tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post4106152437224357398..comments2024-03-27T11:16:36.951-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: Being Truth vs. Doing the LieGagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger112125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-87541065407324890732007-05-19T06:34:00.000-07:002007-05-19T06:34:00.000-07:00Van said:I do get a good look at all the happening...Van said:<BR/><BR/><I>I do get a good look at all the happenings out there, and Fox does a very good job of selecting the most worthy for viewing, and giving visibility to two sides of the issues.</I><BR/><BR/><BR/>Apart from the God thing happening, the above is simple opinion stated as fact. This can be a problem all by itself. I understand the proclivity. Bob sometimes does it, as I pointed out with this excerpt from today's post:<BR/><BR/><I>Let's take a very obvious example, the two recent GOP debates, the first one hosted by a leftist MSM outfit, the second by the non-leftist Fox. The MSNBC debate was a farce and a joke, presided over by the fundamentally unserious buffoon, Chris Matthews. The second was sober, serious, and substantive.</I><BR/><BR/><BR/>If Foxnews was all Brit Hume, fine. Mired as he is in the context of FoxNews, he rings like the token "old school journalist", just like Colmes is there for a "frank discussion" of liberal viewpoints with Hannity. <BR/><BR/>Wake up the BS detector. It's no more or less revealing to find "serious" defense of Foxnews than to acknowledge the leftists love for Bill Maher. Both are entertainment. Nothing more or less.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-47508828219628506262007-05-18T08:49:00.000-07:002007-05-18T08:49:00.000-07:00will said "Yeah, this place is just full of otherp...will said "Yeah, this place is just full of otherpluckers, for sure."<BR/><BR/>Oh... I do <I>SO</I> like this place!<BR/><BR/>On the number stars issue, there is much I used to know that I now know better. From what I can see, on the level that Ricky & I are speaking of, there can be no controling relation between a life of choices lived and numbers and stars locations. <BR/><BR/>However I also suspect that Will is not approaching the matter on that level - there is <I><B>nothing</B></I> I've seen of what Will has written (or sung) that makes me believe that he is in any way a determinist.<BR/><BR/>In "giving the issue a wide berth" approach I've taken towards such things, I can forsee the plottings and measurements as ways of opening your mind to wider, deeper, root concepts, conveying the widest perspectives, perhaps archetypal is what I'm going for here, and through that, the casters mind may be more open to seeing patterns and connections which are not normally apparent. But that's my shear mind smoke conjecture there.<BR/><BR/>I know this. The universe is One. The impression of separateness is one that is apparent and viewable only from our perspective, from the Cosmos's perspective, that separateness is an illusion. That opens many interesting speculations. I also know that I don't know much beyond what I <I>know</I>, and I will stick to expanding and deepening that - as best as I can. <BR/><BR/>And Susannah - <I>big</I> ditto on your two media comments - especially the Gretta-types (<I>retching shudder</I>)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-7897442075160366932007-05-18T08:12:00.000-07:002007-05-18T08:12:00.000-07:00A disciple of Schuon's once complained that her as...A disciple of Schuon's once complained that her astrological (natal) chart was not very impressive. He responded by saying, if you don't like your chart, make another one with your choices.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-70519340240097199702007-05-18T07:46:00.000-07:002007-05-18T07:46:00.000-07:00Will, Petey,As I said, I am willing to be educated...Will, Petey,<BR/>As I said, I am willing to be educated on this.<BR/>I’m not interested in being right. I’m interested in getting it right.<BR/>I understand too that it’s a big subject, too large for here. And of course you don’t owe me any explanation. I don’t feel that way at all. I guess I was just hoping for one.<BR/><BR/>For now I’ll place it on my shelf and for the time being I will consider that my number 11 may indicate a tendency. Maybe I’m just not ready for this level yet.<BR/><BR/>By the way, I’m happy others here came to Will’s defense, for lack of a better word at the moment. I think it’s worth discussing. Well, I’d like to keep discussing it anyway…Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10589423819039764711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-82550476252374639122007-05-18T06:50:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:50:00.000-07:00Here we get into the concept of past lives, karma,...<I>Here we get into the concept of past lives, karma, etc.</I><BR/><BR/>Not. Apparently it's our destiny to disagree about some things (g!).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-67306465816213477982007-05-18T06:48:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:48:00.000-07:00Dougman, your welcome and thanks yourself.Yeah, th...Dougman, your welcome and thanks yourself.