Okay, that’s great.
As I have continually wanted, please keep presenting “your views” to the readers here.
Okay. As long as ‘they’ are only a guess of yours to be more delusional than ‘me’, this works just as well for me.
Yes. And like all “cult leaders” they get followers to say and do what they want.
If they are skilled enough interpersonally to get followers.
And generally they need to meet people desperate in some way to be told what to do and think.
Your skills are not very good, but with the right damaged people, who knows. I’ll just have to hope you don’t have the courage to do this in person.
Are you absolutely and irrefutably sure of this?
To me, this sounds exactly like the culture you are within.
We can all say, “A healthy [such and such] tolerates [whatever]”. but this never ever means that the current [such and such] is a healthy one.
Will you list the ‘current cultures’, which you believe are the ‘healthy ones’?
So, are the people living in the oxymoron “united states of america” living in a ‘cult’ or in a ‘culture’?
Can you name a ‘culture’ where the so-called “leaders” can be questioned on absolutely everything?
Could what you people be living in, or under, actually be more like ‘cults’, which you are just not yet aware?
Once more,
LOL one does not have to be a ‘conscious follower’ to be ‘led’ and be ‘following’.
If this is what you would like to believe is true, then this will keep helping you believe, absolutely, that you are not currently in a ‘cult’.
My skills are, supposedly, not very good in regard to what exactly?
Okay.
I know you think your position is the default position and everyone has to prove you are wrong to your satisfaction and when they don’t or don’t bother this proves your position. Perhaps try a philosophy 101 class, since ‘in a philosophy forum of all places’ is a favorite outrage of yours, yet you know little about basic logic.
Why would I want to? A person who cannot get his needs met by people currently alive and so uses people currently alive to get his needs met through his fantasy of the reactions of people not alive yet. I fail to see the attraction. Maybe there is a Ken way down deep in there screaming in pain. Maybe not. But there is nothing to chase. However, if you could read for context, you’d realize that trying to get you to acknowledge your many assumptions, logical errors and fallacies would be like chasing a squirrel with salad tongs. It’s not a chase I’m interested in. You never do. I don’t rule it out happening, but I’d buy lottery tickets before betting on your doing it.
You’re a cult leader with a cult of one. Poor Ken.
Once more, what you think you know could not be more Wrong and more Incorrect.
So, now this one believes, absolutely, that it is I who knows little about basic logic.
The answer to your question here is something you will find if you ever delve deeply within “yourself”.
Asking others to provide you with answers that you are best to answer will not help you here.
Could you communicate and present your belief here better?
This is just because you are, still, not even remotely close to understanding what I am actually achieving here, by using people like you “iwannaplato” here
Again, you sound like you are speaking from experience, “iwannaplato”, screaming out and trying to be heard through “greenfuse” this time.
Are you suggesting that you have found it all, and there is absolutely nothing for you to look for and/or chase after?
Okay, but I gave up a long time ago to 1) get you to just notice what you are doing here, as well as, 2) get you to understand how you can find and see the actual Truth of things.
Okay, but considering that it was certainly not a chase that I was talking about, it is a chase that only you imagined up and wrote about.
Okay, will you let us know how you went?
you must of also missed, or forgotten, that I have absolutely no interest at all in having followers, nor of being a leader of absolutely anyone, “iwannaplato”.
One day this fact might sink in, as some would say.
But then you haven’t called it inaccurate? —Sorry, Inaccurate. You’re response wasn’t Redundant enough nor was it Repetitive enough. And while you did capitalize the first letters in two adjectives, I think capitalizing the first letter of ‘think’ for emphasis, gives your post an even more oracular feel. You are The Mind. You want to sound Special and Unique if you are The Mind.
Ah, you also have problems understanding conditional sentences.
Yes, when they are communicating metaphorically which you have suggested one shouldn’t in philosophy forums.
But actually you must of - love the grammatically incorrect but street English here - missed that a cult of one is an oxymoron, but you do have trouble with tropes. Here I’ll be vague and mysterious like you: but perhaps you haven’t considered that I might not be Communicating or Discussing with you.
Again, another claim and statement with a question mark at the end of it.
Why are you, supposedly, apologising for here exactly?
Do you even know what the actual difference is between the two?
If yes, then what is the difference, exactly?
Okay. Are you asking for more repetition?
Also, note how this one does not seek out any clarification at all, which some might imply as meaning it already knew exactly how what it claims to know is actually what is Wrong and Incorrect. After all, it should already know considering the fact that I have never meant anything like that absolutely anywhere in ‘my writings’.
Noted, I will Think about doing that from now on.
LOL Once more, what you Think you know could not be more Wrong and more Incorrect.
you are exactly like “atla” in your inability to read ‘my words’ and comprehend what they are actually saying and meaning.
Once more, I will suggest you, and “atla”, just stop pre/assuming and dis/believing things, remain absolutely open, and just seek out and obtain clarification and clarity first.
Again, that way your own personal interpretations will not be as Wrong as they are nor as often as they are. In fact, if you two just did as I suggest, your interpretations will never ever be Wrong ever again.
Is this what you think, know, or believe?
If this is what you want to believe is absolutely true, then this is, again, perfectly fine and okay with me.
you appear to have an issue understanding just about all of my sentences.
Okay, why do you love it?
you do express quite many oxymoronic ideas and views, some of which you have even missed.
Which definition of ‘tropes’ are you using here, exactly?
Perhaps, but then again, maybe perhaps not.
Yes, when they are communicating metaphorically which you have suggested one shouldn’t in philosophy forums.
