Mind Reading

[HatingMeIsEasier]

Telling people what they are is a cake walk.

Telling people what they are by cross-referencing their behavioral to the Universe’s behavioral is a cosmic walk. (i.e explaining how males and females procreate by referring to super-atomic phenomenon called stars and black holes).

[Arcturus_Descending]

HatingMeIsEasier

Telling people what they are is a cake walk.

but it might become a dust bowl.

explaining how males and females procreate by referring to super-atomic phenomenon called stars and black holes).

lol That one I would like explained here.

[HatingMeIsEasier]

@Arcturus Descending

HatingMeIsEasier

Telling people what they are is a cake walk.

but it might become a dust bowl.

explaining how males and females procreate by referring to super-atomic phenomenon called stars and black holes).

lol That one I would like explained here.

It’s already a dust bowl.

When times are tough, it’s then a dust devil.

As for the black holes and the stars, allow me to demonstrate.

“The Male Penis Is To The Volcano And The Exploding Star…”

As the female vagina is to the soil and the sucking black hole.

The male penis is the female vagina inside-out. The star is the black hole inside-out.

The female vagina is the male penis outside-in. The black hole is the star outside-in.

The male creatures’ life’s purpose is to build up energy and release energy.

The female creatures’ life’s purpose is to absorb released energy and create more life.

The star’s life’s purpose is to build up energy and release energy.

The black hole’s life’s purpose is to absorb released energy and create more life.

This looks like my girlfriend’s vagina:

This looks like my boyfriend’s penis:

The gods of love, creation and destruction."

[Arcturus_Descending]

Those images are awesome.
Do you suffer from DID though?
I’m still contemplating your texts above though.

[phoneutria]

I’m pretty easy to read. What am I thinking now?
First to guess right gets a cookie.

[Orbie]

You are thinking of…ERIC.

[phoneutria]

No cookie for you, dear.
But here are some balloons with faces drawn on them, for trying.

[Wizard]

@obe

I had to start a new blog because my laptop has bugs.

I went back to the orginal thesis, in which You related
a lack of expectations, as the requirement for further
understanding. I read You here, and the corollary here in practical terms is 'do not judge, lest you be judged. Judging involves a hidden expectation, whether knowingly, or not. The problem here is, that man is a creature of habit, and we all at times find ourself doing this. Now if one person interacting with another, or, within a group, the difficulty arises, that
the hidden aspects , sometimes hidden from one, may interfere with other’s, presumingly all trying to discount, or, give the benifit of doubt to, the other(s)

That said, the the ascertained levels of each individual may not be set, but may remain in suspended animation, a fluid dynamic of expectation, now this beyond mere body language, of how exactly to respond. I do not see, apart from body language, how expectation can be discounted from the interaction, because as soon as one word is uttered, the interpretive mind goes into drive, and tries to construct an appropriate response on the basis of
that.

 My feeling is at this point, that that is not the 'kind' of expectation You are implying.  Maybe it has to do with starting of with gross aggregates of minimum expectations, as You would from a common, or average man.  Here is another problem.The minute a subscription to that is assumed, the averige man may feel slighted, condescended toward, or far worse.  Such assumptions are difficult to make, for the other may feel more than average, and may feel it is common in the derogtory sense to make such an assumption.

Now my retort may have been a defensive move on my part to pre-empt any furtherance in this discussion, and may be making a mistake even as i am trying to communicate to You, hoping You have not expired yet, after Your first communication.

 On that score i am hoping You are still well, and if You are not as of yet reading these lines, You may be very soon.  My project is two fold regarding mind reading.  First, noting Arcturus suggestion to be able to find a relaxed sense of peace, find clarity.  The with a reasonable sense of that, to be able to differentiate the problem we are discussing, as one, which is in the realm of need, or one of want.  

 I assure You, it is not the latter, of which i am convinced.  In light of that, mind reading has , at least for me, evolved to the third stage, even beyond finding meaning, between the lines, to receive meaning in extra-ordinary ways.

 In a sense, i would like to resolve this issue of the secondary kind, but the hindrance is, that the third, seems to always have taken a center position for me.