<BR/><BR/>Yeah, this place is just full of otherpluckers, for sure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-57229185496858610272007-05-18T06:40:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:40:00.000-07:00"As they say, the source of our greatest strengths..."As they say, the source of our greatest strengths are to be found in our weaknesses."<BR/><BR/>I don't know much about the numbers stuff, but this is so very true. It resonates with me too. Thanks.Susannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381272662339466736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-5617420537154063072007-05-18T06:39:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:39:00.000-07:00>>Well, of course. But to say so is not the same a...>>Well, of course. But to say so is not the same as saying that "we all have choices within certain perimeters" which are determined (predetermined) by "an overwhelming melange of number and astrological factors." <<<BR/><BR/>Yeah, it's basically the same, Convert.<BR/><BR/>And let's be clear - ultimately it is not the astro/number factor that decides the perimeters, those are just languages to describe the perimeters that the individual has determined for his or her self. <BR/><BR/>Here we get into the concept of past lives, karma, etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-91689675121064225232007-05-18T06:38:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:38:00.000-07:00Oh, BTW, I happened to hear to Dennis Miller on th...Oh, BTW, I happened to hear to Dennis Miller on the radio yesterday. He was actually pretty funny, but that's beside my point. He was responding to a caller who hated Fox news and conservative talk radio types, yet was compelled to listened to them literally all day long (that's a diagnosis right there for Bob to take on :) ).<BR/><BR/>Anyway, he said, unlike other channels, in working for Fox he actually got zero interference. Nobody there ever called him up and asked him what he'd be talking about, and he never received a memo with talking points. He was allowed to follow his own conscience. <BR/><BR/>He also had Ann Coulter on. It was interesting. I hardly ever hear talk radio so that was a funny convergence.Susannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381272662339466736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-10591197292144775642007-05-18T06:32:00.001-07:002007-05-18T06:32:00.001-07:00Thank you, PETEY.And to all those who get the heeb...Thank you, PETEY.<BR/><BR/>And to all those who get the heebie-jeebies over supposed predeterminism and "locked in boxes" re: numbers and astro - <BR/>as I indicated from the start, we always have choices with regard to what we do with our inclinations, talents, etc., as indicated by our astro configurations and number patterns. And as Petey in his pyrotechnic, highly labile wisdom points out, we do have inclinations and talents to the exclusion of others, necessarily so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-74143949830623716292007-05-18T06:32:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:32:00.000-07:00"That being said, a couple points to add. 1 - you ..."That being said, a couple points to add. 1 - you can not honestly have no tilt, and be human. You have a viewpoint, if not, you have no knowledge whatsoever and no intelligence to boot - not the type I'd trust to gather info for me. 2 - having a viewpoint does not mean that you ignore uncomfortable info and viewpoints from the other side. You can dissagree with them, but shouldn't ignore them. As comparison to other MSM news orgs out there, Fox does a very good job of at least putting what it sees as the other sides viewpoint out there to be seen."<BR/><BR/>When I was a journalism intern, my boss explained it just that way to me. He told me, "You are an evangelical, and you see the world through evangelical 'glasses.' The question is not whether you can achieve total objectivity--you can't. The question is whether you are fair to the other side, describe them in their own terms, quote them accurately, and so on."<BR/><BR/>I'm afraid the left-oriented media do not fight fair by those standards.<BR/><BR/>Brit Hume is pretty balanced, an excellent journalist, and I like their little round table talk. I think the participants represent a good range of opinion. But I cannot STAND that "true crime" show (Greta's) or the celebrity focus on any of the news channels. Opinion shows do not bother me. You can flick 'em off when they get annoying.<BR/><BR/>Don't have tv anymore, anyway--read Drudge and the Fox summary on The Corner.<BR/><BR/>Last commenter, as usual. :) I go to bed earlier, I guess. (#7's on the way and I'm exhausted lately.)Susannahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381272662339466736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-30182336063608104082007-05-18T06:24:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:24:00.000-07:00There is no freedom without meaningful parameters,...<I>There is no freedom without meaningful parameters, i.e., boundary conditions.