The Matrix

[Tyger]

This is the satirist JP Sears going at it -

Using Ayahuasca - Ultra Spiritual Life episode 5 - with JP Sears

 

[Jeff Davis]

I suspect the ultimate answer will prove those distinctions [Internal vs External] to be quite arbitrary; and in the end, completely irrelevant. The ole dictum "As Above, So Below" could be changed to "As Within, So Wihout".

I think that is the secret that magicians and esoteric practitioners came to uncover: That the human mind is a key by which one can 'hack' the software of Reality itself.

And this my friend, the emboldened above, is the very crux of my personal beliefs with respect to the entire Fortean realm apart from naturally occurring quirks. I'm thinking that as this realm demonstrates to our conscious awareness, via culturally familiar phenomenal iconic observational intersections with us, that it is attempting to communicate as effectively and directly as possible with us. Possibly such a force can only do so at a level so deep and powerful within the fabric of our reality (consciousness) itself that our minds typically boggle and get all hung up on the esthetic noise of assembly so to speak. So much so that we loose the meaning that it's attempting to convey. It's almost like it speaks pure sentience, only communicating by a means of a whole projected observational sensory experience within the realm of our awareness. Possibly it's using powerful iconic memes from our collective imagination's memories that are just powerfully familiar enough, and yet just obtusely askew enough, as if to show us the absurd potential ability that we ourselves have to model and willfully control reality via our natural orientation in this universal realm called consciousness.

It's subtle force could be so powerful that it literally serves to remodel the brain's experiential wiring such that the result could be expressed genetically via one's lineage in terms of exponential generational potentials to come.

All of this could be represent of humanity being in the process of progressively expressing it's natural ongoing sentient development (evolution) via the relation we all share to and with that single living mind that our Zen friends allude to. I'm thinking that we "power" that big mind (consciousness) by means of what are our bioelectric cognitive mechanics and this produces what we call experience or reality.

Further, this massive medium called consciousness may in fact support many native diversities with respect to independent sentient intelligence.

Further again, this medium may represent the substrate upon which the many worlds freeway resides.

I'm just thinking that as a matter of totally insane maniacal gibberish that, UFOs may produce an envelope of artificial consciousness, controlled by an internal, or remote artificial intelligence, that allows them willful interactive navigation within the relationship that we directly share with this medium. Consciousness submarines of the mind so to speak. ;-)

 

[red_pill_junkie]

All of this could be represent of humanity being in the process of progressively expressing it's natural ongoing sentient development (evolution) via the relation we all share to and with that single living mind that our Zen friends allude to. I'm thinking that we "power" that big mind (consciousness) by means of what are our bioelectric cognitive mechanics and this produces what we call experience or reality.

Further, this massive medium called consciousness may in fact support many native diversities with respect to independent sentient intelligence.

Further again, this medium may represent the substrate upon which the many worlds freeway resides.

I'm just thinking that as a matter of totally insane maniacal gibberish that, UFOs may produce an envelope of artificial consciousness, controlled by an internal, or remote artificial intelligence, that allows them willful interactive navigation within the relationship that we directly share with this medium. Consciousness submarines of the mind so to speak. ;-)

Or, as Athomepaul originally suggested, the 'computer cursor' of the Universe's Metaconsciousness

Speaking of Evolution, I've always liked that phrase from Whitley Strieber when he said that this (the UFO phenomenon and the abduction experience) might be what Evolution looks like to the conscious mind.

And, since I like it so damn much, I feel inclined to link (again) to this wonderful video in which comic book writer Grant Morrison explains what it's all about:

 

[Burnt State]

Or, as Athomepaul originally suggested, the 'computer cursor' of the Universe's Metaconsciousness

Speaking of Evolution, I've always liked that phrase from Whitley Strieber when he said that this (the UFO phenomenon and the abduction experience) might be what Evolution looks like to the conscious mind.

And, since I like it so damn much, I feel inclined to link (again) to this wonderful video in which comic book writer Grant Morrison explains what it's all about:

Great video. Everyone should be allowed to get drunk and enthusiastically expound on occultism for 45 min. at a time if they can make sense the way Grant does. I thoroughly enjoyed his talk on how in an age of surveillance the body politic goes to further extremes and planted inside these actions are the seeds of a social revolution. Unfortunately the buggers who control the world always seem able to pay people to police, kettle, or subdue the masses; in various parts of the world such fascist violence easily translates into mass killings, mass disappearances or mass graves. So I don't hold out too much hope on the subdued consumer masses in the west breaking too far out of the molds of control and passivity. But we can still dream about wild abandon in the streets and the transformation of the masses.