It is very connected, almost to an ‘intrusion’ if i may call it that, but nowedays, it has been accepted as a ‘good thing’, a helpful ally, upon which a dare not depend, but has guided the enormity of unresolved secondary processes.

 Detail would be futile at this point, and not even of much interest, however suffice it to say, that i have had times when i found myself in the position of trying (having to) integrate them. If this process fails, the reliance becomes on the highes function, it takes over as if by auto pilot, and since there is no basisfor it, it appears as a message.  Not an auditory one, in my case, thank God, but an understanding, that it is coming from a synchronous source.  If i were to try to remove this from any and all expectation, then i am positive, the 'system' would not allow it.  There are no overrides.

I hope, that You only take relevant (to You) parts of my response to You as a useful part of the substance of what we are, and maybe shall be discussing in the future of this thread, notwhitstanding unnecessary or unessential parts.

Of course there are levels to mind reading as there are levels of the mind, brain, and whole cognitive system.

To read a mind corresponds with intellectual ability. A higher intelligence can read, dominate and control, a lesser intelligence. For example humans regularly civilize and even slaughter animals (cows) for consumption. The cow represents a lower intelligence. Intelligence is not, and never is, “equal”. There are always differences of intellectual ability, as there are differences in intelligence, even though some organisms are closer to others. Is humanity, is man, the highest intelligence in the known and unknown universe? No, of course not, there are organisms more “evolved” or simply more intelligent than humans. There maybe organisms (gods) hundreds of times more powerful and intelligent than humans. However first intelligence must be discovered and exposed. What is intelligence? What is its function? Which parts of the cognition does intelligence represent? Because isn’t imagination different than intelligence?

Presumably, to read minds, you want high intelligence. And to read the most minds of most organisms, you want the highest intelligence. Therefore, what does intelligent consist? What is the embodiment of intelligence?

And here I will offer a small insight. The embodiment of intelligence is the form of a creature, its structure and specie. Its type. Its movement. Its behavior. Its survival.

All reflections of intelligence. Because intelligence is an extension of the mind, that exerts itself (willpower) outward. All organisms do this, even bacteria and viruses. Therefore intelligence is constituted by all life. Just because the minds, consciousness, and cognition of some organisms cannot be perceived, doesn’t mean its not there. Because a bacteria or virus is not just one cell or body. It is many. And most organisms are known through their social composition, a group, an organ, a tissue. A complex of intermoving parts.

Some people reject the idea of “higher and lower” intelligence, in favor of a political agenda. These types will claim that we’re “all equal” and all capable of the same intellect. As if intelligence were nurtured, or could be nurtured. These types ignore the possibility that intelligence is all natural. And can only be natural. There are other types who reassert the mind-body dichotomy, separation of subject and object, into dualism. These are the dualist philosophers and their ilk, their breed of thought. So they posit that intelligence has material limits.

They would claim that intelligence is not “within” the hand or arm or leg or foot. Intelligence is mind-dependent, of the brain and only the brain. But these types fail to conceive the whole. Is the mind rooted in the body?

Or isn’t the body rooted in the mind? Which is primary? The dualist philosophies only go so far before refusing to answer such questions.

A man can read the mind of a dog or cat quite easily. So next obe, you and I will consider one man reading the mind of another man. The two of us will consider one man of slightly higher and lower intellect respectively. Can the man with lower intellect read the mind of the man with higher intellect? Or vice versa?

[Wizard]

@phoneutria

I’m pretty easy to read. What am I thinking now?
First to guess right gets a cookie.

The better question is, why would you want anybody to care what you’re thinking?

[phoneutria]

Because I do the world a service when I derail your threads.

[Orbie]

Intelligence levels have something to do with it, if levels of intelligence is considered as structurally discernible. Absent that, higher and lower may make little difference. How does discernment, distinguish from a general understanding? In that sense the only factors which come into play, is hystoricism, where the distinguishing or period features come into play? If at any point, then the burden is on both the school or author responsible for it, and the perceiver, the reader and the interpreter. Levels hVE TO BE REACHED, BETWEEN LEVELS, satisfactorily available qua that levelof understanding. This is not descending or in ascending in intelligence it’s self, (if there is such a thing) but of communicating toward a common understanding? A dog, or a dog like being may be as intelligent perchance cunning as an Einstein, or a Hitler, however, they mayn not have access;to channels whic buil bridges toward common understanding. No wonder much of psychology was started with observing dog behavior, and ironically leading toward a hands up, furitive research into behavior, via it’s self, behavioralism.

