is void of human experience, spirituality, and creativity.
Let us examine this through a specific lens. From a particle level to the perceptual level, man is built up from small groups working together. Like pixels to the picture, the evidence of man’s own emergence is undeniable. In this perception every phenomenon is situated in its relationship to others, and comes from a ‘Current’ (field/dimension) of energy.
All our thoughts, our feelings, and every movement of the body is the manifestation of a specific energy. In our mindless state, that current is constantly swelling and flooding. The endless focus and blur that happens as we shift from thought to feeling to sensation creates a fluctuating series of impulses. We deceive ourselves by calling those impulses “me” or “I”. It creates a wall of illusion professing it is acting of will power and independence. As one desire is crystallized and then either fulfilled or dismissed, it is quickly replaced with another. We become slave to a pattern of contradiction in which there can be no continuity of intention. We are undoubtedly, accepted or not; all a piece of a larger reality. As slaves to this reality, we succumb to the Puritan continuity of intention. Intuitively we sense this but mistrust the value of intuition.
Continuity of intention is recognized by the Slyman as Calling. Calling can be an amazing tool of transformation. When used consciously it can unlock the doors of transformation and allow us to create our Eminent Mind. However it bears the potential for greater evils of the psyche.
In the article The Relative Nature of the Concept ‘Freedom’, Mr Jason Sorrell brilliantly casts ‘need’ (the catalyst of ‘I’) and the slight-of-hand sorcery that comes, when we do not actively pick which impulses to consciously experience. Mr Sorrell handsomely demonstrates that the level of dependency on the fulfillment of our needs through the system is directly proportionate to our level of ‘freedom’. The assertion is that in order to participate within a system, you must conform to a certain standard (morality). That standard is usually where your contributing value is defined. Sorrell waxes it much better than I do. So I would suggest reading the previously linked article.
Scientifically we are defined as an organism; a form of life composed of mutually interdependent parts that maintain various vital processes. It has been my contention (in previous writings) things… happen, and this occurs on scales of marginal proportioning; but this does not exclude peculiar commonalities shared by things on marginally separate levels. This is why I, so often marvel at the wisdom of the enneagram, we wish to perceive a direct connection (line) between two seemingly opposing/similar points on different levels; its wisdom show us this is not the case. Let’s not trail off, on Sacred Geometry; we need only borrows its influence.
Life composed of mutually interdependent parts that maintain various vital processes. When placed in the context of a worldly sense, is indicative of society. The symbolic perception suggests, that we can then develop these types organism; just as we can develop our own beings.
If by living deliberately we can emerge a stronger being in physicality, mentality, and psychology; why then can it not work socially? Live deliberately… Emerge!
Calling – A Response to Entropicmomentum
The way my life is run, currently, will never be enough. I want out of this slave pen. I think my path is taking me there, but at the same time I can’t help wondering if I’m really just scuttling from one end of the cage to the other (the side with the better view). What will it take to truly be free? What qualifies as good enough?
EM,
Immediately I want to say that true freedom happens only when we can precede in any direction desired without obstruction. However problematic it seems for freedom to become a reality, I cannot with clear conscience ignore a reoccurring observation I have made. Every person I have ever asked this one simple question, has answered it the same. “Do you have a sense of purpose?”, in every instance the response has been to the affirmative.
From the Materialists who believe all things are deterministic, to the Creationists who claim divine Will, and every shade of thinking between each has the idea the we have a role. Rightly so, who can honestly deny that we impact the causal; with every breath we draw. From what I have also gathered, another commonality observed is our quest for this ‘calling‘.
Even more impressive is that this happens on many scales, with an almost eerie congruence; we see one behavior manifested on marginal levels of scaling. I remember being completely fascinated, when being informed that a piece of glass; was in fact not in a truly stationary state. Imagine, over just a few hundred years; what was once a completely level surfaced window, will be thicker toward the bottom and thinner at the top. I marvel even more at the molecule and the mechanical manifestation of material.
One morning swimming at a spring, I started thinking about the current I was walking against. My mind drifted to maps of ocean currents moving, I thought about how it resembled the moving air streams above, everything seeming in motion. It then occurred to me that we use this type of analysis in second nature. I realize none of these are new ideas, it builds a sufficient platform for what I propose might place this square in alignment.
I won’t suggest I have any undeniable truth or solution, but I have some hard-pressed questions to which could open the doors to real answers. If we feel hungry does our body not call to be nourished? If we need sleep do our heads not lean towards the pillow? Say we are addicted to a cigarette, do we not have driving cravings? What happens when your sex drive, cannot be satisfied; do you not boil with frustration? Is it not possible, a woman’s compulsion for chocolate; mirrors the flirtatiousness of Le Femme Fatale ( Our Lady Fate)?
Not to labor the our point of reference unnecessarily, I have but two questions more and my closing.
If we should have meaning (subjected to the filling of physical and psychological needs) , yet be able to to affect the casual to the point of holding responsibility; are we not then mandated by the health of our being to tap our potential? This of course demands an honest analysis of priorities, structure, philosophy, process, and ideals; none the less no man is just born, they’ve all grown. Growing is difficult on some levels, but all must do so together. What then can we say is our true obstructions, and how can they be removed?
Freedom is progression without out obstruction. Without Will or Calling we collapse into happenstance; no different than the currents of the ocean or winds of the air. Though we surely will never be free of Influence, we can choose which currents, on what level; to ride. Live deliberately.
Good Enough?
I begin today, as I began any day before, with the notion that nothing around me seems natural. I don’t mean I was uncomfortable in my home, rather that so much of our lives is a forced existence. Some might argue that this ‘world’ we live in has come about a natural occurrence. I would remark that just because you can stick the barrel of a revolver firmly up your arse and discharge it, does not make it a wise idea. Why are we expected to just accept it as status quo ?