 

[Jeff Davis]

I think one of the most fascinating and "telling" of the references to the influentially malleable, and meme derived/built nature of reality, is all the talk/vibe coming from the comic book realm concerning it's characterized influence on reality. We have seen this in Science Fiction a thousand times if once, but on a much larger and typically socially stabilized level.

Here is a brilliant insight I recently read that RPJ was already hip to prior to me even reading it. You can read his take here:Meeting Their Makers: The Strange Phenomenon of Fictional Characters Turning Up in Real Life | The Daily Grail , and feedback in whatever way you see fit.

In this world, it seems that many things are hid in plain sight. Take for instance the creation reference in the bible. If we could assume just for moment that the essence of pure consciousness were God, and man was created in God's image, would therefore not man's reflection, and all that his eyes see that this reflection encompasses, be the creative essence of our existence within reality? In this sense we would almost seem to exist within a natural interdependent loop with God being the essence of all that is possible as determined by it's own creation. It is interesting to note that each day we return from whence we came, namely, dreams.

How many meanings are lost to the iconic nature of our egos?

 

[red_pill_junkie]

[QUOTE="Jeff Davis, post: 221802, member: 5483"[...] It is interesting to note that each day we return from whence we came, namely, dreams.

How many meanings are lost to the iconic nature of our egos?[/QUOTE]

Comic book writer/Magician Alan Moore often says we humans are amphibians; meaning we live in both the world of material things, but also in the world of ideas. From that point of view, artists and great thinkers are like scuba divers, who dare to plunge deeper than anyone else, in search of pearls they can bring back and share with the rest of us.

And now I'm reminded of something Whitley Strieber wrote about, which his own son told him once when they were reading haikus: That 'they' (the visitors) deep inside were also like haikus.

 

[Tyger]

It is interesting to note that each day we return from whence we came, namely, dreams. How many meanings are lost to the iconic nature of our egos?

Comic book writer/Magician Alan Moore often says we humans are amphibians; meaning we live in both the world of material things, but also in the world of ideas. From that point of view, artists and great thinkers are like scuba divers, who dare to plunge deeper than anyone else, in search of pearls they can bring back and share with the rest of us.

And now I'm reminded of something Whitley Strieber wrote about, which his own son told him once when they were reading haikus: That 'they' (the visitors) deep inside were also like haikus.

Interesting stuff. Coming out of the arcane as I do, I can say that it is a 'given' that everything in the ideational world has an element of truth in it - that is why it 'floats'. Sometimes I liken it to a fun-house mirror effect: our minds distort the image/truth at the core. (That said, an objective reality is a given, a la Plato. All is a reflection of that one way or another).

The history of ideas is littered with images that were just sufficiently 'askew' as to miss the reality mark, but they were in the ballpark, and in hindsight we can see what was happening. Consider something as simple as thinking the world is flat - watching a sailing ship 'disappear' over the horizon looks for all the world like 'falling off' something (though thinking the analogy through would cause the analogy to fall apart when the ship returns with sailors and ship having 'fallen' no where in their subjective experience).

There were things the Greeks knew about mechanics, for example, that should have translated, could have translated, into advanced technology, yet because of their world-view, made advanced technology (as we know it, that is), not only impossible for them, but inconceivable.

 

[Burnt State]

Ok, now this thread is cooking.

 

[Wade]

I think one of the most fascinating and "telling" of the references to the influentially malleable, and meme derived/built nature of reality, is all the talk/vibe coming from the comic book realm concerning it's characterized influence on reality. We have seen this in Science Fiction a thousand times if once, but on a much larger and typically socially stabilized level.

Here is a brilliant insight I recently read that RPJ was already hip to prior to me even reading it. You can read his take here:Meeting Their Makers: The Strange Phenomenon of Fictional Characters Turning Up in Real Life | The Daily Grail , and feedback in whatever way you see fit.

In this world, it seems that many things are hid in plain sight. Take for instance the creation reference in the bible. If we could assume just for moment that the essence of pure consciousness were God, and man was created in God's image, would therefore not man's reflection, and all that his eyes see that this reflection encompasses, be the creative essence of our existence within reality? In this sense we would almost seem to exist within a natural interdependent loop with God being the essence of all that is possible as determined by it's own creation. It is interesting to note that each day we return from whence we came, namely, dreams.