</I><BR/><BR/>Well, of course. But to say so is not the same as saying that "we all have choices within certain perimeters" which are determined (predetermined) by "an overwhelming melange of number and astrological factors."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-17188769171529746682007-05-18T06:19:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:19:00.000-07:00As they say, the source of our greatest strengths ...<I>As they say, the source of our greatest strengths are to be found in our weaknesses</I>.<BR/><BR/>Will did it again.<BR/><BR/>Plucked another string whose resonation (in my head) just won't stop.<BR/><BR/>Thanks Will, it makes life more interesting.<BR/>Not to say that all the other "pluckers" don't teach and resonate with me.<BR/><BR/>I learn alot here everyday.<BR/>Thanks All.<BR/><BR/>Hey! my First stab at <I>italics</I> worked!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-82834727610471882732007-05-18T06:18:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:18:00.000-07:00"...the abolition of man"That's really what it all..."...the abolition of man"<BR/><BR/>That's really what it all comes down to for the left, isn't it? I heard an idiot the other day (don't recall his name) call for the reduction of the world's population to one billion people. Another one (or maybe the same one) called humanity a virus of which the earth needs to rid itself. Perhaps that's what Al Gore meant when he said the earth has a fever.<BR/><BR/>I don't hear anyone on the left talk about human rights much anymore, unless they're accusing the US or Israel of violating them. They're not interested in human rights, because they don't even believe that humans have a right to exist and inhabit the planet. It's the inevitable result of rejecting a Creator. There's nothing special about man, and the world would be better off without him.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that this idea is at odds with Darwinism. Nature apparently made a profound mistake by evolving sentient, intelligent creatures. Intelligence is more of a liability than an asset, if it doesn't serve more than just a horizontal purpose. Other species don't need intelligence to survive, so why do we?<BR/><BR/>Yup, humanity was a bad idea, and the ultimate Utopian fantasy is a world free from the scourge of man. Leaving no one around to appreciate the wonder of creation is the final act of spitting in God's eye.Doughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12634217906285044030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-15871527807418067172007-05-18T06:16:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:16:00.000-07:00There is no freedom without meaningful parameters,...There is no freedom <I>without</I> meaningful parameters, i.e., boundary conditions. Otherwise there is only horizontal chaos. Boundary conditions are our means of ascent. You must be somebody -- a very specific somebody -- in order to become nobody. We are each a different "problem" or "possibility" of God, depending on the day of the week.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-17453211647125683262007-05-18T06:06:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:06:00.000-07:00Bottom line is that we all have choices within cer...<I>Bottom line is that we all have choices within certain perimeters.</I><BR/><BR/>So, if our choices are limited (within certain perimeters), then none of us have real freedom?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-71590483262876225622007-05-18T06:05:00.000-07:002007-05-18T06:05:00.000-07:00Ricky, please see my reply to Convert re: predeter...Ricky, please see my reply to Convert re: predeterminism. Nobody is getting locked in a box, trust me.<BR/><BR/>As for divine archetypes - I'm pressed for time here, but, for example, you notice how much the numbers 3, 7, and 12 play in sacred scripture? And in nature? It's an "as it is above/so it is below" thing. Archetypes are basic, elemental "ideas" that orginated in the mind of God and that show up in His creation, from top to botton, in patterns, symmetries - they can, in effect, be reduced to numbers, just as music can be reduced to numbers. <BR/><BR/>As liitle atoms of God, we too must have archetypal qualities that can be described to numerical - or if you prefer, musical - form. <BR/><BR/>This is one large topic, Mr Raccoon, and this space doesn't allow for much explication.<BR/><BR/>Trust me on one thing, however - there's something to it and it's worth discovering.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-40791275736196642322007-05-18T05:45:00.000-07:002007-05-18T05:45:00.000-07:00Convert formerly known as Apex - >>If I am not mis...Convert formerly known as Apex - <BR/><BR/>>>If I am not mistaken, the implication is that the boxes you describe predetermine behaviors and beliefs in some measure, which is quite a different thing.