• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Location
    Vancouver BC
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

18,597 profile views
  1. I didn't even know that dude posted on here. But then, I'm rarely browsing on this part of the forum much.
  2. @Leo Gura Yea, I remember reading that detail too, now that you mention it. It would be interesting to see a compilation of all the artwork that beat Hitler's and to judge it through modern eyes. (>>> and therefore WWII as we know it happened<<<)
  3. The skill is undeniable, I always found it a bit strange people said "he couldn't paint", and then I actually saw his paintings. By whose standards, exactly? There is also really sound architectural draftsmanship going on there. I'm sure if he wanted to be an architect instead, maybe we wouldn't even be having these discussions about him, heh. From what I remember, I don't think he had the right aesthetic for the time period and what art schools were looking for then. I also don't think he was super interested or specialized in painting people either, which was probably what they were looking for, but you need training (probably in something like the French academic style) to be extremely skilled at it. Everyone does. No one is magically skilled at anatomic realism without practice and the right background knowledge.
  4. @Tim R They're not technically shitty at all, they're just kind of boring and super kitsch, kind of like every single Thomas Kinkade painting used for gift cards. I understand that what Hitler was creating was not what art schools were interested in at the time. I watched a documentary called "The Architecture of Doom" for a uni class years ago; there are a number of artists that Hitler liked that I also liked. But then he loved "pure" art that reflected his ideals of beauty and health, and didn't like all that other generate avant-garde art that was supposedly all made by Jewish people, Soviets, etc. I also liked a lot of the "degenerate art" he burned. My favourite artist that he liked that I also like was Bocklin, who I learned about before I learned that Hitler liked him too: With this famous painting being in the bunker where he shot himself: Also one of my favourites, and also apparently in Germany anywhere in homes around the turn of the 19th-20th century. ****art history lesson*****
  5. So... my dear, without me asking anything at all from you, what do you need/ want from me? (It's fine, you don't have to even answer. I know. I've always known from the first moment I remembered you.)
  6. SPRING 2019: It's been two years. I am recalling suddenly that before I had put this all out of my mind, that originally I anticipated that it would be at least one year, probably at least two before I would want to have even tangential contact with you in psychic/ psychoemotional way. I never wanted him to deal with the fallout of what would inevitably happen after that time period, nor did I think he was ready anyway. I considered his wellbeing. Better to be cut off from me just in case, going by my intuition. I did anticipate that you would come back and that I would have need of you in the future. That we would have some sort of work to do together. I suppose you are the person who ended up knowing the most details about what it was like (and by extension what it felt like for me to die not through direct empathy, but through). Hey, I had the understanding that you crashed with me, but I might have completely fell off the rail at that point. I thought I heard your voice run bone dry, and I also considered the degree to which it was completely and all me, myself and I. I stopped both taking it all seriously and all for granted though. My morning star. A small but significant symbol of hope from that time period, the only one then. What a barren reality in my circumstances. The end of a life. I guess I felt like I needed someone/ something to hold onto, that I couldn't help myself. (He wrote my story down from that time period, in quite accurate detail too. There was no surprise there.) I expected nothing. I stopped believing. Well, thank you. This means something now still, especially as I open myself more to trusting again. (And in the material world, I see your signs again.) IRL, I have a place for you, soul and mind, however this works now. And if it's not in the works, as I have little mind to look for specific molds for specific people except how they manifest tangibly in my IRL reality at this point relevantly as however I can create and attract it into being, that's fine, as I will not touch this too directly and with any sort of loaded emotional attachment/ expectation especially for what has been in my past (in no way will I involve myself with anyone as I attempted to do before; it is not the correct order of things anyway). You've had your idealism completely decimated. So have I. We can work together and understand each other properly now, I think. And I have the need of your mind; it's a fine one. So no longer are you walking in one direction and I am walking towards you in the opposite direction, our paths fairly askew and misaligned. So I anticipated it almost exactly 2 years ago. I very much still can make it "worth it" for you. ... It's me that has needed the convincing, probably not you. In the relative, personal sense. Not in the absolute sense. ........
