Monday, January 01, 2007

Bounders and Luminauts

With dull eyes like fish they bump against the glass walls of their mental horizon.

Thump! Thump! Thump!

I was awakened by a thump-thump-thumping sound in the middle of the night, but had no idea what it was until I got up this morning and saw that it was an iamfibbingyous fish named Integralist bumping up against the walls of his mental horizon -- right up against the inside of my computer screen. As you know, this jnani one-gnote often comes here to remind me that I am not Ken Wilber -- as if I or even Ken Wilber could ever be Ken Wilber -- and to preach to us the absolute truth that no one can know absolute truth.

In his first of three composts, Integralist sets the tone by exclaiming "You gotta be frickin' kidding me!" and asks the question that has been on everyone's mind, "How arrogant is this Bob?"

I think I already addressed this question in yesterday's post about our absence of limits around here.

He then asks a trickier question, but it's actually not as difficult as it sounds: "Are you kidding or are you actually this self-deluded?"

I think it is fair to say that we are always kidding in the Cosmos, are we not? It even says so at the top of the blog, e.g., Stand-up Cosmology and Jehovial Witticisms in a Mirthful Atmansphere of Affable Transpersonal Gallantry. If we weren't joking, we wouldn't very well be bloody Raccoons, now would we?, as Colonel Beaglehole might say between puffs on his Victorian hookah.

Perhaps Integralist was asking a different question: "Are you frickin' serious?," which is an entirely different matter.

Yes, we are serious. We are seriously pulling your leg and goosing your egg, Mr. Integralist, for as the Master once upin a timeless put it, "my yokes are easy, my words enlight." I could be right, but you give me no reason to believe someone like you is timorously hardinough for the guffah-ha! experience of our inrisible mythsemantics. Or as a wise man or guy once remarked, "last rung in's a written gag, so your seenill grammar and gravidad may not be malapropriate for my laughty revelation."

In fact, I think it is unfair to avoid saying that this summarizes the essential deference with which you persistently remand us to your authority, thy wilber done. See if you can't clutch my daft: Don't worry, it's just aphasia go through before the noesis in your head becomes real. Ascent you a son, amen for a child's job! That's the New Man, we're just putting him on. When you reach a ribald age, you can grasp the wheel of this broken-down trancebardation. Wilber's theosaurus might help you circumnavigate, but you'll need a plastic exejesus for the darshan your vehicle, that's the crux of the master.

Salvarel pounds of no penurious interest annunciate themselves to hear. First, you seem rather jung and therefore easily freudened. This much is bobvious to the finnagling professional pslackologist. And as my fitfully growning minister of doctrinal enforcement put it to you in my sleep, "You've probably read enough Wilber and the like to intellectually grasp, at least on some level, what Bob is talking about. However, you are utterly without genuine gnosis. You aren't aware of this, of course; how could you be?"

If my Minister is wrong, kill him now, crasstalker! Show me the sword of your true gnosis! Prove where there is Will there is no wu-wei! Show me the phase before you were bearthed and begaialed! Show me Raccoon nature!

Mach Schau, little Beatle!

Ah ha! My marysophial raccoon nous could sniff you a smile away! Silent but deadly, like wind of ex-wife of Bob Dylan! You know something is happening, don't you, Mr. Drones on and on, and besides, we got your point already? But what is it?

Now you say: "Don't get me wrong -- I agree that your blog serves a purpose and one that may be, overall, 'upward serving' (in terms of what you call verticality). But this post, again, reveals the GLARING BLINDSPOT of this blog. Take that for whatever its worth."

We say this. All to gather now: what is upword serving verticalisthenics worth? It all deepens. For you? Nothing. For noble Raccoon? Deity bread before bleakfest, fertile ovasations sonny side up. A luxury corp at pentecost. Eloha, that's a good bye for the Love that removes the sin and other scars (speaking allegheirically). But nobody crosses the phoenix line 'til he be repossessed and amortized, so you go back and do more omwork, or you're not grounded. For life!

You say: "Don't kid yourself that you are a club of folks that are completely free and without pre-existing frameworks (and biases) by which you (mis)understand others. Otherwise you're putting yourself on a self-declared pedestal, above pretty much everyone else, and thus apart from everyone else. You will only ever preach to the choir unless you 'see and 'rectify' this blindspot."

Umm, get off pedestrial and remove preachy spleen blandspot from own I! No spiral, just circle drain. Beholied! I preach what I practice only to high flier choir on fire in aspiraling gyre! Practice make perfect, and vice versa!

*****

To summarize our differences: you conflate boundaries and limits. We adhere to God-given boundaries that may be used as springboards to the limitless, while you reject these absolute boundaries and replace them with your kenmade limits. Good luck in your quixotic endeavor to write without the eternal laws of grammar or to compose music without the scales and chords given to us by our Composer.

116 Comments:

Anonymous hoarhey said...

Nah nah na nah nah!

1/01/2007 08:26:00 AM  
Anonymous Integralist said...

You effectively said nothing, Bob. There is no substantive response to my "composts," just word games and more projections. Who is sounding rather "jung"? Young of soul, if not years.

My point is this: You are not capable of discerning if I have "genuine gnosis" because of your own rather limited mental framework which you refuse to--or are unable to--recognize as existing at all. You continue to equate "genuine gnosis" (wisdom) with compatibility to your own world-view, which is why you can only preach to the choir.

If one thinks they are without limit, Bob, they will continue to bump up against their own limitations by the reaction/disagreement of others; many, such as seemingly yourself, will choose to cloister themselves in an environment of like-minded individuals--which is fine, but precludes real growth, especially when any such opposition is automatically translated as "wrong." This is simply and clearly and ego defense. The first step in transcending these limitations is "copping to" the fact that we always have blindspots. If you cannot even recognize this--and thus if you continue to believe--arrogantly and erroneously--that you (at least your body-mind) is totally free and without limitations, you are in self-delusion.

I am only here to help ;)

1/01/2007 08:37:00 AM  
Anonymous Another Bob said...

Bob,
I think it was Raymond Moody that devoted
a book to the thesis that too much seriousness
effectively chased the spirit away (or
walled us off from it, which from one
point of view is the same thing).
It's called _The Last Laugh_

So, you agree that the Spirit should be
pursued with a spirit of mirth?

Another thing -- it seems to me that
Integralist wants to hang on to some
of his pet illusions in the face of
Truth. But Truth disolves illusions,
not vice-versa. As long as one hangs
on to illusions, he/she cannot see
the Truth. What was your analogy?
Something about blind men in tuxedos
with brown shoes?


-Another Bob

1/01/2007 08:38:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Now that's the way to start off the New Year!

I too had a thumpin of a time last night with a man-child who also didn't realize that there are rules of grammar, of music and rules that if broken will bring down the wrath of Dad. The annoivaying part, is that he too doesn't realize that the penalties are of his own creation - though he at least, will be grounded.

Very.

1/01/2007 08:43:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Integralist--

Thank you. I do not pretend to be Meister Eckhart, but if I have effectively spoken of Nothing, you flatter me with the highest encomium.

1/01/2007 08:45:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Integralist said "You effectively said nothing, Bob."

Funny, I saw quite a lot in what he said. Could it be you just don't hear?

1/01/2007 08:45:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Integralist said... "You are not capable of discerning if I have "genuine gnosis" because of your own rather limited mental framework"

You are the one who thinks "You effectively said nothing, Bob", perhaps your own skewed framework puts you in a position of not knowing what you don't gno?

1/01/2007 08:48:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

"I am only here to help ;)"
Says the blind seeing-I dog.
;-)

1/01/2007 08:50:00 AM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Get over yourself integralist.

1/01/2007 08:56:00 AM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

(Lisa -- I deleted that because you mistakenly attributed the MInister's quote to the Integralist)

1/01/2007 09:08:00 AM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Why, Inty, I dare not presume to speak for other Racoons amongst us, but I think we would not find ourselves so drawn to one another if it were not for the very challenges, questions and blindspots we attempt to overcome.

I'm here because I've found worthy warriors with whom to sharpen my mind and spirit, "...as iron sharpens iron." so to speak. Nobody here is crushing dissent or quashing questions, but they will always impose absolute Truth on the questioner. I want nothing less in fellow Racoons. If I talk nonsense, they're gonna call me on it. (If I post under my real name...)

But, the attraction is the strength of the iron, not the soft-soap stone that pretenders put forth.

Look around: If the foundation goes deep, then the building can be taller; in fact, limitless. Kites need string to go higher. If they try to integrate their flight with the wind, they'd better be tied to the absolute gravity of Truth, else they merely float away. (I highly recommend it for you.)

Even those amazing astronauts that escape gravity and fly to the moon (to the moon, Alice!) are bound by physical absolutes. Their ability to transcend all obstacles using only the Truth at hand made their dreams that much bigger, and limitless even today. In fact, they discover even more Truth, more absolutes when they trust the little truth they own.

Ideas soar over, the drag restrains, and whaddaya know? You're flying with something that actually works. Anything's possible with Truth. One Cosmosnauts are unrestrained and limitless because they are always seeking True Absolutes.

But, you do look mighty cute in your Superman Cape, standing there on the roof!

1/01/2007 09:09:00 AM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

Oops. My bad. I see that he did utter that blasphemy in his comment above.