How many meanings are lost to the iconic nature of our egos?

that article was an interesting read and i do like to toss the idea around of things being "tulpified" and that we can will such things into existance but then i ask myself if this is the case why don't we report more sightings of charlie brown or snoopy ? i wonder if mr. schultz ever reported bumping to a charlie brown archtype ever in his life, more likely he met one before he even sat down to do a story board and already had this archtype in mind, the qualities that charlie brown possessed wouldn't be unknown in other characters.certainly given the amount of time they have been around and their prominance around the world and certainly contained by millions in their conscious...although probably not necessarily concentrated...thought , why haven't we seen any personification of them. i suppose we could have but i've yet to come across any writings about charlie or snoopy as much as the manifestation of slenderman.

as far as a possible doppleganger i can see a possibility of that, as i have been told numerous times over the years by complete strangers in post office lines and such that they had seen my absolute double elsewhere earlier that day, or they have a friend that looks exactly like me ..to which my standard reply is if this person looks anything like me they have my sympathies.

my guess is if authors report bumping into their creations in everyday events, perhaps those creations are an amalgamation of people that these authors have had contact with and remember...even subconciously perhaps...and being an archtype you just know that some time eventually you're going to bump into another one and when you do...boom it hits you.

 

[Constance]

that article was an interesting read and i do like to toss the idea around of things being "tulpified" and that we can will such things into existance but then i ask myself if this is the case why don't we report more sightings of charlie brown or snoopy ?

Good question. Why do I not project an image of the Road Runner, who has intrigued and delighted me for years? Why have I not come across the likeness of St. Christopher, another favorite figure long-embedded in my imagination? Why have I not seen a recurrence of the gigantic glass-encased light hovering just off the wingtip of an airliner, first called to my attention by my three-year-old daughter one winter night in 1990? And why do so many people in our time apparently conjure up encounters with monsters of various sorts, and dwell on them?

I don't think we are archetypes, btw, or meet archetypes on the street. I think we're increasingly haunted by the idea of being haunted.

 

[Burnt State]

Perhaps what is seen is very dependent on context? It's not just what we obsess about but the setting and the stimulus that combine to create a mental prompt. We process imagery incredibly fast and it's done according to our individual history of seeing and our survivalist needs. When we see something previouly uncategorized by our brain, depending on the situation and the contours of the stimulus, that brain will reach into the filing cabinet and pull whatever seems most likely out of the brain's image library and provide you with a best estimate. Fear and other chemistry will also play a role in this process to best codify the stimulus.

Artist's seeing their creations seems perfectly natural. The visual construction of a character by an artist must fix their own contours and features in an intense manner and most likely imbued with much emotion. And for someone like Moore who also dwells in a world of images and symbolism it's not a wonder that they see their creation come to life. Flexible minds allow for such interpretations. Those who dwell deeply in the arcane may make many different kinds of associations with visual stimulus that those who live more mundan lives might not see at all.

 

[Constance]

Flexible minds allow for such interpretations.

Perhaps because they're bored silly with ordinarily experienced life?

 

[Tyger]

Or, as Athomepaul originally suggested, the 'computer cursor' of the Universe's Metaconsciousness

Speaking of Evolution, I've always liked that phrase from Whitley Strieber when he said that this (the UFO phenomenon and the abduction experience) might be what Evolution looks like to the conscious mind.

And, since I like it so damn much, I feel inclined to link (again) to this wonderful video in which comic book writer Grant Morrison explains what it's all about:

An interesting video. There is much in it. Cannot possibly comment on it all, but some features rose up to greet me on viewing.

His question as to what happens when everyone's desire becomes manifest: fact is, we are seeing it. We manifest all the time. The world we see is our manifestation. Having spoken to the idea of Manifestation (a la Neville Goddard) - and having heard posters here dismiss the suppositions of writings like The Secret (which I have never read but understand to be in the vein of Manifestation or with New Thought lineage) - it is striking to me that this man can so openly discuss this and get credence. It is, of course, a matter of what we are desiring that is getting manifested. Where people focus their intentions - be wary! Beware!

The whole money aspect he stumbles into and rather briefly summarizes - puzzling and questionable. Didn't follow him.

His inner creative process, as he describes it, seems similar to all artists working out their inner demons.

Definitely a Worker - a magus - of a particular grade/standing. That he was giving the indications for Sigil Magic is interesting. Sorcery indulged in without knowledge is always a dicey affair - but hey! we must all learn. He clearly is doing it the hard way.

The whole individual as 'not important' as distinct from the current celebration of the individual was garbled to me. However, this I got loud and clear - the pervading thought these days that 'the earth will go on without mankind' - that mankind is not consequential. This is a fallacy - as is the belief that humanity is not the 'center' of creation - I say that coming out of Occultism - though it is also an (Esoteric) Christian view.