  7. ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF INTERDEPENDENCE (/ framing things from the outset as mutually beneficial outcomes): I don't know quite how to say this, though I have mentioned this before. I feel like I have been showing a lot of my worst sides (as well as better sides, though pride makes me hyperaware of the former), but that I still have so much to offer still. But I will put all of my intention and actions where my words are. When I taught (as this is my best example), I served who I taught. I considered my duty to do this, I got a great deal from it but it was also very draining at times. But all things that are worthwhile doing, they are some times. And yes, I obviously expect a great deal more from adults than children, but then I look around the issues we have sometimes, and I look at my own issues and expectations as they've been, and I wonder the degree that I've been expecting too much of both myself and others in an overly harsh way that ends up being impractical. No one makes the cut when you are looking for flaws in everyone and also yourself, especially if your underlying motive actually ends up being to keep people at a distance. That is not how I intend to treat people (at least, going forward, I plan to continue to change my stance in this way here circumstantially). You are where you are. Just as with the kids I taught, they are where they are. I didn't bring excessive, pointlessly impractical judgement to my practice there, and when I did, I saw that it was my duty to get over with it in order to better be able to function in reality for a given purpose/ goal. Anyway, in that role, you serve even if you are also leadership and there is inevitable selfishness involved. Interests become directly shared. And to go back to this same point over and over again: without integrity, openness, honesty, mutual accountability and responsibility, there isn't much of anything. It would be nice to serve a small group of people more unconditionally than everyone else, even as this ultimately may also involve "game playing"/ "ego" stuff. Yea, it's alright. It need not be an obstacle (which goes back to the principle of interdependence/ inclusiveness.) May we play "conscious games" together then, in our shared and in all of our best interests, and may this be framed properly as such from the outset. It will stick one way or another. I suppose the limiting factor is ultimately me. I have inevitably have limits on wasting my time and energy, but why bother getting overly attached to people who walk away or who do not and cannot do what is in my best interest, if I never put that expectation excessively on them in the first place? And why bother excessively in that way in the first place? What unaccounted for need or desire is now coming into play, and where did it come from, and why did I not deal with it properly before? And also, what has being overly tight-fisted ever done for anyone except make the hand cramp up in pain, numbness, and eventual immobility? Why yell at your own damn hand for doing what it did? I am becoming more open to trusting despite the past; I feel this deeply at the heart level, despite whatever pain there is there. There may be no good reason to trust based on the past, but there is always a reason not to trust. To not trust in spite of or because of someone or something else, that's to shoot yourself in the foot, as it is to have relationships but to experience no meaningful, lasting value in them. As it is to remain in a state of half-consumption, half-feeling and half-disconnection, and half-trust. Maybe this is the most obvious statement of the century. (Coming from the queen of being one foot in and out the door mostly ALL the time, and when I felt like I wasn't in my life before? I sure fucked that one up, didn't I? Haha.)
  8. STUPID QUESTIONS I COULDN'T HELP BUT PURSUE: I have paid the most astronomical price for these questions, personally speaking, as it was a couple years ago. 1) How well does anyone understand me? Or want to? (And all the stupid tests I felt the need to do in the past.) 2) How much would you give up for me, now and continuing into the future? (And drawing both intuitions and making reasonable assumptions based on what presents itself in reality.) Which amounts to, what am I worth to you? And why? 2) How well do I understand myself? How well do I want to? (Practically speaking, to get on with my life, I feel like I've learned way too much at times, in both scope and nuance/ detail.) Didn't I say somewhere: play stupid games, win stupid prizes? Etc.
  9. INTERDEPENDENCE + THE SPIRIT OF SCIENCE + FINESSE JUDGEMENT: All things, positive values and ethics, and desired outcomes, are in non-contradiction and interdependence with each other. And so, we must rewrite the rules of psyche accordingly in order to get the best possible results in tangible reality and in our subjective, personal, and collective experience. (This is the name of the game in SO many of our conflicts with ourselves and others, that we might even say that this is at the root of it all as we know it.) I was having this conversation with my partner a couple days ago, when he asked me how scientifically, materialistically minded people should deal with this conflict of the limits of the scientific method/ scientific thinking. And I said.. you MUST frame intuition as being in intrinsic non conflict with the scientific method and other "rational" means from the outset in order to have it so that you can tap into higher intuition, particularly if you wish to tap into it in "normal consciousness" which is just regular, waking consciousness, whatever that is to you, which is something that doesn't even necessarily register as being an usually altered state (say you might just be higher energy than normal). The only reason why you need to resort to such states in a more absolute sense is because the regular rules of consciousness do not permit access (although perhaps the next problem you might have after this is that you may not have developed the skill of appropriate judgement and psychoemotional navigation in a state of much greater openness). You must be able to do this in order to have a fuller command and ability to work with