1/01/2007 09:10:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Well, my bad, cuz but he didn't say it on the 2nd comment in this thread at 8:37? I have been known to be wrong once or twice! ;0)

1/01/2007 09:13:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

seroiusly, you scare me cuz! synchronicity!!! Joan got to my point anyhow...

1/01/2007 09:14:00 AM  
Blogger Smoov said...

I come for the Beaglefowl, but I stay for the O-->k.

1/01/2007 09:21:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

Can't help it, must re-post my early-this-morning, hung-over post that appeared on yesterday's Bob post, with fresh, new update! It's for YOU, Inty:

Nice try, Inty, but no enchilada.

By the way, for your reference so you don't appear too much of the intellectual stumblebum in your future debates - one doesn't "acquiesce of evil" or "acquiesce evil". There is only "acquiesce TO or IN evil" - a notion which your previous statement does suggest.

And yes, of course, the world allows for evil, that's the whole point. This world is the arena wherein the poles of good and evil are delineated and where we must eventually make a clear choice between one or the other.

Among your vast expressions of diversity in the world there clearly exists expressions of evil, to varying degrees. Such expressions are not sanctified by the mere fact of their existence, and if you really believe they are, good luck, you will need it.

To "accommodate" such expressions is to - note phrase usage, please - acquiesce to (or in) evil. One must attempt to transform, sublimate, convert the lower passions into the energies of love, but this is not an accommodation, rather it is a recognition of what is base and needs be transformed. Thus there are times when evil must be forcibly confronted, both in the interior and exterior worlds.

Do you "accommodate" your lower instincts, Inty? Compassion and hatred have equal billing in your soul? Both are "natural", after all. By the way, let's say I had an "emotional" reaction to the dangerous nonsense that you spew. Totally cool, by your lights, that I should "accommodate" my emotions in my response.

Again, your "accommodation" is tantamount to acquiescence.

Do you have a point in being here? You're not going to turn us, we're not going to turn you. We've all gotten your point by now -- your continued presence is annoyingly redundant. We're NOT going to accommodate you. Take the suggestion and leave, don't come back -- we'll be better off , you'll be better off.

1/01/2007 09:22:00 AM  
Anonymous interlocutor said...

Servants of God, Raccoons, Spirit People, carriers of Gnosis, Light-bearers--

Happy New Year

My Message:

I would like to stress to writers on this blog that every person is unique.

Now, Bob serves the Lord by drawing up searing acid-baths of denunciation, and that is his special domain; the Lord sanctions this, and Bob is doing His work.

But we don't all have to follow suit. We can choose to be compassionate and friendly without fear that we will alienate Bob. He doesn't expect everyone to come from the same place that he does, and serve in the same ways.

For that reason, I will break ranks and say to Integralist--welcome, friend. You are loved and respected by a God-lover who has witnessed your jousting with Bob.

How do you, Integralist, best serve the Lord? What is your special domain of service? That is the question you have come here to answer,isn't it?

The answer is already within your grasp. Tell me, what do you think it may be?

P.S.
This year, may every word you Bob(bleheades)speak or write be worthy of your station, be sincere and unique to yourselves, and may your intention be the same as our Lord's.

1/01/2007 09:23:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Heh, I love how Will always gets to pour the salt!!!

1/01/2007 09:24:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

Lisa, Dupree - now even I don't know what I said.

What did I say?

1/01/2007 09:25:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Cuz doubted my reading comprehension which I can understand or can I? You didn't say anything but you have said it before to peeps-probably why Cuz got cuzfused. ;0)

1/01/2007 09:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Well, Lisa, I tried to use simple concepts for the poor fish. However, the eggnog could be doing the talking, too.

Bob, the minute we're bored with your energizing slack, we're outta here. Gonna look for the next Big Kahuna (oh! Sorry Beaglehole!) and pester him with questions.

1/01/2007 09:29:00 AM  
Anonymous bubba said...

Bob, you got on your heigh hoarse trying to explane which infinity has aussiefied integralist’s gaping blandspot. SUBMIT before you lose your vice. Hop aboard the troll-e car and learn your plicae. M’kay? Chortle.

1/01/2007 09:30:00 AM  
Anonymous dame edith waterfowl said...

If anyone of your dears has knowledge of Beaglehole falling into his customary New Year's coma-approximating morning-after state, please do inform me as rapidly as possible.

I have Beaglehole-specific reviving instructions.

1/01/2007 09:33:00 AM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Which Arvo Pärt should I order first? Amazon has what seems like dozens to choose from...

1/01/2007 09:35:00 AM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Interlocutor, I'm cool with your suggestion, but I'm afraid Racoons, by their very physical appearance, are fairly comical creatures. That means that they simply cannot suffer real fools gladly.

Many of the friendly brotherhood here can spot insincerity a mile away, and by virtue of their allegiance to Truth simply can't resist poking at the insincere with an iron-y stick.

As for me, my purpose here is "Sophialogo à Go-Go Mysteress of Vertical Animatraction."

I'm thinking the sky's not even the limit.

1/01/2007 09:40:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

This is a very nice career-spanning introduction to Part.

1/01/2007 09:41:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Dame, Is that why he keeps mumbling something about the other hose? Don't ask how I stumbled upon him...seriously.

1/01/2007 09:43:00 AM  
Blogger Smoov said...

I ordered Miserere, Sanctuary and Da Pacem to get started.

I've been looking for a composer like this for some time. Now I'm off to read your link. Thanks Bob.

1/01/2007 09:44:00 AM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Just added Arvo Pärt - A Tribute to my order.

Now, if One Cosmos could have theme music...

1/01/2007 09:47:00 AM  
Anonymous cousin dupree said...

What do you mean? Of course we have theme music:

The One Cosmos Theme Song

So all you cosmic castaways,
we're here such a short, short time.
We have to make the best of things,
thanks to Adam's crime.
But Petey and old Gagdad Bob
will do their very best,
to make your journey vertical,
in this horizontal mess.
No angry trolls, no leftist loons,
no infantile moonbats,
like Dailykos and Huffington,
or other victocrats.
So join us here each day my friends,
we'll sail right through the fog.
Obnoxious Bobservations,
here on Gag-a-dad's blog!

1/01/2007 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous dame edith waterfowl said...

I shan't ask, Lisa dear, but someday you will tell me of your own accord.

To matters at hand: First, ask one of your servants to draw one-third a glass of orange juice. Then have the glass filled with one-third Polish-produced Kubanskaya Vodka, which I'm sure you have in your cabinet. Fill the rest of the glass with water. Now, drink it yourself because the actual reviving process will prove to be quite harrowing.

Tee-hee, I do love that joke. It is one of my New Year's Day "favorites."

But to the reviving process: Don kitchen gloves, better yet, oven mitts. Roll the old goat over so that he is face down. Pour no less that four kitchen buckets of water on him, taking care to favor the head and shoulder areas, while shouting as loudly as your young lungs can manage, "WAKE UP, YOU WORTHLESS DUNDERHEAD!"

Repeat at fifteen minute intervals.

1/01/2007 10:13:00 AM  
Anonymous walt said...

Will said,
"Do you have a point in being here? You're not going to turn us, we're not going to turn you. We've all gotten your point by now -- your continued presence is annoyingly redundant. We're NOT going to accommodate you. Take the suggestion and leave, don't come back -- we'll be better off , you'll be better off."
Uh, couldn't you just say what you mean?

1/01/2007 10:14:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Will Patron work? I'm fresh out of vodka. I do have a tree full of the sweetest oranges around at this moment. The servants have all left me. The last one only lasted 2 weeks! I can't understand why? Good help is hard to find! I'm sure you know what I mean, Dame...

1/01/2007 10:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Duchess Beaglehole said...

Ah, Edith! Whatever else you may be, you seem to be practical.

But sometimes, my dear, it's best to deploy a bucket of cold water on a man before he has to suffer the consequences of his own foolishness. Oh, that I done so more often with the Duke. But I see that John is his father's boy, alas.

Well, good luck, Lisa. Lord knows how and when he arrived at your location, but do send him back to Dame Edith, as I do not wish to see him in his present state, nor do I need to begin the New Year in disappointment. (Oh, and don't give him any money.)

1/01/2007 10:25:00 AM  
Anonymous Col. J. C. Beaglehole said...

Wha! Oh! Mffplllgglrggggg..... Whbbbrle....... Wroppl.... Rrrr....

Aye Captain! Damn Hawaiians! Let go of his leg! Bloody cannibals! Hoy hoy! I say! You can't..... Nooooo!

Ogggggghhhh...

Oh God, the pilates tart... Go away!

1/01/2007 10:27:00 AM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Bob,

Great post. I love wordplay. I used to work with a lady who was queen of malapropisms, without knowing so!

Integralist,

Next time, drink Stolichnaya, it does not give you such a large hangover including subsequent angry dillusions of Cosmic understandings.

Two basic kinds of people, the Cosmonauts and the CosmoNOTs.

"He or she who writes on blogspot walls, using Anonymous, simply, has no balls"

Happy New year,

-Luke

1/01/2007 10:29:00 AM  
Anonymous oh no, you di'int said...

"pilates tart" !!!!

LOLOL!!!

1/01/2007 10:31:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, dearest Lisa, I was making a bit of a jape, so you may drink whatever you have at hand. I must say, I am rather shocked that your cabinet is absent the recommended vodka.