But actually you must of - love the grammatically incorrect but street English here - missed that a cult of one is an oxymoron, but you do have trouble with tropes. Here I’ll be vague and mysterious like you: but perhaps you haven’t considered that I might not be Communicating or Discussing with you.
Because I didn’t capitalize it. It should be capitalized just like Wrong and Incorrect were capitalized. Without this the specialness of you and the ‘message’ might be Missed and Not Seen.
Once again the Knight of The Mind shows us its Boldness and Bravery.
- Jim Jones (Peoples Temple): “If you see me as your father, I’ll be your father. If you see me as your friend, I’ll be your friend. If you see me as your God, I’ll be your God. You must give me your mind.”
- Keith Raniere (NXIVM): “Clarity is the removal of the obstacles to the truth. To gain it, you must be willing to sacrifice your internal consistency for a higher integration.”
- Marshall Applewhite (Heaven’s Gate): “You must be willing to abandon everything of this world, including your own human mind, to be open to the Next Level.”
- Anne Hamilton-Byrne (The Family): “You have to unlearn everything that you’d learned before—since your birth, literally. You must accept the role of a fool to be filled with the Light.”
- Sun Myung Moon (Unification Church): “Absolute obedience does not lead you to death. What happens when you obey? You become one with the person you obey… You must have no will of your own.”
- Shoko Asahara (Aum Shinrikyo): “The only way to reach the truth is through absolute surrender to the Guru. You must stop your own thinking and simply receive.”
- David Koresh (Branch Davidians): “No man can know me nor my father unless they open their book and give a fair chance in honesty and equity to see the seals.”
- Luc Jouret (Order of the Solar Temple): “The transition requires the total surrender of the earthly self. Do not question the path; simply remain open to the source.”
- Charles Manson (The Manson Family): “Look down at me and you see a fool; look up at me and you see a god; look straight at me and you see yourself. Open your mind and let me in.”
Wow. You usually tell me I believe this absolutely. And each time you have been wrong in your assertions, but in your world those assertions were not beliefs.
A common ego issue is to conflate disagreement or lack of interest with lack of understanding. Here are how some cult leaders frame the same thing:
-
Osho (Rajneesh): “If you understand me, you will agree with me. If you do not agree, it simply means you have not heard me yet. To hear me is to be me; there is no other way.”
-
Keith Raniere (NXIVM): “If you are having a reaction to the logic, it is because you have a ‘breach’ in your own integration. You aren’t disagreeing with the truth; you are simply failing to perceive it clearly because of your own baggage.”
-
Werner Erhard (EST/Landmark): “If you don’t ‘get’ it, you don’t ‘get’ it. Your trying to understand it is actually the barrier to getting it. You are using your old, broken mind to measure a new reality.”
-
Andrew Cohen (EnlightenNext): “Any resistance you feel toward the teaching is just your ego trying to protect itself from a truth it cannot comprehend. You don’t have a difference of opinion; you have a lack of evolutionary clarity.”
-
John de Ruiter: “When you argue, you are consulting your mind instead of the truth. If you were truly open and had clarity, the argument would vanish because the truth is self-evident to those who can see.”
-
Frederick Lenz (Zen Master Rama): “If my words seem confusing or contradictory, it is only because your mind is cluttered with old concepts. You are trying to put the ocean into a thimble. You don’t need to argue; you need to expand.”
-
Sun Myung Moon (Unification Church): “Truth is absolute. If you find yourself in doubt, it is not because the Truth is flawed, but because your spirit is not yet clear enough to reflect the Divine image.”
-
Prem Rawat (Maharaji): “I am showing you the sun. If you say you don’t see it, I don’t need to argue with you. I only need to tell you to open your eyes. To disagree with the light is simply to be blind.”
-
Adnan Oktar: “These are absolute scientific and faith-based facts. Anyone who denies them is simply under the ‘spell’ of ignorance. They do not have a counter-argument; they only have a lack of realization.”
I do appreciate the lesson in cult grooming you embody.
It’s creative. Not on your part, but by the people who followed contractions like must’ve phonetically to must of. A bit like the rise of ‘gonna.’ It’s the language of the people, just as slang and idiomatic speech are.
Ah, I was silly to challenge the master of the non-statement.
Assignioli developed these ideas between 1910 and 1926.
The Dual Center of Psychosynthesis
Roberto Assagioli’s model of the human psyche is built on the radical act of disidentification. He posits that we are not our thoughts, feelings, or sensations, but rather the observer of them. At the heart of this “bureaucracy of the soul” is the “I,” the personal center of pure self-awareness and will. Assagioli explains:
“We are dominated by everything with which our self becomes identified. We can dominate and control everything from which we disidentify ourselves.”
While the “I” acts as the temporary, conscious representative in daily life, it is merely a reflection of the Self (the Transpersonal Self). The Self is the permanent, ontological center that remains unaffected by the “noise” of personality. Assagioli describes the Self as:
“A center of dynamic life that is independent of the body and the mind… the ‘Sun’ to the ‘I’s’ reflection.”
By practicing the “Bridge” of disidentification, the individual moves from being a puppet of their “mind” to a sovereign observer, eventually realizing that the personal “I” and the universal “Self” are essentially one.
Okay, so you love what you claim is “incorrect”. ‘Gotya’. And, as always, you can take that in absolutely anyway you would like to.
Well, ‘must of’ is incorrect if one is trying to write formal English. I don’t know what your Intent or Goal was. If your goal was to write Correct and Accurate English, which it has often seemed was your goal, you failed. But if you were trying to be Expressive, it succeeded. It’s the type of thing a child says, so that nuance, the child’s presence, is Added and Included.