[Wizard]

@obe

A dog, or a dog like being may be as intelligent perchance cunning as an Einstein, or a Hitler,

This is an error, because certain levels of intelligence maybe incapable of “overcoming” other levels of intelligence.

For example, obe, just because a virus kills a man, doesn’t mean the virus is necessarily “more intelligent” than the man.

This is where the definition of intelligence becomes conflated with survival. Does intelligence necessarily confer more survival in a specie? Maybe, yes.

If you presume that intelligence is directly correlated with survival, then yes, you’re correct. But this is too big a presumption to make, at this point in the conversation. Let’s move onto understanding “higher and lower” intelligence.

[Wizard]

Just because a “lower intelligence” may kill and predate, consume a higher intelligence, doesn’t make that “lower intelligence” any higher.

[HatingMeIsEasier]

@Arcturus Descending

Those images are awesome.
Do you suffer from DID though?
I’m still contemplating your texts above though.

I suffer from nothing more than a barrage of ideas beyond my human senses that conflict with the infinite eye of ignorance here in this world I must take with only a stride.

[Orbie]

wisard yes, but…the smallest micro organism has more intelligence than the highest level supercomputr and you know why? Becuase supercomputers afre burdened by tons of memory, they are not free to realiz how Being is doing the very thing you are objecting to, the confusion of a differentially derived identty,between consciousness and sub consciousness, of course the existential motive will usurp that of evaluation of the self, it can not but not to, it will compress the two into aaa flat sandwich of the edible sort, (which is really a quack’s mysterious alchemical solution, based on anti taste, the differentially deraggulation of which, is a sine qua non, of breeding and really good taste.
This is Crowley , not me here, just chanelled his rel intent out of the dilemma of the very confusion You are implying at… Too modernly incomprehensively You say, i feel comfortable with it, and the premontion that the deontology of consciousnes is no better than a dog’s is proof.
The best friend of some, will verily bear this out? But it is You, who meant to amaze me, and really ,what was the composure of that seminal poisonous hemlock out of which he had to drink?
Let’s face it for all the beheadings for far lesser crimes as these. It is down to that.
The Saints are down? If You could tell me the name of the group, i will really be amazed. (they did it ambiguously to sound ike saint satan, if you would really listen to the lyrics. Again please skip this diatribe, excusable as it is, for lack of relevance)

[Orbie]

my faith in Your amazement!

[Orbie]

ezra pound

[Orbie]

@obe

xxx was going to refer to the Cantos of this guy, asked wiliam burroughs if he ever read itmand he evaded the quesYou can remeber who wrote the Cantos,amazement. ++++This is the type of stuff Fixed was referring to in his new forum. But i bet i can loo it up before You may have a chance to answer me.

[Orbie]

era pound. forget all i said about looking up his name, it just didn’t come to me. Will try to associate one of is cantos with seminal ideas that is all.

[Orbie]

Ezra Pound '“Veritas est semen quod fuctum non facit” Ezra Pound metaphorized the brain as a great clot of seminal fluid…

I brought this up with William Burroughs inn1982 at Boulder, and he dismissed it, by being unfamiliar with ut. A professor of English laterasked me about the source and i coukd not give it because my cooy of it was lost,

There are detractorsm, but the following isan interestin paraphrase here, (incidentally i am usinng this metaphore onky to buttress my ever growing conviction of an increasing convictin fa tie in to the occuot here.

Richard Sieburth sees little of the occult in the de Gourment’s influence onn Poun. ; but his list of ideas shared by de Gurment and Pound fits cimfortably into an ccut ambience.

"All these terms ,; clarity, process (tao) and liquiid light in cnjuntion to sexuak=l forces joined with love, lustre, and fluidity, form an ideogram absoutely central to the Cantos.