<<<BR/><BR/>Nothing's predetermined. Numbers/astro underscore inclinations, possible talents, along with pitfalls, possible negativities, etc. Nobody is destined, predetermined to be an alcoholic, for example. It is very likely, however, that should a person be addicted to alchohol or some other drug, said penchant for addiction would show up in that person's chart. Now - and this is important - the astro indication for possible addiction would also suggest an alternative penchant for spirituality - should the person decide for it. That is, the same impulse/inclination which might lead to drug addiction can also lead to spirituality. Or the same impulse/inclination that might lead to a nervous frittering away of energy might also leading to writing skills, or miserliness might lead to resourcefulness. <BR/><BR/>It's not complicated, it just sounds that way. Bottom line is that we all have choices within certain perimeters. <BR/><BR/>I don't know for certain, of course, but I'd think it likely that many of Bob's patients have within them certain attributes that, if they were positively channeled, would lead to great spiritual insight. As they say, the source of our greatest strengths are to be found in our weaknesses.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-9152131906560232222007-05-18T05:43:00.000-07:002007-05-18T05:43:00.000-07:00Reader said "I'll stick to my point. The idea that...Reader said "I'll stick to my point. The idea that anyone would hold up Fox News as an example of truth is remarkable in itself. Especially here."<BR/><BR/>First, we're talking about News org's - if you look to them for Truth... you're looking in all the wrong places. I look to them for info on the most visible happenings of the moment, little more than that. Hello and thank the big guy for the 'Net, which makes the other less visible happenings easier to find and find info on, than ever before.<BR/><BR/>As far as News Orgs though, on a scale of -10 to 0 to +10, with 0 being the Balanced point, the MSM has put itself at -11, and Fox... let me narrow that, Brit Humes news hour (can't think of it's 'name'), I'd be hard pressed to put further than a +3. IMHO Fox's tilt, is more towards populism, than conservativism with O'Reilly (a conservative populist) being the standard bearer there. <BR/><BR/>That being said, a couple points to add. 1 - you can not honestly have no tilt, and be human. You have a viewpoint, if not, you have no knowledge whatsoever and no intelligence to boot - not the type I'd trust to gather info for me. 2 - having a viewpoint does not mean that you ignore uncomfortable info and viewpoints from the other side. You can dissagree with them, but shouldn't ignore them. As comparison to other MSM news orgs out there, Fox does a very good job of at least putting what it sees as the other sides viewpoint out there to be seen. <BR/><BR/>A case could be made for their seeing the lefties as being "The" other viewpoint... especially as a focus for their multiple talk shows, to the exclusion of for instance, Objectivist type views... but still all in all? I do get a good look at all the happenings out there, and Fox does a very good job of selecting the most worthy for viewing, and giving visibility to two sides of the issues.<BR/><BR/>The MSM aren't worth the time it takes to watch (some to read...except lately I feel like a coroner when doing so), except to get a feel for how the lefties are handling things at the moment.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-76441690383402151072007-05-18T04:57:00.000-07:002007-05-18T04:57:00.000-07:00Oops, coffee hasn't kicked in yet. Late Apex is so...Oops, coffee hasn't kicked in yet. Late Apex is someone else's handle from another forum. That was my comment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-19707663080938143622007-05-18T04:49:00.000-07:002007-05-18T04:49:00.000-07:00Ever notice that Bob, as a psychologist, puts peop...<I>Ever notice that Bob, as a psychologist, puts people into boxes with labels? Nothing wrong with that, in fact, it's rather necessary to do so. The terms leftist, conservative, secular, spiritual - boxes.</I><BR/><BR/>Bob's boxes are based on the behaviors and beliefs of the people who are sorted into them. If I am not mistaken, the implication is that the boxes you describe predetermine behaviors and beliefs in some measure, which is quite a different thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-2174032680544811052007-05-18T04:37:00.000-07:002007-05-18T04:37:00.000-07:00Will,Sorry for the joking around about late last n...Will,<BR/>Sorry for the joking around about late last night.<BR/>I recognize this means a lot to you, and not only you. And also that I don’t know much about it. I am about halfway through Tarot myself and I am not seeing it quite like this “Numbers and astro factors are, in essence, divine archetypes.”<BR/>Maybe you can point some out to me.<BR/><BR/>As I said, if I’m missing something I shouldn’t be missing, I’ll gladly change course here. In a second.<BR/><BR/>You mention Dr Bob placing people in boxes with labels and therefore it’s the same thing so it’s ok. I think there is a big difference. Bob doesn’t build the box and place someone in it and lock the lid for good. Having a predetermined number that you can’t ever escape seems very different than that.