Prophecy

I met contemporaries of ouspensky as a kid through travel before I ever read or saw mention and was turned on to gurdjieffs work by them. I just read Beelzebubs's Tales in the last eight years. I don't promote gurdjieffs philosophy but I do have a basis for adhering to the idea of esoteric teaching.

Esoteric teaching.

Not treated
Healed physically.

 

Your information is incorrect, as least as far as 'Beelzebub's Tales' are concerned.

It's more to do with Gurdjieff creating a myth in which all the problems of mankind can be assigned to a single cause. A bit like the Biblical concept of original sin.

I don't think the concept has any validity outside of the totality of Gurjieff's construction.

 

And it is in it's likeness to other forms that speaks to esoteric tradition. All differing systems differ by virtue of unique vocabulary or vernacular usage and penetrating them with aplomb is about familiarizing ourselves with peculiar dialects. It takes time to get to know some one for this very reason that our contextual use of language is locally impressed and the peculiar associations learned in one house aren't necessarily the same peculiar ones learned in another house even though the houses might be in the same neighborhood.

 

Well, no .. this is about the coccyx. I'm only just now exploring Gurdjieff but I got coccyx from thedope's link. http://gnosticteachings.org/books-by-samael-aun-weor/the-elimination-of-satans-tail/288-the-kundabuffer-organ.html

 

That touches upon my recent Language thread, and the reason for it, to look at the conflict in Language when we are not all speaking the same .. even though we are "in the same neighborhood" (using English).

 

I think a lot of perceived offense in language is the result of not really comprehending what is being said.

 

Clearly.

 

I disagree. I think it's abuse and conditioning.

 

Which because they are not the same. If it is conditioning then it is habit.

 

Which? Do you think it can be only one thing or the other? My use of the word and automatically indicates that they are not the same: abuse AND conditioning. So why are you restricting me to only one, or seemingly restricting me to only one, and then wiping out conditioning to replace it with another word? If it's habit to you, that's okay, but it's conditioning to me.

Here is a look at conditioning: https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140717050118-161099728-verbal-abuse-and-classical-conditioning

When a social atmosphere, and interactions, is experienced as ordinarily hostile / combative / abusive / negative / disruptive, a person might likely be conditioned to feel / think / believe that the intention is negative, when it might not be. That is my reason for use of the word conditioning.

Life on the internet makes matters more difficult (I think so). The internet brought out the worst in lots of people, where people have been very free with brutality and incivility. But this isn't news, isn't a revelation.

 

I am not restricting you but pointing out what is the same and what is different. I say it is not the same because to equate it to abuse confuses the fact that conditioning is positive reinforcement or a self reinforcing, not negative, feedback loop and if you think otherwise you denigrate the power of your own mind and think of yourself as victimized when the intention may not in fact be to victimize. As I have said many times the only intent that exists is extending self interest. Now there is social atmosphere and there is fundamental understanding and they are not the same.

 

I see why you rejected the word conditioning then. It means something positive to you, and it sure can have positive properties. But we were talking about offense so that's a negative. Sometimes a person is offended because something was offensive. Sometimes a person is offended because they've misunderstood. Sometimes a person is offended because, like I said, of abuse .. and conditioning.

Well then, I don't entirely disagree .. I just have a more honed focus on one aspect of how and why people are offended.

Where to now, thedope?

 

No dear what I objected to was equating conditioning with the word abuse. To confuse the two or hone in on one aspect of a dynamic as you have perpetuates the habit or conditioning and you find yourself repeatedly offended as a result producing varying degrees of ignorance on your part when I know darn well you don't won't to ignore people but be well received by them.
Taking offense and being rude are both extensions of the same vain misapprehension or misunderstanding of motive.

 

I understood that quite fine, thedope, I think you just don't like my choice of words.

You made your clarification for your value of the word conditioning and I made mine. Per your own clarification, the word conditioning means something different to you. I gave you the link for an example of conditioning. I haven't misused the word, in my meaning and use of it.

You said it is somebody's misunderstanding of something that makes them offended. I disagreed, but through progress of our chat here, I adjusted it to say that I don't entirely disagree. In my saying "Sometimes a person is offended because they've misunderstood.", I have agreed with you but I still focus on matters and issues of abuse. But, people might be prone to misunderstand, since abuse can cause mental / emotional difficulties. Abuse is abuse, the harm and damage it causes needs to always be held to the cause: abuse, and never put upon some other excuse, such as chemical imbalances or some such thing.

 

Very astute observations there.

I think it's necessary to be very clear about what we mean by the words we use, especially when talking about anything of a philosophical, scientific or even esoteric nature.

Sometimes, in order to gain new knowledge or new insight it can be necessary to learn a whole new 'code of language'. This is something that I see in retrospect I have done many times. ,

And when discussing things in a forum such as this, you have to try to be sensitive to the nuances of meaning inherent in language. Just the difference between US and English English can cause confusion. Any kind of 'technical' term more so.

A sociologist and a Zen Master using the word 'void' can mean very different things.

 

By definition conditioning is a simple form of learning involving the formation, strengthening, or weakening of an association between a stimulus and a response. Abuse is a behavior which can condition but it is not synonymous with the word conditioning. Got it? You could say abused is a condition you find yourself in and I would also suggest that the idea of abused is also the result of conditioning. All thoughts must be cultivated to materialize in time.

Habit or conditioned response is not indelible conditioning as we can change our mind or grow new dendritic pathways in the mind and therefor change habitual response and at the same time your supposed indelible damage. The only reason to preserve the idea of victimization is to preserve it and the reason to preserve the idea is secondary benefit or the sympathetic response. I think all pathetic sympaticos are the same and I really don't have time for people who feel sorry. It is just a sorry ass excuse for a lazy mind. Uproot suffering.

 

thedope, I don't need you to correct me. I said what I meant, I meant what I said. I'm not mistaken in my use of the word conditioning.

This thread is wayyy off topic, and I'm letting this rest here now.

 

Sweet dreams...

 

That's not what I said, thedope. Don't attribute your sentiments to me as if they were mine, now. I said I don't need you to correct me. And I don't. Can't tell if you're messing around, playing .. or if you're basically flipping me off with an unspoken fuck you. sigh...

 

Interesting to see how this little flare has manifest itself elsewhere. Someone's status update I found interesting, as that person's status updates usually are. I replied. BAM, that's the problem. It has nothing to do with anything I said and everything to do with the specific person replying. Period.

And, true .. my thoughts in response weren't deep in the least. They flew right off my fingertips and I don't see anything wrong, at all, with the thoughts I shared. It's just PERSONAL.

I did nothing to that person. Nothing at all. We've never interacted before. I said a pleasant goodbye as I bowed out, but was attacked in response to that. That's all you.

Oh. And I'll also note that I have not seen that person be SO negative before. Of course, I'm not overly-familiar with that person .. but familiar enough. What's with *YOUR* negativity .. .and excuse you. Please don't blame *YOUR* negativity on me. Thanks.