intuition, as this should be the end goal IMO. Intuition must be understood (/reframed) as being TRUTH. The more accurate and expansive your perception is, the more true intuition (which ultimately, should just be defined as intuition, period) has increasingly limited room for deviation. It's incredibly precise. The instinct and judgement must be honed and cultivated in good spirit. That most often requires true commitment over just the idea of commitment as it stands. Recognize for example, when you are using the scientific method to explain or justify things to other people because it is necessary, but that this is NOT where the information and understanding of legible knowledge and the judgement to use it; it's not where it comes from. That this is true by structure, that generally it is not possible. Generally, if you follow the rules precisely, what you can accomplish is tiny piecework at most, and indeed this does have its place. But it also lends directly to bureaucracy (and also, culture "stability" and stagnation as we know it, for better and for worse, but this too can change). And so here in this way, your working psychology changes. Having a vision beforehand is also not conducive to the spirit of empirical science as we know it, but considered that this system has only really been operational for about 200 years or so. We got quite a bit done before that. Also, if you think intuition is wishy-washy and fickle stuff in its core nature? Well.... this perspective does not serve. I reminded him of a piece of common knowledge that was relevant here: the number of discoveries and understandings coming directly from dream states or sometimes altered states of consciousness. To come in command of the "powers of creation" in "normal consciousness" you must get psyche and the relationships between beliefs and habits right. A great deal must be cleared out too by default. But is not simply enough to empty out unless you are receiving intuition (which comes with "psychic/ psychoemotional" infrastructure from another source). That means that someone else probably did the heavy lifting for you (and while it might not have been experienced as difficult and done in a state of psychoemotional resistance, but conscious synthesis and intention often does comes from somewhere. I have seen a great deal here, both in the past and future.) Anyway, a well known example of having the right openness and aptitude/drive from the outset plus adapting psyche perpetually for a specific task is Tesla, who I have mentioned before very briefly in this general context (probably in my first METACOG journal). You are going to be very weird by any normal, modern standard at the levels of deeper psychoemotional infrastructure, for whatever that is worth, though you can easily enough cover it up with something else manage to change this, I think, if you can manage to change your deep wiring as well. Because that's not easy. (Also, I told him to consider the amount of intuition integrated with the search for truth/ knowledge in the early days of human science when it was merged with philosophy, as these were not originally identified as separate drives at all. What do you think the understanding/ concept/ belief in the Logos is and why was it also a religious/ spiritual concept? Here is an example of "rules of psyche" that allowed more freedom with the means of legible reasoning and justification in combination with the freer use of intuition, and still, a great deal of technology was brought into this world from it. These were the days when philosophy was not at all separate from science, and before 19th century, industrial, often "Victorian", empirical- materialist science and all its direct successors, I have mentioned that science WAS natural philosophy. And as we return towards a more holistic and merged approached in all of our fields of knowledge and art, and let's just say, all conscious human endeavors as it should be aimed towards all aspects of human living; what we will return to in perspective and approach will share much in common with the early days. I told him to consider what it might have been like to be someone like Aristotle, and what it would have been like to pull out a system of classification (which was the precursor to a great deal of scientific classification and organization of scientific thought, including categorizing all animals according to species, genus, etc.) from almost nothing, if you consider his surroundings. So we must too return to this degree and scale of creativity and intuition, as we call it now, and it will at least in theory give us the space and integration to achieve things in much greater scope. Then we may rely retrospectively on the systems given to us already, while we have also given ourselves the freedom to adapt this method, other methods, and the metamethods or CONTEXT surrounding these methods in an appropriate way. (And in this way, we are exercising the virtue of adaptability and flexibility in the face of reality, openminded observation in good consciousness and spirit, etc.) And we must do this... despite all the stuff we've created both in a purely conceptual way with all the things we've filled the world with. Why? Because it must be done in order to achieve the means of evolving our practice of knowledge, especially in the technology and the sciences. At least, a good handful of us must do this. Yes, perhaps we require more discipline and unity of vision than we ever have for these reasons. Even though it presents itself as an impossibly difficult task at times due to the amount of possible distractions everywhere. We fall back so easily into reiterative thought processes and approaches believing that this is all that there is, because it's what is taught to us, it's culture as we know it. We are at the moment living in a very bureaucratic society particularly at the level of autonomized systems ("the information/ knowledge economy) that have been allowed to govern our lives, and it seems like there is a great deal of paranoia about this. It is understandable, but it is not necessary. It simply that a more intelligent approach that takes more into account properly is needed. The autonomization is not the issue, but the seemingly