As to the question of good help: Yes, this is often a problem. However, there are those on the Manor staff who I have employed for decades, due to their reliability and serviceability. For example, Mr. Diaz, my pool attendant, has been with me for many a year.

1/01/2007 10:34:00 AM  
Anonymous dame edith waterfowl said...

Excuse me, dear Lisa, anonymous was nothing other than moi, Dame Edith

1/01/2007 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Don't worry, Duchess, I'm afraid, yet relieved, the Dame is stuck with him. Have you seen the tattoo? He passed out on the reformer but not before crying like a baby when he saw the springs. I left a bucket near by. What on earth happened when he was a lad?

1/01/2007 10:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Col. J. C. Beaglehole said...

My apologies. She caught me but surprise. The yogini. Yes, the lovely bit of crumpet in leotards over there with the blasted GARDEN HOSE who rudely terminated my night sea journey, my restorative frolic with hypnos!

My eye! Where is my left eye! It was in this shot glass when I lay down to sleep on this magnetic contraption!

1/01/2007 10:42:00 AM  
Anonymous will said...

Hmm, who really are Beaglehole/Waterfowl? One person? Two?

I'm sure Lisa suspects me - Lisa suspects me of involvement in the Lindbergh kidnapping.

1/01/2007 10:43:00 AM  
Blogger Lisa said...

Call me names of endearment all you want, Col. but don't insinuate that you made it to my mattress!

1/01/2007 10:47:00 AM  
Blogger GeorgeD said...

Arvo Part is spiritual cotton candy. If you want real transcendence you need Bach. Try "Es ist vollbracht" from St. John's Passion. Be sure that you have no distractions and read the text before you listen.

1/01/2007 10:50:00 AM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Whilst drinking my morning coffee, and watching Twilight Zone re-runs on the Sci-Fi channel, this notion popped into my head.

Integralist,

Good God man!

Methinks you doth protest too much.

Either fish, or cut bait.
Sh*t, or get of the pot.

Grab the doorknob, turn it, and walk through the doorway.

Come outside into the light.

Standing on the porch, stamping your feet and throwing a tantrum will get you nowhere with most people.

You seem obcessively stuck on your own points, and unwilling to examine other issues. The universe will not bend to your ideas of Integralism or world view just because you want them to.

All of your obcessions seem to be a wrapping in other people's work and research, as a cloak to cover your ego, which apparently is rather wouded about something.

You seem to have little ability to move on your own into the deep waters.

The time is (always) now.

Quit flapping your arms and stamping your feet, and walk forward. Its not so hard to do.

Many, better than I, have studied the Bible in excessive detail and not found God wanting.

Many have come to disprove the words therein, only to be captivated for a lifetime relationship with God.

Why do you insist upon cry baby, betwetter tantrums, when you can come play with the big boys and girls?

The only answer I see, is that your wounding and what some abstract target(s) "owe" you, is more important to you than actually getting over it and growth in truth, light, and the related things.

Freedom can be scary. Stop letting the meme virus of uniform integration slow you down. Its not the real you, anyway. You've used this to insulate yourself from pain.

This you know, or you would not be fighting so hard, in fear of moving.

I am sorry to be so direct, as a new years discussion, but frankly, I think you are being cornered by an opprotunity to break free.

I hope a little clarity dawns.

-Luke

1/01/2007 10:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Col. J. C. Beaglehole said...

My apologies, my dear and very pure yogini girl, if I am responsible for any suggestive misapprehension in the presumptuous minds of Dr. Godwin's readers. Alas, as my friend Edith knows, "if you have to ask, you can't afford me" anyway.

1/01/2007 10:57:00 AM  
Anonymous dame edith waterfowl said...

Lisa, dear, allow the Colonel to "wear" the mattress on his head for a time. You'd need not have your gardeners pry it off immediately. It will good, I suspect, for his sense of balance.

Now, I really must finish writing my column "Love Advice From Historically Famous Spirits", which, I fear, will consume most of my day and evening.

Also, if any of you dears has a question concerning your love life, and you would like a famous spirit's advice on the matter, oh, say, Napoleon, Plato, or William of Orange, do feel free to ask. This service will be available on Sundays and holidays.

Oh, don't be shocked at my generosity. A lady of the manor is expected to offer gratuities now and then.

1/01/2007 11:00:00 AM  
Blogger Smoov said...

GeorgeD:

"Arvo Part is spiritual cotton candy"

I LIKE cotton candy (though I don't think that describes Part very well, from what I've read so far).

As for Bach, I have somewhere in the vicinity of 300 records, CDs and DVDs of his works, including St. John's Passion (your recommendation is an excellent one in any case).

I love Bach (along with Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Handel, Chopin and many others). I also love to experience new things, and Bob's reference to Part piqued my curiosity (and perhaps my sweet tooth, as time will tell).

1/01/2007 11:22:00 AM  
Blogger robinstarfish said...

what makes bad haiku
fourth and a long twenty-nine
five sev'n five hut hut!


...robin recommends taking the rest of the day off for football; cheetos and teton ale in hand...happy day one in the cosmos.

1/01/2007 11:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Intergralist,

I suggest you change your name to, "Projector" -since you seem to me to be guilty of all you accuse Bob of being.

Which he is not, beyond that which is normally human to confront.

1/01/2007 11:32:00 AM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Integralist may get worked up, but at least he seems sincere.

My beef is with those indecent leftists who mock everything One Cosmos stands for, as though their ironic and jaded sophisitcation is "reality-based" whereas to seek spiritual enlightenment through God can only be the silly and obsolete pastime of the NASCAR set. A wide assortment of such depraved-yet-ordinary folk can be seen attached to the likes of Boing Boing, Digg, Daily Kos, and other clearninghouses of the damned.

1/01/2007 11:44:00 AM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Sincereity without action, is troublesome.

This reminds me of the words of Jesus. That we have "hearers" and "hearers and doers".

Sometimes, the only difference, is in the actions the "doers" are willing to commit.

The Cosmic revealations which come from the addition of "doing", to the "hearing" are manifold.

-Luke

1/01/2007 11:58:00 AM  
Anonymous Col. J. C. Beaglehole said...

Ho! Reminds me of an off-the-cuff remark my friend Wilde once said, "All bad poetry is sincere."

1/01/2007 12:05:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

As my father, the philosophy instructor and known fiction author says..

There is nothing so easy to write, as bad poetry.

-Luke

1/01/2007 12:23:00 PM  
Anonymous ken wilber said...

It seems integralists mission is to come here and make me look bad.

1/01/2007 12:31:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Not so well Jung of you eh?

Wasn't Wilbur the name of the pig in Charlotte's Web?

That'll do, pig.

-Luke

1/01/2007 12:35:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

I dunno, blog comments are pretty easy to write too :-)

Writing a Bayesian algorithm which can cause a web of robotic cameras to reliably detect the difference between a refuleing vehicle heading toward an aircraft normally, and the same vehicle behaving "out of character"--how THAT's hard. Believe me.

1/01/2007 12:35:00 PM  
Anonymous debass said...

Bob,

Love the word play. I could smell the smoke coming from your spell checker and I can't see where I could fail to disagree with you less.

1/01/2007 01:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Integralist said...

Van, I would've thought you beyond such reactive regurgitations. You, like Bob, are merely saying "I'm rubber and you're glue..."

Bob, as I said...nothing substantive, just more word-games and evasions. Do you ever respond to critiques or dialogue with opposing views? Or do you only preach to the choir and rant about the Evil Left?

Joan of Arghh, I like your post. But what, pray tell, are some of these absolute truths you speak of? What does "imposing Absolute Truth on the questioner" mean? And who can possible claim to be able to "impose" Absolute Truth?

See, there is an assumption 'round these parts that Absolute Truth is known and knowable without a individual, interpretive, framework. I am questioning that assumption. What I see happening is people conflating their own framework (or "small t" truth) with Truth. A common mistake that we all do, to some extent at least. My own search for Truth involves differentiating truth and Truth, not finding rock-solid Absolute Truth, because that is Unfindable. It is like searching for that which is seeking, naming the Unnameable (read the first part of the Tao te Ching). One can only rest in/as it (the Mystery).

Will, you are (anal retentively) nit-picking a technicality, as if my slight phrase mis-usage invalidates anything else I have to say.

As for "lower passions," I imagine we see things rather differently. Of course the "higher" is more evolved--and compassion is greater than hatred; but the "lower" has a place too--at least in its healthy manifestations. Anger, for example, is appropriate in certain contexts. Lust? Definitely. Hatred? Perhaps not. Hatred could be seen as a pathological version of anger (like Bob's hatred of the Left). But what of hatred of evil? It seems you would advocate that, yes?

As for good and evil, you still leave out one of the most crucial points: ascertaining what is good and what is evil. For you they seem clear-cut, set-in-stone, static. But are they really? Can we scientifically measure evil in a fail-proof way?

As for me leaving, don't worry--at some point I will drift away. But your desire and request for me to leave is rather telling. Think about it: "only members allowed, only those that think as I think." Where will that inevitably leave you? But sure, we are of different "tribes"--but can we not meet somewhere?

Interlocutor, nice post--and good question. It is difficult to answer succinctly, largely because it is an ever-unfolding "answer" with many parts. One answer is that I "best serve the Lord" by evolving myself and embodying my highest vision of Truth, which is what I intuit of "God's Truth"--and forever deepening (hopefully!). The specifics depend upon the context.