Why in our minds, do we make excuses; claiming things such as “I’m one man, what can I do about it?” I often hear folks say, ” The system isn’t perfect, but what would work better? The grass is not greener on the other side.”; to which I address with “For some any grass is greener than the grass they’ve been chewing on for so many years”, “Show me where I can go and not be forced to participate under tyranny of some form or the other.”. I further this by asking if such a place does not exist, if I cannot find a system of my liking, what then are my options but to forge one?
Is it not tyranny, when you are forced to conform to the ethics and principles, subjected to laws and standards of a particular region; simply because you are born to it? Even if one exists that meets the measure of your sound reason’s judgement, what is the reality that you’ll ever make it to the ‘land that has promise’? Will the economy be friendly enough to allow for your departure from it? Will your current country allow your departure from it? Will the favored country welcome you with open arms? Can you give up all the people which you hold dear to you? Should you be the one forced to uproot and go?
It seems perfectly reasonable to me, that when contrasting these questions with the Slyman’s perspective; knowing not only the proper sequence of emergence, but what is of organic phenomenon and is purely artifice; we might come to a grim reality. Men lack accountability, man has always done so. History exists purely to justify the wrongs of mankind. Man has, is, and will continue to do very reckless things. We’ve learned how to dupe ourselves and it helps us sleep at night. We refuse to look at the bigger picture, as we judgingly point our fingers at our neighbors, coworkers, and families. Mommy did not hug me enough when I was little, so its ok to be chauvinistic.
It is as if, a long time ago someone penned your glorious tragic comedy; with brilliance to suit your role. You proudly take stage left and curtsey on your cue. Maybe you are satisfied to make due with your lot in life. What if I am not? Would you argue that I should use the system to change it? What if that system is failing? How can one expect a favorable outcome from a system that fails to see every man and woman within it secured and stabilized? What does it say for that system? Why are we forced to accept ‘good enough’?
Illumination
So many of us are seeking answers. We turn to science, religion, philosophy, and our own experiences for some kind of understanding or comfort. We seek an explanation, a foundation to build our world-view upon, a paradigm or system with which to navigate reality. Answers are what we are after, and answers are what are offered in abundance by both the well-meaning and well-informed as well as the clueless or hucksters of the world.
A Basis In History
Work on a recent section of my up and coming book led me to doing some research on the methods historians use for verifying accuracy. This was important in my research because so many “traditions” roam abroad with unsupported claims of ancient roots. I’m sharing this with you fine folks because it may help you decide which systems are worth working in and which are not. After all if the system is based in lies, you can only expect any claims of potential gain are also based in lies. Given the short lifespan we have and the fact that most of us were not born into this pursuit, time is precious.
Time brings us to our first point of measure when dealing in authenticating a system as ancient. Olden-Jørgensen and Thurén state that the closer the evidence examined is to the event it claims to describe, the more likely it is that we can trust the evidence given.
In the case of physical evidence (i.e. a plate, stone, or any other tangible item) this is more than obvious. As an example let us just pretend someone has found a spear which they claim was used by early Mesopotamian hunters. After undergoing the process of carbon dating it is revealed that this spear could not be any older than the end of the Roman Empire. We can confidently conclude that it is highly unlikely that this spear existed in it’s “claimed” time period.
What about narrative evidence? Can the same type of measure be given? It certainly can! However a greater degree of difficulty is presented in this type of verification and so a number of procedures have been proposed. Bernheim and Langlois & Seignobos proposed a 7 step system and Garraghan gives 6 steps. It would seem there are many options available to establishing a method of verification. In this light I’ve sought a common field of variables and comprised my own list.
* Proximity of Origin
* Greater Value of Testimony
* Tendency of Bias
* Detail vs General Analysis
* Reference Verification
* Plausibility Verification
* Linear Relativity
* Statisical Relativity
* Analogical Function
As to not entirely bore you fine folks with exasperating detailed descriptions, I will sum each up with a brief sentence or two.
Proximity of Origin – The length of time between the actual occurrence and it’s testimony. It is completely different when dealing with a narrative account from someone who was present during the occurrence versus someone who is trying to reconstruct it a hundred years later.
Greater Value of Testimony – Are there a large number of separate accounts from separate individuals? Do they all agree on ALL the points in consideration?
Tendency of Bias – Is there a set of circumstances which would cause the petitioner of the testimony to be biased to the occurrence? If so, what is the likelihood of the petitioner maintaining a neutral presentation?
Detail Vs General Analysis – Are ALL accounts detailed? If not is there a larger percentage that are detailed or general?
Reference Verification – Can the data presented be verified by sources of authority? How much empirical evidence can be gathered to support the reference.
Plausibility Verification – Is it reasonable to have occurred? Are the existing external conditions for its plausibility present?
Linear Relativity – Does the sequence of events leading up to and continuing afterward present its situation as relative? For instance the claim that Jesus was born between the time of Washington’s Presidency and Adam’s Presidency is clearly retarded.
Statistical Relativity – This deals more with gray areas (situations in which there is conflicting data) and can be utilized by comparison of higher statistical probability. This is obviously using hard science to measure the likelihood of the occurrence.
Analogical Function – When dealing with things of metaphor, one must measure the application of the metaphor during it’s historical period. Obviously the Xtian’s metaphor for “Feeding the Five Thousand” has nothing to do with biological cloning of fish and bread.
As it stands now this is my method. In contrast prior to my committal of this to my book, I’d like you folks to examine it or try it out and help me refine this.
T.C. Downey
jasonsorrell
Warlock Asylum