impossible number of things for one human or even a small group of humans to keep track of properly at the level of minutiae detail. This too must be gotten a handle over one way or another, and it will. Also, a note about receiving inspiration, intuitive knowledge, and visions: people may be capable of receiving inspiration and even working with it, but they do not always understand where it is coming from. Even more rarely IMO is even having extensive estimates and knowledge into the WHYS of it, with the WHYS not going that deep, and keeping tabs on this process in a more expansive, visionary sense. Everything that I have seen is rather limited, from my perspective, and I recall the number of times that I myself have felt full of gaps and holes in this way, and thought: this process must be accounted for properly one way or another. And rather than just to take my word on it, for everything that is here, you yourself may just keep asking WHY, WHY, WHY, and see how much questioning a structure and the understanding of it can hold up to, and how your own understanding may transform and expand in the process of looping feedback with yourself. I told my partner too, we should have a sort of "science of intuition" as well to develop a better social system of checks and balances here. We used to have something to this effect in the past, but it was... much more limited. The people who could best use it mostly already had the goods and this was not considered to be something that could be shared properly especially via language extensively. Whatever there was got codified and we called it the more conceptual side of knowledge and judgement about knowledge ("philosophy"). But perhaps this can change once again once we involve "intuition proper" as we know it now again in this whole process. May all of the "woo" factor be taken out of it. But for very rigid scientific/ materialist types and also just generally, for all of us in the business of living, you must come to have an understanding of using the right tools for the right purpose, like finesse judgement; and not be hammering the square peg into every hole you find, you know? Any one who doesn't share your particular dogma can tell that what you're doing is causing a sort of conflict within reality (at least, at an raw, intuitive, gut level, if not consciously due to being obscured by their own myopic vision and agendas). Someone who shares your perspective or who is more reconciliatory towards it may think something like, well, they're doing their best with their understanding of reality, or something like that. And it's... sort of working. The most dogmatic will say that every square hole is actually a round one (scientific dogma, atheistic dogma, religious and spiritual dogma, it all tends to have much more in common with each other than not, structurally speaking)...)
  10. Direct psychic/emotional connection is no joke. It is a potentially a huge shit show even moreso than "regular" connections due to an even greater lack of intrinsic boundaries. For lack of a better way to explain it at the moment, what exists at your deepest is core and what is both unresolved and in disintegrated and fractured states dictates what happens, and it things are felt.. more directly and more quickly. (Or at least, this is potentially the case unless some other sort of buffer zone is set up between at least two people creating a sense of distance and time. You know, things that do not intrinsically exist?) You can't rely on externalization, disconnection, and walling yourself up to keep the shit out or in, which ever one of it. And generally, it tends to be at least a little bit of both. I guess the dream hasn't died entirely yet. And indeed, it cannot. But I cannot reach for firm ground where there is nothing anymore anyway. And that's ok. It was my intention to destroy that. And despite this, I am learning how to trust and prioritize in a human sense once again in some sort of meaningful way. As opposed to this feeling like "human trust" just slips through me like water, I couldn't seem to hold onto it properly or long enough even to get the barest sense of connection meaning anything, and in that case, if I can't make it mean anything, why bother? As in connection is just some means to some other end, as if that will satisfy? Why bother with it all? Perhaps it's true that maybe I didn't truly have to if I didn't want to. (And then to ask myself the question, why talk to anyone or start over after two summers ago? For what possible reason?) When it comes to psychic-emotional connections: if I like you in this way and we are compatible and predisposed towards each other (as this tends to be a thing that goes both ways), you will know. If you have the psychic affinity, you will obviously know even if you don't know exactly about what it means. You will know in waking life or you will dream, whatever is the most consistent means. (Though if you're relying on dreams you're a bit behind the program.) And if I don't, you will probably also know. You will feel it. Have you done anything major that would cause me to dislike you? (I'm still following the 2 strikes rule for the most part unless there is a very good reason, and even then, it's 2 strikes are not a given.) Are you resisting having a compatible vision in some way? Are you not interested in my interests (as I should properly take and at the very least consider full interest in your interest and direct experiences, on your terms)? There are very good reasons to seriously limit the overlap. Especially as I have been continuing to sort out my relationship with myself, my boundaries, etc. I find myself thinking about the people that I haven't met yet IRL, and might still. That is the end game, as much as possible.
  11. May I do this all in right spirit and in perfect action. And may I just not need to deal with anyone who is not relevant in this way. Let's just save everyone unnecessary time and energy wasted, and possibly emotional damage as well. I MUST go after what I value, whatever is left of it and whatever I can create. Otherwise what? Otherwise nothing. (No one's gonna save you from your own sense of aloneness as you've known it your whole life. and what has returned residually.)