This is a fundamental crisis of thinking - the belief that 'we' are unimportant. As we have learned that even wolves in Yosemite have significance to whole realms of life and even geological formations - so, too, mankind has enormous significance to existence. But of course in Occultism it is postulated that humanity has always been present on the earth or within the realm of earth. Even when no physical humanity trod the ground we were here in other forms, complicit in the shaping of the creator gods. Even were we to be wiped off the face of the earth (unlikely) we would still be here, albeit not physically. The earth cannot maintain without us. It's a story.

 

[Burnt State]

Perhaps because they're bored silly with ordinarily experienced life?

aren't all artists, hence their need to create, destroy and recreate? have they not remade the world in their own vision?

 

[Jeff Davis]

Good question. Why do I not project an image of the Road Runner, who has intrigued and delighted me for years? Why have I not come across the likeness of St. Christopher, another favorite figure long-embedded in my imagination? Why have I not seen a recurrence of the gigantic glass-encased light hovering just off the wingtip of an airliner, first called to my attention by my three-year-old daughter one winter night in 1990? And why do so many people in our time apparently conjure up encounters with monsters of various sorts, and dwell on them?

I don't think we are archetypes, btw, or meet archetypes on the street. I think we're increasingly haunted by the idea of being haunted.

There is a future Paracast show that is being, seemingly quite synchronously, recorded today. I believe it will tie in perfectly with this conversation. The guest is a truly great guy that I know would fit right in here in this forum. The topic of this show is literally the precise subject matter that this thread has evolved to include, that we are now exploring. I cannot recommend Eric's writings highly enough. It's my thought that having come this far in this very interesting discussion, each and everyone of us here would both enjoy and benefit from their relevant and well timed content. Coincidence, Chaos, & Archetypes: Eric Wargo will be our GUEST | The Paracast Community Forums

 

[red_pill_junkie]

aren't all artists, hence their need to create, destroy and recreate? have they not remade the world in their own vision?

"Happy people don't build civilizations." ~Baroness Susan Greenfield

 

[red_pill_junkie]

This is a fundamental crisis of thinking - the belief that 'we' are unimportant. As we have learned that even wolves in Yosemite have significance to whole realms of life and even geological formations - so, too, mankind has enormous significance to existence. But of course in Occultism it is postulated that humanity has always been present on the earth or within the realm of earth. Even when no physical humanity trod the ground we were here in other forms, complicit in the shaping of the creator gods. Even were we to be wiped off the face of the earth (unlikely) we would still be here, albeit not physically. The earth cannot maintain without us. It's a story.

To me, the fact that we humans are (possibly) the only species in this planet that is aware of its own irrelevance in the larger scheme of things, is precisely what makes us relevant.

I think what he's saying is that the Earth, and perhaps the whole Universe, is just a 'cosmic womb' designed to produce sentient beings. Beings capable of achieving such a state of development they can transcend beyond their biological origins and metamorphosize into a godly state. I see natural cataclysms as 'tests' intended to filter out evolutionary dead-ends. as Arthur C Clarke said, dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't develop a space program*

Catastrophist Randall Carlson's ideas run in the same vein. Like Chris, he thinks it's our duty to become a space-faring civilization; Morrison seems to suggest in The Invisibles that such a evolutionary leap would require a Singularity-state much more radical than the one suggested by Kurzweil and the transhumanists. Maybe more like the Starchild at the end of 2001.

And if 'we' (our civilization) fails? I guess the Universe will just keep trying. And if you believe in reincarnation, that means we will all get a second chance until we get it right. Or a third, a fourth, a fifth...






(*)Or did they??

 

[technomage]

Great video. Everyone should be allowed to get drunk and enthusiastically expound on occultism for 45 min. at a time if they can make sense the way Grant does. I thoroughly enjoyed his talk on how in an age of surveillance the body politic goes to further extremes and planted inside these actions are the seeds of a social revolution. Unfortunately the buggers who control the world always seem able to pay people to police, kettle, or subdue the masses; in various parts of the world such fascist violence easily translates into mass killings, mass disappearances or mass graves. So I don't hold out too much hope on the subdued consumer masses in the west breaking too far out of the molds of control and passivity. But we can still dream about wild abandon in the streets and the transformation of the masses.

This is a funny coincidence. I just saw this episode yesterday.

 

[Jeff Davis]

Perhaps what is seen is very dependent on context? It's not just what we obsess about but the setting and the stimulus that combine to create a mental prompt. We process imagery incredibly fast and it's done according to our individual history of seeing and our survivalist needs. When we see something previouly uncategorized by our brain, depending on the situation and the contours of the stimulus, that brain will reach into the filing cabinet and pull whatever seems most likely out of the brain's image library and provide you with a best estimate. Fear and other chemistry will also play a role in this process to best codify the stimulus.