Luke, I don't get your point. How am I posting more anonymously than anyone else here? Or are you holding a double standard?

1/01/2007 01:41:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

It was my impression that Bayesian calculations are somewhat in error compared to other methods.

I don't recall what I was doing in the last year that had me reading on these things, but I was reading up on various methods of prediction.

Unfortunately, my library is mostly in storage, so I'm going to have to do this off the top of my head.

See:

http://www2.informs.org/Pubs/Topics/tos.htm

et. al.

Since the target is non-moving, and the vehicle is moving, I suppose you can reverse the calculations somewhat to determine normal routes of the vehicle.

The vehicle also is not involved in not being found, that is, taking evasive actions in an effort to avoid you.

Now, taking what we know from cryptography, that people do repetitious things even when told not to, the drivers and such are going to be human in this. They will most likely take similar routes, with similar velocities.

Perhaps measuring a change in velocity and not route would be usseful, along with the tracking of the mean times of departure, and arrival.

At least the date time group on the departures and arrivals -and the entire trip could be statistically analyzed in order to determine the mean times of the process and the end points.

This would enable you to examine predictable and out of scope behaviors in a simple way.

Within a standard deviation, you should be able to say when the vehicle will do the business at hand for much of the time, or if the process has altered, even though it has taken a trip at an unsuspected time.

You can also toss in other intelligence factors if they are available. The heat signature from the engine of the vehicle may be different on a sudden trip (along any similar given track) than it would be from a routine visit. (But I have no idea of your camera types).

Any SIGINT and ELINT data from the location may also change. But you probably knew that.

The real problem, is a mathematical indicator for a human behavior change.

Perhaps if you put yourself into the headspace of reading their minds a bit, you can anticipate what you can then measure, or other factors to measure.

-Luke

1/01/2007 01:47:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Jane, you ignorant slut,

"I don't get your point. How am I posting more anonymously than anyone else here? Or are you holding a double standard?"

I was referring to people who use "Anonymous" and not some readily identifiable moniker.

I think people post bitterness as Anonymous in lieu of taking the heat themselves.

Just remember, its not all about you. The things which are, are yours to change. I can't give you the light, you have to see it where it is.

It is all around you.

And I'm not trying to be oblique.

-Luke

1/01/2007 01:50:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

"Bob, do you only preach to the choir and rant about the Evil Left?"

Yeah, pretty much. I leave the heavy lifting to Dupree and Hoarhey.

1/01/2007 01:54:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Integralist:

You appear to think that "getting it" is akin to a ball that is held by certain team members who are bent on keeping it away from you. If they would just pass it to you & stop hogging it for themselves, you would "get it."

Not how the thing works.

Everyone must fight their own specific internal battles, come to terms with what is going on within themselves. OWN SPECIFIC.

Bob & the Raccoons CANNOT do this work for you. It's not an unwillingness to share with you, to pass that ball over as some kind of complete object.

Only YOU know what your real questions are, what deep fears you have, what you're willing to let go of & what will have to be beaten out of you.

You keep slamming your head against this wall, apparently very angry with Bob & Co for having already done their own work & coming to their own conclusions. You call them arrogant and too sure about what they've figured out, by going thru the process themselves.

It's up to you, my friend, to do the work for yourself. Others can tell you what worked for them, to try to steer you in your effort, to warn you about pitfalls they have experienced for themselves. But that is ALL they can do for you.

Not everything has an immediate explanation. Sometimes it's just better to give it a rest, chalk it up to a "mystery" for now & plan to revisit later.

Often, All Will Be
Made Clear in time, by not forcing. The fun thing about this is: It Won't Matter Anymore.

1/01/2007 02:00:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

You might also want to poke around here:

http://scholar.google.com

It is a beta site, but it still works well. It tends towards showing real research, rather than Jo-Bob's homepage.

At least it can give you some good papers and leads to solve your problem.

-Luke

1/01/2007 02:00:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Integralist--

Seriously, there is nothing in your words that intrigues me sufficiently to provoke a response other than what I have said. To you, you undoubtedly feel "deep," but I cannot say that I share that sentiment. As always, my blog is for no one but those who derive some sort of benefit from it. I'm not here to argue but simply to pass along what has been passed to me, as faithfully as I can, and in a form appropriate to the subject. Is it also your habit to argue with melodies, poems and paintings, or do you simply enjoy them for what they're worth? And if they're worthless, no one is compelling you to look and listen, least of all me. The fewer the better, as far as I'm concerned. I mean, feel free to keep posting, but as Jim Rome says, have a take and do not suck. Or accept the consequences of your folly.

1/01/2007 02:09:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

Not to beat a dead horse here, but you *did* cross map your common physical points in your cameras, in order to establish a base coordinate system for 3 dimensions, yes?

-Luke

1/01/2007 02:20:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Integralist,

The following is a response I wrote the other day in response to your respose which was:

integralist said...
"Hoarhey, come on. RE-READ WHAT I WROTE TO BOB AND TELL ME HOW THAT BROUGHT DISCORD.

Is it not a gift to say "Even though we agree on a lot, I think this post was beautifully said."

Or are you so partisan that you can only agree with your friends?"

It's called context Grasshoppah.
I decided to be Mr. nice guy and not post it.
Today is your lucky day Mr. Clueless.
My answer was:

Can you not see the difference between selflessly offering up gifts to the people reading and offering your opinion (blessing) of how you agree or disagree with what someone wrote? The first being done for others, the second being about bestowing some sort of egotistical absolution? Earth to integralist; no one gives a rats ass what you think about what Bob wrote, least of all Bob.
Would you say that you have a hard time admitting when YOU’RE wrong ?
Until you are able to see yourself as others do you'll continue to be perplexed as to why others treat you as they do (like a troll).
Bob has nothing to gain by doing this blog which is done from a spirit of charity. I mean, who needs to get up a 5 in the morning and cast pearls to swine day after day? If you find nothing of value here, you currently have the freedom to choose differently. If you're looking to have others integrate your worldview, why not go where it might have some effect? There are plenty of other websites out there where you might actually have a chance of convincing someone differently. Most people here have been down your cul de sac and see right through you. And if they haven't yet, they will. I know you don't believe this but it's true.
Since your first post you've had an adversarial relationship with the people here yet you refuse to admit it.
You can hide behind sham reasonability and the title of integralist but you are more judgmental and dogmatic than anyone posting. In your world there is no one so elevated as an integralist, this enables you to look down your nose at others, even others who show ten times the brilliance that you do. Since no one besides you lives in your world, they don’t have the same hierarchies, this is the reason why you are mocked. You elevate never staking out a position as the ultimate goal. A position which in this cause and effect world has real consequences. Since no position is still a position, eventually it causes your lack of a position to be overrun by the hordes. We’ve actually done the integration and ultimately, for most here, believing as you do would be a step backward in consciousness, that is why you are so transparent. Do you find similar scenarios cropping up in your personal life? People who fell for the mask initially, but eventually found out what was behind it and want to get away from you as quickly as possible? Women (or men) who initially saw you as sensitive and were attracted to you yet find you to be a little less of a man than they actually wanted?
There, does that spell it out any clearer?
As to being in lockstep with my friends, I make up my own mind, as evidenced by the fact that I was one of the first to jump on your dumb ass when you first came here. I felt the negative "vibes" which you are apparently oblivious to.
But, like the hundred other posts written by others with you in mind, this one will go in one ear and out the other, after all, though true, it doesn't fit the "integralist" image. Since the truth doesn’t fit the image you’ve honed for yourself lo these many years, it gets thrown out the window. Bob wrote a post on just this phenomenon called Attacks on Truth. The sad fact is that you are going to have to back up and take a hard look at your TRUE motivations before you have any chance of proceeding in any meaningful direction. Believe it or not, people here are trying to help you.

P.S. Your animus towards Bob (or Bobby as you’ve called him) and the people here actually contains the seeds for the possibility of turning you into the sycophant, the very image that you project onto others. It may sound counterintuitive but your guilt over condemning someone who is undeserving of it raises that possibility. Especially with someone so out of touch with themselves as you are.
Now, if you want go ahead and say that I am the “projectionist” and the one who has condemned you, you’d be incorrect. (see reference to ‘Attacks on Truth’ above) Though it seems I’ve been harsh, looking through the lens of this P C society where the spoken truth is almost non existent, these words were offered in the spirit of trying to help, and with no animus OR emotion whatsoever. If I didn’t care, I wouldn’t have taken the time.
Living life as an out of body experience is a waste of opportunity and ultimately unfulfilling. You’re actually too smart for your own good but you’ve met your match and then some here at O. C.. You can continue to B S your way through life but your attempts to elevate yourself beyond your true stature will ultimately and continuously end in failure.
You have no interest in integrating anything besides your EGO.

There, I’m done, almost

P.P.S.
I don’t need an answer or your “insights” to any of the above questions, they were asked for you to ponder and possibly gain some insight, or not.

Clue to integralist: We're all watching our own clueless, egotistical past selves everytime you click the Login and Publish tab.

1/01/2007 02:55:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Luke -

Want a job?

I'm semi-serious...

Detecting anamolous behavior in an environment as complex as a busy tarmac is, as you clearly understand, a non-trvial problem.

Some of the original research in this area was done at MIT a while back. The system simply monitored the daily activities captured by a single cam pointed out an office window. The neural net had to be manually trained extensively, but gradiually it got to the point where it could point out the fact that the white delivery van which normally showed up on Thursday mornings had not in fact shown up this week, but that a similar blue van had instead.