  12. SHOUT REBOOT: The sorting through and adapting of aspects tends to come in cycles. (The remote use of responsibility Viking-Z style is reinstated, at least for a while. Originally I used this a lot when I was 17-19 and basically cut off direct psychic connection for the most part in the years before (while retaining a number of aspects...) It was called the leave me the fuck alone, I don't want to be bothered, feel watched, (and the sense of paranoia that inevitably seemed to come with it) etc. Not using it in the same way that I use it before, I intend and need to stay connected.) Calling to me people worth being connected to more directly, with all aspects of relationship/ connection in right order. With some people I would just not... there are degrees of removal, just like there are in IRL. There are terms and conditions of connection, present and future. It's how it tends to go, though it doesn't end here. At the end of it all, my greatest strength probably still remains cutting people off or staying connected (and the qualities of being connected). Like... maybe if I'm in a shitty mood and in a state of disarray, perhaps it's just better to be disconnected from me. Truly. I don't even know at this point. And maybe I don't care as much either. My direct connection is a manifestation of my consciousness, self image, inevitably. In all its irresolution and perfection. I knew that I would not have been able to really get what I wanted before, as in, 2+ years ago. Feasibly speaking, whatever I set up here is verging towards collapse, it's just a matter of when. We are one will. In holy communion. (The spirit of the old SHOUT gets phased out and we move towards something that is both ancient and futuristic in spirit, but it was always here. Just covered up a bit.) I always get what I want in the end. Remember that I think your thoughts and feel your impulses before you actually have them. ("Even though time doesn't exist.) Everything will catch up to this. It's just that you don't realize that I am and... but I see it everywhere. Again, it's not a synchronicity in the classical sense. Not everything makes it through; there is a reason for that. Remember that I have lived your life and known your history, quite directly in this case (explaining degrees of relative removal is a desperate issue for a separate time).
  13. OOPS: I definitely feel a tinge or two of embarrassment when I think of some of the stuff that I've told people in private mostly over the last year or so. Yea, that's paranoia. It might not have been the most extreme version of it as I've known it, but by any standard of "normal consciousness", it absolutely is. I wish I could have done without it, but, oh well. Remind of why I felt it was completely necessary to vomit my guts out to other people? Where was my pride? (Oh right, I believe it got destroyed entirely, for better and for worse. Half-true.) Couldn't I just have locked myself in a room without the internet and journalled it out or focused on creating highly questionable art? (Well, looking back, I was actually extremely productive all things considering. Useful skill.) How about screaming or talking to a wall? (I've heard that works for some people.) So to what degree was my perception me lying to myself then, and to what degree was it a radically different frame of measuring relative experience? With a sense of social normalcy tends to come a degree of social self consciousness and concerns about your self image, even if it's only for a moment or two or in passing before you find yourself doing the exact opposite. (And... everyone else tends to have impulse control issues.) I will never stop recycling the Picard facepalms. I just thought I'd like to announce that I had a pretty big crush on Jon Stewart when I was like 13-14, probably. Do you know what I used to do when I said really embarrassing, personal shit but I didn't want to deal with the consequences after? I would just leave people after. Even if I wasn't judged negatively for it. But to be able to wipe the slate and to start over. I've never liked the weight and baggage of history between myself and people. Entanglement. The seeming loss of mutual accountability as time progresses as well. ..... (Although now that I focus on it again, it kind of makes me laugh. Who cares about self-consciousness, even.)
  14. The more I get it all out of my system, the more I feel sort of neutral/ open/ blank slate about it all, which is where I want to be. Like my past here was just NBD. And then there is even less of the need to talk about it for its own sake. A sense of openness, the freedom to do what I want, a sense of emotional lightweightedness. Unselfconscious (but self aware) confidence. Optimism curiosity, flow, and all of those good things. The satisfaction of doing work and creating fully on my terms (which has almost entirely been restored at this point). It has almost nothing to do with comparing myself to other people at all. But to be as I was when I was very young, with all the experiences that I've processed and distilled into insight with none of the baggage I accumulated along the way.
  15. @LastThursday I think what you wrote about "journal etiquette" sums up this whole issue really well, and we've had some reoccurring issues here for a while when it comes to open communications and leaving comments on people's journals vs. boundaries. I've thought for a while that we should have a different set of etiquette for this part of the forum as well. Also, appreciate the appreciation.