Artist's seeing their creations seems perfectly natural. The visual construction of a character by an artist must fix their own contours and features in an intense manner and most likely imbued with much emotion. And for someone like Moore who also dwells in a world of images and symbolism it's not a wonder that they see their creation come to life. Flexible minds allow for such interpretations. Those who dwell deeply in the arcane may make many different kinds of associations with visual stimulus that those who live more mundan lives might not see at all.

Don't get me wrong here, I really do not have a clue what is taking place when we witness the paranormal, or these tulpa like manifestations within our reality, I just have a few ideas floating around that I can share.

One is that we are dealing with an external agency that chooses to interact with the reality that we are witness to. This is to state that it is manipulating our perceptual awareness, not according to it's design, but a design that it either arbitrarily extrapolates from us somehow, or possibly by way of it's own natural design, communicates with us, and thus renders an exchange equivalent to what we term "paranormal experiences". I call this process sentient translation, and please don't cite me as vain, pretentious, and/or delusional for doing so. I would in some dark, paranoid, and clandestine manner, surmise that this is some new or recent type of quasi military intelligence control mechanism, if it were not for the fact that this has been happening since reported/recorded time began.

The other alternative is that there is a portion of our existence, or a realm of our natural environment, that can and does act upon our collective reality architecturally, according to a natural evolutionary progression. Possibly controlled or regulated via some internal DNA light entrained feedback loop that we share with this natural consciousness facility. It very well could be the developmental agent that rendered the bicameral mind evolutionarily obsolete. Or of course, it could just as easily all be hogwash.

I tend to favor the former guess rather than the latter due to the nature of multi witness reports. But you know, both could be true. Some dub the former agency, "The Trickster", but as such, I believe it is we that "trick" ourselves routinely due to a lack of yet to come familiarity with this thing called consciousness.

Isn't it interesting to think sometimes, that possibly, just possibly, the real underlining seamless truth of these matters is a combination or composite of all the familiar great wild ass guesses we've come to ponder and be entertained by? Now that *does* take an ego to imagine.

Imagine a juvenile egoless form of natural discarnate intelligence wandering this vast physical planet in search of it's mother. (seems like a reasonable instinctual path to me, albeit a bit dramatic for the egoless) Perhaps one that is just outside the mouth of it's own evolutionary cave so to speak. Possibly a life form that has an infinite lifespan and the only growth it comes to know is an expanse built of our collective experiential reflection that it absorbs to grow and develop as a lifeform. What might happen if we as the occupying agents of it's reflective growth were to get too close in proximity to such a naturally potential sentient force in lieu of some natural form of cognitive interference? Possibly, we are all surrounded by it, and in routine interchange with it, continuously. If what we project to it's natural edification is indeed a mirror like reflection of all that our experiences comprise, might we see an equal and opposite reflection of our own experiential norm? Combined with Burnt State's "filing cabinet", might such an undefined interference effect the routine ebb and flow of our normal cognitive consciousness relationship and result in the rendering of what just might be paranormal experiences?

Who knows?

 

[red_pill_junkie]

One is that we are dealing with an external agency that chooses to interact with the reality that we are witness to. This is to state that it is manipulating our perceptual awareness, not according to it's design, but a design that it either arbitrarily extrapolates from us somehow, or possibly by way of it's own natural design, communicates with us, and thus renders an exchange equivalent to what we term "paranormal experiences". I call this process sentient translation, and please don't cite me as vain, pretentious, and/or delusional for doing so. I would in some dark, paranoid, and clandestine manner, surmise that this is some new or recent type of quasi military intelligence control mechanism, if it were not for the fact that this has been happening since reported/recorded time began.

This reminds me of that scene in Steven Spielberg's A.I., in which the super-advanced Post-Anthropocene machines choose to first interact with David (the positronic Pinocchio who's greatest wish is to become "a real-life boy") through the imagery of 'the blue fairy', the spiritual agency David has imagined out of his past experiences and personal desires, in order not to perturb him and seek a common ground from which communication can be established.

We've already established oral language is far too limiting to communicate complex ideas. That's why I think these intelligences rely so often on symbols. As a designer, I'm aware of the semiotic power of a good symbol, and that it can also bypass the 'left-brain' part of our psyche and tap in directly to our subconscious. Great artists like Kubrick exploited this in their work.

That's why I so strongly agree with Greg Bishop and Paul Kimball when they equate the UFO phenomenon with an art project