"The real problem, is a mathematical indicator for a human behavior change."

There is no way to dervive such a thing. The SOTA involves various flavors of neural nets and Bayesian-style filters which are layered in a finely-tuned manner, not unlike the layer upon organic layer which makes human perception itself possible.

This technology is in its infancy, but will become pervasive within 20 years.

What we are working on--detecting someone attempting to epoxy a package to the outside of an aircraft, for example, versus normal maintenance--is actually relatively simple compared with trying to detect malefactors at the check-in counter, security checkpoints, or other nodes in the boarding process. That stuff is REALLY hard.

1/01/2007 03:06:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

To clarify further, the reason autonomous anomaly detection works in certain situations such as an airport is that the behvaior of planes, support vehicles and personnel is quite predictable, unlike, say, a shopping mall where something as simple as unruly teenagers or a children's clown will uttlerly confuse the system.

It is also possible to use the tens of thousands of hours of airport suveillance videotape to train nets.

The Orwellian profliferation of cameras in the UK will provide a similar database of effectively millions of hours of recorded "normal" behavior, however I have no idea what they are plannign to do with this, if anything.

1/01/2007 03:19:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

>> . . . as if my slight phrase mis-usage invalidates anything else I have to say <<

I wss just so shocked that someone so very *nuanced* as you could make such a mistake.

>>But what of hatred of evil? It seems you would advocate that, yes?<<

Actually, I'd recommend transcending evil, but to do so, evil must be clearly identified and understood for what it is. Bob doesn't have a "pathological hatred" for the Left, and from whence comes your psychological diagnostic powers? Bob impersonally and clearly identifies evil for what it is. Of course, you are unable to comprehend impersonal transcendence and so label it "pathological hatred."

>>Can we scientifically measure evil in a fail-proof way<<

Yes, by the new, improved E-meter by Ronco. Is that a serious question? Evil won't really be genuine for you until it can be "scientifically" measured? Of course evil can't be scientifically measured, it never will be. One can come measure evil in a generally fail-proof method through the organs of higher perception, through intuition and gnosis. But of course, if one is lacking in such development, one would view evil as an undefined abstraction because it can't be scientifically measured. One then becomes very "nuanced".

>>As for me leaving, don't worry--at some point I will drift away<<

Could we get that in writing?

1/01/2007 03:23:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Luke:

"Not to beat a dead horse here, but you *did* cross map your common physical points in your cameras"

We don't actually do the cameras at this point. Just the software. We will likely acquire the hardware side within the next two years.

It isn't all about the "usual suspects" either. A strong need among police forces globally is the need to identify vehicles which are about to be dumped at an airport as someone is fleeing the country. This is not easy for numerous reasons.

1/01/2007 03:23:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

Sure, I'd love a job hacking my way through that stuff. Its what I do -figure stuff out.

Deviousness is a good thing, when used properly. ;)

As my friend, Ed, used to say, "I'm glad you're on our side."

I remember seeing a CCD in an IEEE publication back in collge. It fasccinated me -it did not detect the usual visual spectrum, but was sensitive to acoustic waves.

This permitted imaging through buildings with the use of sound.

Very cool. Never saw that again!

-Luke

PS -willing to relocate based on coolness factor.

1/01/2007 03:34:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

"I got my job on OneCosmos!"

heh heh

-Luke

(Finders fee to Bob, and beer to Dupree)

1/01/2007 03:36:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

LukeBlogWalker:

Relocation might involve Plattsburgh, NY. Or Montreal, Canada. That usually throws some people. We're planning a location in Melbourne, FL next year (2008).

Two positions I have right now involve C++/C# programming, and also some ASP.Net development to put a web front end on some of this stuff.

1/01/2007 03:38:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

While in college, I was fortunate enough to visit the optical tracking site at (redacted). It was then run by the MIT Lincoln labs.

They only showed us non-classified targets (of course) but it was obvious what this stuff was used for.

Upon the exit of our group, Luke had to bail for the little computer guy's room. On the way out, the MIT Grad student said to me, "Did you have a good time?"

I said, "Yes, but I would have liked to have seen a Rhyolite or KH-11 myself."

He about dropped the video tapes he was carrying.

"Seeya!" I said, and hustled out the door, and into the van.

hee hee

-Luke

1/01/2007 03:39:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

LukeBlogWalker:

My involvement at MIT was via the ill-fated Curl Corp. The brainchild of a lot of very smart people (MIT Ph.Ds) including Tim Berners-Lee. They neglected to have anyone involved who knew anything whatsoever about business. They brought me in far too late, and it sank like a stone after consuming $48M in VC dough.

1/01/2007 03:46:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

Have done C, but nothing further (like C# or C++) and have done various information based websites (just finished one in PHP) and have done then in ASP.

Dot net is just another layer in my book to "normal" ASP.

Read: not hard.

Montreal is cool. Dig it. :)

As for cameras, you can get some experimental stuff cheap -see

http://www.supercircuits.com

I have worked as a system administrator on most every available platform. AS-400 and Dmonino are the only ones I've not used extensively.

Mail, Web, Database, and file servers, and the occasional SANS array. I've also had to ad-hoc tweak a few Cicso routers into place.

Beyond that, phones, networks and security are part of my rate.

I am a criminal analyst as well.

Whee!

-Luke

1/01/2007 03:46:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

Perhaps it is about the usual suspects. If the system can learn them, the abnormal behavior, by definition will be unusual.

-Just a thought

-Luke

1/01/2007 03:51:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

LukeBlogWalker said...

1. Can you travel to do support
2. Can you pass a background check with pristine purity
3. Do you speak any French?

(We deal with French and German customers as well as North American)

Also I'll have to be up front with you: lack of extensive C++ experience will probably be an issue for the guy that actually heads up this team. The ASP.Net part is less onerous, experience-wise. In any case brains count more than specific experience.

1/01/2007 03:54:00 PM  
Blogger Smoov said...

Probably not a great idea to conduct job interviews on One Cosmos :-)

How can I communicate an email address to you Luke without having every leftoid lurker instantly add it to porn-spam lists?

1/01/2007 04:00:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

I can travel and pass the clearance. I only speak very little French. I understand a bit of French and less German.

I could brush up on my C programming stuff. My main asset is my general craftiness across the board.

Anything computer, I've figured out on my own. This takes me out of the box a bit. I solve problems across the fields of knowledge that I understand, and don't strictly "program" or "design" anything.

When at a large healthcare orgainisation recently, I was told that Pareto charts could not be done in a Crystal report.

Intuitively, I knew this was wrong. When I had the time, I realised it was the same as a running total SQL statement -but for a Pareto chart, one uses the running total, divided by the grand total for the Pareto percentage figure. All I had to do was lay one graph over the other from the same result set.

This automated something that was normally an ugly process when I first arrived.

But it came from realizing that the Pareto percentage was calculated in that manner proportionally, and not from some other rigorous understanding.

I took what I "knew" instinctively about the mechanics of the graphing and remodeled it in my head mathematically, which I then converted to a simple SQL statement.

Okay, now I am kicking a dead horse.

-Luke

1/01/2007 04:03:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

USS Ben has my email, perhaps he would relay.

BT/UNCLAS FOUO
DTG:20070102/00:04:19Z/
TO:USSBEN/FROM:SMOOV, LUKEBLOGWALKER/

REQUEST RELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS/AT YOUR DISCRETION/EOT

NNNN

1/01/2007 04:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Joan of Argghh! said...

Inty,

Well, let me re-think according to your position. Hmmm. I won't call gravity "absolutely True" because my understanding of it is not complete.

I'm there with you, on the house roof, with a terrycloth towel pinned at the neck, flowing out behind me. I'm only 5 years old, like you, and am fairly sure I can fly, because I don't know enough about gravity. It may or may not be absolutely true.

Now, as I grow and learn and expand my understanding of gravity, I may learn more formulaic calculations based on mass density and rotation that will cause prior calculations to be less than complete. Knowing this may help my Supergirl launch go more successfully. But that'll take way too long.

I'm gonna push you off the roof first!

:)

"If any man will do, he will know."

1/01/2007 04:11:00 PM  
Anonymous GLASR said...

My hair hurts.

1/01/2007 06:14:00 PM  
Anonymous no longer green said...

Integralist:

Give it up man. You're simply fodder for a programming break on the Gagdad Bob network (the "no mirror" zone). If he bought into your "how 'bout some humility" line, this place wouldn't be half so enjoyable. Can you imagine sitting around trading insights with fellow bobbleheads for yucks? Neither can they. Leave them alone and they'll devour their own young.
Watch, learn, enjoy. Don't take things so seriously.

1/01/2007 06:47:00 PM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Humm... well, smoov, I am well versed in C++ myself, four-year degree (UMBC) 4 years or so total experience with computer work (think of it as potential!)

I studied networks and AI quite a lot, and was considering doing a master's for A.I or Network Security. However, there was no money in it -- or no EXTRA money, and I was tired of school.

Anyway, the visual patterning stuff involving neural nets is interesting. A friend of mine, roommate in college, studied neural nets for awhile. Lots of linear algebra involved (as with Graphics.) It was my strongest math.