<BR/><BR/>You haven’t shown me how 11 = power and where that comes from. It seems you could point to millions of people born on the 11th and say see, these folks are powerful while discarding all the rest who are not powerful but also born on the 11th.<BR/><BR/>And then of course, which, or rather whose calendar do I go by?<BR/><BR/>Back to Tarot for a sec, I see the significance in numbers as this. This is just an example: 10 commandments, 10 fingers (digits). If God had determined that 8 commandments constituted the whole of them, then we would have 8 fingers. It’s not about the number 10 but about the fact that the commandments match the fingers. It’s about the connection or the matching.<BR/><BR/>Another: Adam and Eve. Is it about another “2”? Or is it rather that Adam is only ever a complete “half” without Eve. They are incomplete without each other.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10589423819039764711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-73701700864595840182007-05-18T04:07:00.000-07:002007-05-18T04:07:00.000-07:00Nomo - >>With all due respect to Will, there's not...Nomo - >>With all due respect to Will, there's nothing to numbers but superstition. There are no straight lines in man. There are no straight lines in God. If you know what I mean<<<BR/><BR/>One thing that's dangerous about throwing a little data about numbers/astro and the like is that people who are not at all familiar with the territory assume that that the little data is the sum total of the picture, eg, I'm a Capricorn, so I'm determined, earthy, blah blah, etc.<BR/><BR/>The truth is that each individual is composed of an overwhelming melange of number and astrological factors. Numbers and astro factors are, in essence, divine archetypes. Some factors are dominant archetypes, eg., a sun sign Leo with Leo on a 10 b'day makes Leo a palpably dominant archetype in that individual. There are still a zillion other factors to consider in that person's number/astro archetype makeup. For example, masculine and feminine are divine archetypes, but no one person is purely masculine or feminine. We all have countless elements of both the masculine and feminine.<BR/><BR/>To say that numbers are superstition is to say that the divine archetypes are superstition. Nomo, did you read Meditation On The Tarot? If not, do yourself a favor and do so. Widen your vistas a little.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-7551235850916450482007-05-18T03:52:00.000-07:002007-05-18T03:52:00.000-07:00Maine,Yes. I didn't link to that article by accide...Maine,<BR/><BR/>Yes. I didn't link to that article by accident. The tabloid atmosphere surrounding even "legitimate" journalism is rampant and I think the media doesn't even recognize when it has its own hand in its jaw, chewing for news. As I said, maybe all isn't right with that world. <BR/>I'll stick to my point. The idea that anyone would hold up Fox News as an example of truth is remarkable in itself. Especially here.<BR/><BR/>I would rather you had commented on my Bob quote instead of the link. <BR/><BR/>I believe at heart that we each seek and find the supporting documentation for our own "inner cosmos" views in the external cosmos (as best we each perceive it). Period. The lens of objectivity is broken by the time we begin to look for that documentation. Somewhere in the operating system, way before the cognitive level we call "intellect", we develop a proclivity for skewing data so that it supports our own sense of who we are. Psychic survival mechanism. While Bob talks often to this process and its manifestation in the lives of "left" versus "us", I don't see evidence that many humans are capable of changing that origninal hardwiring. That ability seems to require some additional Divine Blessing. <BR/>And either God blesses our efforts (as opposed to only our results) or he doesn't. The idea that God gives no credit for the work done on the back, but only for the answer shown on the front, drove me from the Christian church as advertised in the media. The idea that Jesus was actually Christ brought me back to Christ. Not to today's Christians. <BR/><BR/>Which side of the left/right median one falls on doesn't seem to alter the proclivity for skewing data to one's own "righteous" end. That's why I offered the text excerpted from Bob's post.<BR/><BR/>Maybe it <I>is</I> as simple as one's "power number". Or maybe it's as complex as Will's ancient idea that we choose our circumstances before we ever get here. I'll go with the ancient idea. Although exactly why remains unknown to me. So far.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-86654867227458080652007-05-18T03:41:00.000-07:002007-05-18T03:41:00.000-07:00Cosa - numbers, along with astro do, to a certain ...Cosa - numbers, along with astro do, to a certain extent, put people in boxes, psychological boxes. So what? What's wrong with boxes? Fact is, people come in boxes - and each box is unique because each individual is unique. <BR/><BR/>Ever notice that Bob, as a psychologist, puts people into boxes with labels? Nothing wrong with that, in fact, it's rather necessary to do so. The terms leftist, conservative, secular, spiritual - boxes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com