So, I probably can't boast the experience that Luke has-- but I do have a long-form from a few years ago photocopied that can be updated for clearance. Was going to join the NSA, but they lost my forms it was so long before they finally acknowledged it I had to fully reapply. (I didn't...)

Data Noise is the biggest issue with those things-- especially with video. Though it is true that a security person staring at 200 monitors is not so helpful either.

My guess is you're working with pattern-differentiation on the images rather than approximating the distance, size and shape of objects in the visual range?

One thing that has always interested me is that impossible 'technology' of identifying actual objects from visual images. I've seen it done once, though to what extent it was actually 'undestanding' what the objects it was identifying were, I have no clue.

Prin: about the Allah/Yahweh thing, here's the first article by Bat Yeor...
And
Here is the other, which may or may not be entirely relevant but is very enlightening.

1/01/2007 07:00:00 PM  
Anonymous fat raccoon bastard said...

I want the baby!

1/01/2007 07:15:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

Maybe River would be the better choice -if you are looking for a programmer.

I'm more like someone Bill Donovan would have hired, at the core, --someone with "cipher brains". ;)

-Luke

1/01/2007 08:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Integralist said...

Luke, fair enough--thanks for the clarification. BTW, I'm not asking you to "give me the light" (?).

Ximeze, you're preaching to the choir. I'm not asking anyone to "do this work" for me, and I understand that everyone goes through their own process.

Furthermore, I am not "very angry" with anyone here. I am mainly just pointing out what I see as deficiencies in perspectives. You seem to perceive this as a kind of (perhaps subconscious) plea for spiritual guidance from my betters. That is, of course, based upon the assumption that the perspectives presented here are "beyond" what I am presenting, which I obviously see as untrue.

Bob, what can I say...You put yourself out in cyberspace and seem to only appreciate adulation. You equate your posts with "melodies, poems and paintings," yet thrash around about your big bugaboo, the Evil Leftists. And then you use me in your posts and won't actually engage in dialogue when the opportunity arises.

In other words you are a monologue, only taking in what agrees with you, trashing what disagrees with you. What does this sound like? You're a pyschologist, you should know: EGO.

Or to put it another way, a cult of personality.

Hoarhey, I think everyone has a hard time admitting when they are wrong, including myself.

I do admit that I have had an "adversarial relationship" with the folks on this board, but not simply for the sake of being adversarial, as you would have it. However, I do think I could have been more skillful, more diplomatic, and perhaps not "shit the bed" before sleeping in it, so to speak. My bad.

But also understand that I only disagree when I actually disagree. If you see me as insincere or with an unspoken agenda, what can I say? Like most folks I don't like conflict, I don't like being a fox in a henhouse--or a hen in a fox den--but I do enjoy discussion, sharing and arguing viewpoints, and "fighting for" my own highest vision of truth. I started posting here because I was surprised between the contrast between Bob's more public presentation (his book and WIE interview) and some of what he writes here.

But again, yes, I could have been more skillful, more diplomatic, and probably more friendly.

As for the rest, I don't feel that you understand my approach, because I am not advocating "no position." Far from it. This is where I feel that this blog basically holds an overall "healthy conservative" worldview and opposes a "pathological liberal-leftist" one. One of my handful of main points has been to point this out, and that the major blindspot here is in seeing all leftism as pathological, and thus effectively throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

What I personally advocate is a synthesis of healthy polarities, in this case conservative rightism and liberal leftism. Where you see me as taking a lesser antithesis to your thesis; I am trying to point to a synthesis of your thesis and the leftist/postmodern antithesis.

Finally, you ask whether I find myself in similar scenarios. The answer is no, hardly ever. Except if I run into a tight group with a shared worldview that I have disagreements with. And usually I turn and run the other way ;)

p.s. A technical clarification: I've never called Bob, "Bobby." This is not the first time that someone here has outright mischaracterized what I've said.

Will, Bob = "impersonal transcendence?" LOL. Certainly Bob has a certain degree of "genuine gnosis"--unlike those here, I cannot really say. Why? Because I differentiate between worldview/perspective and gnosis. This is where the "gift" of postmodern is not acknowledged here: that genuine spiritual intuition and even realization can be interpreted in different ways, framed in different worldviews. It seems a common misconception here is that anyone who had "genuine gnosis" will inherently think and believe the same way folks here think and believe. This is an enormous error.

Joan, physical laws are not Absolute Truth. They are not something that is always the case, in every situation. And no, I am not a relativist. But I have covered this territory before. Suffice it to say, I believe and perceive truth as hierarchical--or Ken Wilber says, holarchical. But Absolute Truth is...well, non-codifiable. Anything that can be codified--or spoken--is not Absolute.

Again, I recommend consulting the Tao te Ching.

And finally, No longer green...that is probably the best advice I've read on this blog. I think you are right. Thanks. "No mirror" zone, LOL.

Peace and goodnight to one and all...I will take Will's request, and No Longer Green's advice, and haunt y'all no more.

Love and blessings to all,
"Integralist."

1/01/2007 08:30:00 PM  
Blogger HV said...

Smoov,
That's quite a problem you have set for yourself there. Maybe not just hard but NP hard? (Just kidding.)

- bleeding edge veteran

1/01/2007 08:56:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Integralist:

Too bad there bubba, I had hope for you to cross the line, instead of jump ship and run away. Giving up means it will take longer. Lets hope you have more life in you, than giving up.

No Longer Green,

I do know some of the people here, and we do sit about chatting about reality, the Cosmos, econimics, archaeolgy, astronomy, history, ancient history, the Bible, God, philosophy, and good places to eat or find great coffee. (NOT FourBuck's)

So your snide, sarcastic, and bitter remarks have only assisted to swerve young Integralist back into the darkness.

But, you love darkness, and yourself, a blind man could see that.

-Luke

1/01/2007 09:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Col. J. C. Beaglehole said...

I say! What is this I hear of "eating our young?" You have no doubt heard of the ancient code of the Beagleholes, and I can assure you that it doesn't sanction cannibalism. Bad business, don't you know. Very Hawaiian.

1/01/2007 09:19:00 PM  
Blogger PSGInfinity said...

I have an amazing time reading the Boblog, and the racooments therein. You don't hear from me much, since I don't usually feel like I can add to the conversation. (Int. anyone?)

Smoov,

I understand that Luke doesn't have the paper, but my gut hunch is that you should put his name in, just the same. Most teams need a fixer; a crafty fellow who ignores conventional approach patterns when solving problems. Most teams can really use one of those, and Luke might fit the bill.

1/01/2007 09:32:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Integralist said...
Van, I would've thought you beyond such reactive regurgitations. You, like Bob, are merely saying "I'm rubber and you're glue..."

First off I only had one beer last night, so no regurgitations. I say your comment and thought "Oh lighten up, your studied obtuseness is giving you a sour puss".

I'm not saying I'm rubber and your glue (though that would have been fun), I'm saying that Bob said something that most regulars here could read quite clearly right through the word play, in many ways clearer because of the word play - and you somehow missed it completely. How is that?

Perhaps your "...own search for Truth" by way of attempting to differentiate between truth and Truth is "... not finding rock-solid Absolute Truth" not "because that is Unfindable" but because all your attempts to differentiate between Truth and truth has disabled your ability to recognize it at all.

There's no Absolute Truth and relative truth - there is Truth, and it is always contextual. And what you studiously blind yourself to seeing is that your attempt to split Truth, kills it. Your attempt to ignore principles by pragmatically adopting this and that based on their surface appeal, declares your views and intent to be clearly at odds to even them most casual of regulars here.

We don't want a part of it. We fully understand what you are proposing, and we don't want anything to do with it. I don't mind arguing some of the points on my site, because I'm a flogger and within bounds I enjoy the process.

But here it's just plain tedious, and really buggers up the works. If you've somehow missed the overall message from grandstands here - stop! Truth isn't that complicated, your attempts to twist it like taffy is blinding you to the obvious. Quit it. If you insist on persisting, persist elsewhere.

Sheesh!

1/01/2007 09:36:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

Luke:

Shut up & count your blessings.

1/01/2007 09:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Ken Wilber said...

Pssst, Bob -- if you want to keep the cult of personality thing going and string along addle-brained kids like that Integralist clone, take it from me -- you gotta snazz up your website with tasteful beefcake shots of yourself, like I do. I don't know why it works, but it does.

1/01/2007 09:40:00 PM  
Blogger ximeze said...

That should have read: our blessings

1/01/2007 09:40:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Joan of Arrgghh!!!
The good news is I finally put up a new post. The bad news is I took it down again.

The simple truth is I tried to cram too much in, it's gonna take longer, and Gagdad is so amazingly good at doing this daily that I want to set fire to his armchair.

Well, not really. Well... yeah really, but only relatively so.

1/01/2007 09:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Ken Wilber said...

You'd also see a lot more coon-tang around here, if you catch my drift...

1/01/2007 09:43:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

hoarhey, about your comment of 1/01/2007 02:55:06 PM?

I'm in the middle of the country, which way should I face to bow down in your direction?

llLovvVVED it!

1/01/2007 09:52:00 PM  
Blogger NoMo said...

Whoa, thought I had wandered into monster.com for a moment.

integralist - just remember as you lay your head on your pillow and close your eyes to sleep tonight, that GOD is there -- in your head with you. You've only to ask, and He might also join you in your heart.

1/01/2007 10:10:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Oh, its gonna be a long night..

[I'm not asking you to "give me the light" (?).]

Thats good, I can't!

[In other words you are a monologue, only taking in what agrees with you, trashing what disagrees with you. What does this sound like? You're a pyschologist, you should know: EGO.]

OH PUHLEAZE! The only monologue you hear is your own.

Dood, seriously, you gotta get help if you don't see this is you.

[Or to put it another way, a cult of personality.]

I come here because it is interesting, and so are most of the people doing commentary. Follow Bob? Hardly. Be appreciative of his wit and understanding? You bet.

[I do admit that I have had an "adversarial relationship" with the folks on this board, but not simply for the sake of being adversarial, as you would have it.]

Thats interesting, as I noticed you seem to vaunt your tit-for-tat methodology of discussion as well.

[However, I do think I could have been more skillful, more diplomatic, and perhaps not "shit the bed" before sleeping in it, so to speak. My bad.]

So stick around? Whats up with running away? SISSY! ;)

I personally could care less about that, just get into the information more. "Quaid, open your mind.."

[But also understand that I only disagree when I actually disagree.]

Then perhaps a discussion of where you agree, along with your disagreement is what is needed?

[I don't like being a fox in a henhouse--or a hen in a fox den--but I do enjoy discussion, sharing and arguing viewpoints, and "fighting for" my own highest vision of truth.]

Dude, you've got to be kidding me?

Your own vision of the truth? Ack! Gasp! The truth changes you, one does not go about deciding that individual truth is absolute truth.

Take note: This is a product of the NEA and modern educational crap produced by John Dewey's Progressivism. Notice how poisonous and pervasive it is too. If he ever returns, he will insist upon his position voraciously.

-SIGH-

Poor manipulated bastard.

[I started posting here because I was surprised between the contrast between Bob's more public presentation (his book and WIE interview) and some of what he writes here.]

Started by screaming "hypocrite" instead of reading more and talking more.. great solution! ;)

[But again, yes, I could have been more skillful, more diplomatic, and probably more friendly.]

So, knowing this, WHY WUSS OUT?

[As for the rest, I don't feel that you understand my approach,]

It is your job to communicate for you. Using an "approach" is just a BS excuse -again.

[One of my handful of main points has been to point this out, and that the major blindspot here is in seeing all leftism as pathological, and thus effectively throwing the baby out with the bathwater.]

Dude, it is a moot point. Leftism is crap. It is delusion. It is murderous. Separate the issues of (for example) environment (like Dixy Lee Ray has done) from the politics (something you can't seem to fathom) and you will see more clearly why I say this.

[What I personally advocate is a synthesis of healthy polarities, in this case conservative rightism and liberal leftism.]

Your opinion of the truth, does not change the truth. In that, Hoarhey was on the money by saying nobody gives a rat's ass about your opinion. The same goes for the rest of us.

Get it yet?

The truth is distinct from your opinions and wants having to do with the truth.

I also question two aspects of your idea. One, that they are polar opposites, and two, that there exists a "healthy" synthesis between these two things.

Who the hell is going to define "healthy"? -That is crappy ass reasoning. No wonder you are confuzzed.

[Where you see me as taking a lesser antithesis to your thesis; I am trying to point to a synthesis of your thesis and the leftist/postmodern antithesis.]

Dude, life and these things are not binary Aristotlean systems. They are not Von Neumann's Game Theory either.

Nor are they solvable with stacks of IF THEN ELSE statements. They are more like complex parallel equations.

[Finally, you ask whether I find myself in similar scenarios. The answer is no, hardly ever. Except if I run into a tight group with a shared worldview that I have disagreements with. And usually I turn and run the other way ;)]

You turn the other way, because your liberal self-view is a very closed system, despite what you might insist. You go to them because you want to figure it out, but you prevent this and toss on the cloak of superiority and run like a scared rabbit.

Read The Bible, CS Lewis, GK Chesterton, Josh McDowell, Hayek and Von Mises, Horowitz and Collier, there is so much you ignore, while standing on your teeter totter of worshipping at the altar of the crap they gave you in college.

[Because I differentiate between worldview/perspective and gnosis.]

You would like to believe this, but it is only within the envelope of the crap you believe that you have this capacity. Push the envelope a bit man.

[This is where the "gift" of postmodern is not acknowledged here: that genuine spiritual intuition and even realization can be interpreted in different ways, framed in different worldviews.]

Dude, that is such nonsense, and I've heard it all before. I probably heard it when you were in your diapers.

DON'T MAKE THE MISTAKE of seeing different interpretations as talking about the same thing, just because they both say they are truth.

[It seems a common misconception here is that anyone who had "genuine gnosis" will inherently think and believe the same way folks here think and believe. This is an enormous error.]

It is a larger error to insist that the "fairness" and "synthesis" would rule any truth. How self-defining can you be?

Read: "Eternity in their Hearts", then tell me this. Also, stop standing behind this as an excuse for not looking at God or Christ or truth you don't wish to know. You learned that arrogant / ignorant position from a professor. It is not intelligent, and it does not impress those of us who have seen it many times before.

[Joan, physical laws are not Absolute Truth. They are not something that is always the case, in every situation.]

Flunked your Audit of the Introduction to Science did we?

They may not have the meaning that God does, but I guarantee you, put some plutonium down your pants, and you will know it -even if you don't believe it. Dang man, I was arguing this junk in High School Philosophy class!

[And no, I am not a relativist.]

Idealist. Get it right.

[Suffice it to say, I believe and perceive truth as hierarchical--or Ken Wilber says, holarchical.]

(Luke reaches for his air sickness bag)

Dude, on the one hand you toss scientific laws to the wind and say they are not always that way, then you insist truth is some Ken Wilburized "holarchical" system?

TIME TO SMELL THE COFFEE, KEN WILBER IS NOT THE TRUTH.

Can't you see your own logic is hunt-and-peck, choosing what you will or won't accept based upon things you've never really thought about much?

Your cart is before your horse.

You don't decide what truth is and how it behaves then go looking for that. Nor do you try to make truth what you think it should be.

DUDE, THIS IS SO BASIC, HOW DID YOU MISS THAT YOU DO THIS?

Reminds me of Paul's remark to Timothy, warning of people with itching ears -always looking for the truth, but never grasping it.

[But Absolute Truth is...well, non-codifiable.]

Pblfffftttt!

Oh, so why do you bother being an Integralist? I mean, any of your polar opposites are also non codifiable. Your whole system is corrupted if you have no reference points!

Moreover, if the only absolute truth, is that truth is not absolute, then why bother at all?

[Anything that can be codified--or spoken--is not Absolute.]

So, every wise word, every poem, reflection, physics book, math formula, COLLEGE TEXTBOOK OR SOMETHING YOUR PROFESSORS TOLD YOU is meaningless.

As I said in High School Philosophy lecture, you might as well do yourself now and avoid the obvious later. Good God man, can't you see how crazy making this is for you?

Moreover, this is so Eastern -that speech is the original sin, as it tries to describe reality.

A fallout mix of Eastern thoughts into Western minds from the 60's and 70's. AGAIN.

As an A-priori, you miss so much truth by looking at it this way. SO VERY MUCH. Like most of it.

Stuck in "mystery" and ego, you are blind, and encouraged to be a narcissist or nihlist. And you have no vision of this at all, nor of the freedom you could have if you lay it down.

[Again, I recommend consulting the Tao te Ching.]

Been there, done that.

I recommend you print the historical aspects of the ressurrection of Christ from my blog. Go to the library and check them out -thats what it is for.

Then read the Gospel of John, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Proverbs.

Then tell me what you think.

[And finally, No longer green...that is probably the best advice I've read on this blog.]

Identification with such bad advice is very telling.

You both have ego problems. Big ones. Frosted over with the sweetness of liberalism and integralism.

[I think you are right. Thanks. "No mirror" zone, LOL.]

Did it ever occur to you, that you operate on a level where we've already been in the mirror and have not looked back since we grew passed it?

I didn't think so.

[Love and blessings to all,
"Integralist."]

--a legend in his own mind...

-Luke

1/01/2007 10:40:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Smoov,

I have "paper" not dreamed of in some philosophies. ;)

But we can discuss that on another venue.

I sure as heck would not post it here, or I'd have to kill you all.

;)

-Luke

1/01/2007 11:00:00 PM  
Blogger LukeBlogWalker said...

Bob,

Does there exist an Occam's Razor for theroretical truth evaluation sequences?

I mean after all, Einstien was able to reduce a lot of math to E=mc2 -this shows reduction / simplicity at the end, not complexity.

So, perhaps a Rube Goldberg Unified theory is not the answer, simply due to the fact that it must be continually band-aided to continue to exist?

I am sure there are occasional exceptions to this, or perhaps what seems to be an exception -as the end solution is not apparent at the moment.

-Just thinking out loud.

-Luke

1/01/2007 11:13:00 PM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Ken Wiber,
I could use a little coon-tang myself.

1/01/2007 11:24:00 PM  
Anonymous no longer green said...

lukegroundwalker,

Here's another facet of truth: the relative truth of our words and intentions, versus the absolute truth of our actions. Then of course interpreting those truths involves layering yet another skin of absolute/relative beliefs and values onto the picture.

So you "know" some of the people around here? Well ain't you sumpin'. I know exactly what "we" sit around here dis-cussing. If you are so busy polishing your trapeze act that you forget to appreciate the ladies riding bareback, that's your business. But please don't suddenly feign interest in how they keep their poise. Stick to what you know. And here's a clue: it isn't me. I read here, I don't write here. Mostly. That's my act.

What I am beginning to like more and more about Bobbleheads is that those who stick around (excepting the Grand PooDad himself) drop the sanctimony after a time. They come to recognize and respect a diversity of values, while adhering to some mysterious "core" that even they can't agree on. Those who stick around for the wrong reasons are easily recognized as the ankle-biters who rush out and nip at any passing stranger who stinks of a land not Gagdadian in origin, protecting some vague idea of "turf". The big, scary dogs stay in their own yards and watch. Mostly.

Each dog, little or big, has private reasons for their behavior; I certainly have mine. And while the reasons are open for debate and critique in whatever manner is deemed legal at the moment, the worth of our separate behaviors are not. For we each ultimately affect only Self. I am deeply affected by this site, even though I have slight interaction compared to...you, for example. But it is that affect that matters. Only.

For your own reasons, you have extended my single comment out to draw a very personal judgment on me:

you love darkness, and yourself, a blind man could see that.

You, my book-learned traveling companion, are behaving the fool. Even I can see that. Why don't you practice a little Princessation of your own, and try breathing without speaking (or writing...)

As for my "assisting" young inty "back into the darkness", my how you flatter. As if young inty has shown him/herself easily swayed by anything other than her own inner voice. No matter the politics, s/he strikes me as someone who isn't afraid to let the world wash over him from time to time and simply lie still, taking it all in. He was here, discussing his philosophy among overt hostiles, while you were peddling your job credentials at a company picnic.You might try venturing out into that kind of darkness yourself. Then judge whether it is worthy of your ridicule.

1/01/2007 11:29:00 PM  
Anonymous uss ben said...

Is Coon-Tang orange?

1/02/2007 12:00:00 AM  
Anonymous Interlocutor said...

Integralist wrote

--I "best serve the Lord" by evolving myself and embodying my highest vision of Truth, which is what I intuit of "God's Truth"--and forever deepening (hopefully!). The specifics depend upon the context.---

My curiosity is piqued. What is the usual context? What is your occupation? What kind of hobbies do you have? Children?

I intuit that you are here at One Cosmos to firm up your life, to obtain some certainty and solidity. You would do well to stick around and take some more abuse. It will do you good. And, our site benefits greatly from your continued presence here, that is the truth.

The denizens here become dejected if there is no one to push against. Think of them; is this part of your service? Be there for them.

Bob attacks the Greens because they needs to be attacked; unchecked their ideology will overgrow and become monstrous (the infamous PC, for example) Bob and others like him ensure that the herd of Green Ideas stays healthy by culling out the unfit. In an arcane way, he is a genuine asset to the Green cause.

Bob is no egoist and he is not narrow-minded; he just appears that way in the course of doing his job. Don't let the patter fool you.

One the other hand, one may not become friends with Bob; he must keep some distance to remain effective. Observe him in his role and don't take anything he says personally.

I've been on this site for a year and I've cross-examined Bob exhaustively; I can spot narcissists and egoists and he does not match the profile.

The Bobble heads are good eggs but very reactive; forgive them, please.

Come back, Inty. You'll be glad you did.

1/02/2007 12:21:00 AM  
Anonymous A Friend From Long Ago said...

Bob,

I offer you my sincere gratitude.

We are The Few, The Prideless, The Raccoons.

Thank you for bringing us together once again in this lifetime.

We are getting close to the Telos, the Eschaton, to Revelation, to Awe, to Realization, to Mashiach.

And your daily infusion of Spirit propels us ever closer.

All the glory belongs to God. Who, by His Grace alone, radiates forth from your words.

Happy New Year.

1/02/2007 05:19:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Lukeblogwalker said..."I mean after all, Einstien was able to reduce a lot of math to E=mc2 -this shows reduction / simplicity at the end, not complexity. So, perhaps a Rube Goldberg Unified theory is not the answer, simply due to the fact that it must be continually band-aided to continue to exist?"

The reduced complexity of E=Mc2 is what a proper system of concepts do for us. Increased complexity is what we get by misapplying concepts, or attempting to works something out without key information. Like epicycles.

I think our convoluted unified theories are reflections of what Irving Babbit called our temporal parochialism; the tendency of we 'moderns' to think that this is the end point of history and not simply another brief stop on a long line. We miss the fact that it's earlier in history than we want to believe.

Ptolemy was a very intelligent guy. He tried to work out the odd thing mars does in the night sky now and then - seeming to stop and loop backwards, by coming up with epicycles. Others with more information and data improved on it with many more epicycle calculations. None of them could make it work completly because they weren't yet aware that it was the earth rolving within the solar system, rather than the solar system revolving around us.

It's true that some people did propose a heliocentric system, but it was essentially an arbitrary proposition, they didn't have the data to back it up. Ptolemy and the rest worked with what they had.

That's all we can do. Our attempts at a unified system are so Rube Goldberg, because we're flat out missing some (probably huge amounts) of data. All we can do is keep going. I'd bet that a unified system of physics is doable - but not with the information we have at the moment.

And even when it is finally worked out, I too have the sneaking suspicion that isn't going to provide a way to scientifically calculate evil either. Or good. There will never be such a handy crutch to live our lives for us, we will always have to work it out longhand and show our work.

1/02/2007 06:28:00 AM  
Blogger River Cocytus said...

Intergralist, Interlocutor, No longer green--

Keep shoveling-- every good garden needs fertilizer.

Ohh... Snap!

1/02/2007 07:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not to worry, RC. Dang wooden handles.

1/02/2007 08:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Jenny said...

Gagdad, I'm with you on the Integralist matter. He just doesn't get it, and the poster who said Int was projecting is spot on. His behavior on here is exactly what he's accusing you of.

Of course you know by now that trying to reason with or get any of these kinds of jokers to understand what you're saying (or what anyone else is saying if he doesn't already agree with it)is useless. It's hard for some people to admit to themselves that they may not already know everything there is to know.

I appreciate your candor without apologies and the time you take to share your POV with us.

Happy New Year to all of you. I'm proud to be a raccoon. :)

1/02/2007 11:35:00 AM  
Anonymous hoarhey said...

Integralist,

If I've wrongly accused you of calling Bob, Bobby, I apologize.
It actually could have been Peace and Namaste Bill (aka Batman) who did that. At this point the resident trolls have become a conflated mass due to their recurring theme of, "you're wrong", mainly on political matters.
Many here may have shared the same views at a less enlightened time in our lives but have come to realize that while spiritual enlightenment is great, we also have to live in THIS world while attaining it, and that there are certain conditions here on earth which are of a greater complement in acheiving that goal. Since (political)ideas, when implemented, have consequences, we have separated the wheat from the chaff as far as political philosophies and their consequences are concerned. It is predictable, knowable and discernable when each begins to know his own corrupted nature. When that epiphany occurs, a healthy position will then be established and the courage of those convictions will appear. I believe that is what you are seeing here, appearing in your mind as hate or intolerance.
It is possible to judge conditions here on earth through the lens of Absolute Truth relative to life on earth. A seeker, desiring to follow goodness, with the willingness to drop their own agenda when it gets in the way of finding that goodness will ultimately get where they're heading.
The Rules have already been established, it is our job to find and follow those rules to the best of each of our abilities.

1/02/2007 01:04:00 PM  
Anonymous PrincessSpirit said...

Inty: For pete's sake: Do your HOMEWORK so thou may knowest thy subject and not speaketh out of thy "behind" anymore! You're always so woefully behind...

KETCHUP! ! ! !


INTY Said:..."As for Good + Evil, You still leave out one of the most crucial points: ascertaining what is good and what is evil. For you, they seem clear-cut, set in stone, static. But are they really? Can we scientifically measure evil in a fail-proof way?"

You asked, I'm answering here:

http://depravityscale.org

I'm an advisory member on the panel evaluating this Forensic Measurement Depravity Standard/Scale that will soon become the standard measurement in use in Criminal Justice Systems nation-wide.

Read up. You might get a clue for once. Clearly, your flimsy assertions that "Evil cant be measured" is shown to be pointless & just your lowly opinion - its not Truth, not founded on scholarly research & facts.

Know The Subject before you Blow. Get Ye A Clue & Get Ye a Brain so you don't continue to deceive yourself and attempt to deceive others & make your sappy lies look like "truth" when they are nothing of the sort.

- PrincessSpirit -

SMOOV, LUKE, RIVER: Open Invite: Have lots of great friends in Montreal if anyone needs to learn French & a place to hang out for a few weeks or 6 months. They'll gladly feed you, shelter you & are eager for stimulating conversations. They will consider themselves Honored if you stay with them. I'll hook you uip if you need. They're truly Great peeps! You'll love em.

1/02/2007 02:48:00 PM  
Anonymous PrincessSpirit said...

Dang LUKE! You surpassed even me in length this year so far! :D

Least you put it out there for him to consider. They were my same first comments given directly to him as well - he completely skips answering or applying them. (Hmmm...wonder where you heard them before? Wink.)

RIVER-C: Thanks for the Links! Got em!

Heartening to see Guy/Girl Raccoons consistently stepping up to the plate defending our beliefs, instead of doubting or compromising them. No need for me to add more. :D

- PrincessSpirit -

1/02/2007 03:00:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home