Post by: card9ats on 20 February 2013 07:47:02 PM
Hello.
Post by: Merlin on 20 February 2013 07:53:10 PM
Post by: card9ats on 20 February 2013 08:00:38 PM
I would guess mr X is 'Aristide', Merlin - ? Ra6as , Aspen - Aesop ?
Whoelse is here?
8) 8) 8) :)
Post by: Merlin on 20 February 2013 08:07:54 PM
Aspen = Ra6 = ju4o
Mr X = Aristide
Merlin = All versions of Merlin + Aesop
Post by: card9ats on 20 February 2013 08:16:37 PM
Through other SMF forums the option of changing thy username was available. Just created this in haste, maybe I would consider a change in the future.
There 's a bit like mist/mystery here ... like looking through the fog but not like the fog being heavy.
-
Post by: card9ats on 20 February 2013 08:53:46 PM
Everything is a rock
There are many rocks
You have to search for your own rock
To find what isn't a rock
~Four directions
Post by: ju4o on 23 February 2013 05:45:41 PM
Quote
Their name is not gwyrxia, of course. They do not communicate with sound waves, and, in fact, any sound waves humans can hear are of such low frequency the gwyrxia would not have considered even the possibility they might be a means of communication. They communicate with a spread-spectrum electromagnetic radiation, so efficiently encoded that, if we humans even detected it, we would think of it as indistinguishable from thermal noise. Gwyrxia is what it would sound like—sort of—if you could decipher their name for themselves out of that pink noise.
Rather slowly, they decided to colonize the galaxy. They "...knew they would have to abandon organic bodies. They needed a more durable form. This they did many billions of years ago. The most efficient encoding of a mind is to imprint the patterns of their consciousness into electron spin states, using a quantum computation as a form of thinking. They implemented this quantum computation in the spin states of the valence-band electrons of silicon-oxygen bonds in silicate rock. Silicate rock seemed a reasonable matrix, since there is plenty of it in the universe."
This is one answer to Fermi's question which (in consideration of the overwhelmingly high probability that conscious life on earth is not a unique phenomenon in the universe) asks, "Where is everybody?"
(wiki)
Quote
In 1950, while working at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Fermi had a casual conversation while walking to lunch with colleagues Emil Konopinski, Edward Teller and Herbert York. The men discussed a recent spate of UFO reports and an Alan Dunn cartoon facetiously blaming the disappearance of municipal trashcans on marauding aliens. They then had a more serious discussion regarding the chances of humans observing faster-than-light travel by some material object within the next ten years, which Teller put at one in a million, but Fermi put closer to one in ten. The conversation shifted to other subjects, until during lunch Fermi suddenly exclaimed, "Where are they?" (alternatively, "Where is everybody?"). One participant recollects that Fermi then made a series of rapid calculations using estimated figures. According to this account, he then concluded that Earth should have been visited long ago and many times over.
More formally,
Quote
The Fermi paradox is the apparent contradiction between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilization and humanity's lack of contact with, or evidence for, such civilizations. The basic points of the argument are:
- The Sun is a young star. There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are billions of years older;
- Some of these stars likely have Earth-like planets which, if the Earth is typical, may develop intelligent life;
- Presumably some of these civilizations will develop interstellar travel, a technology Earth is investigating even now;
- At any practical pace of interstellar travel, the galaxy can be completely colonized in just a few tens of millions of years.
According to this line of thinking, the Earth should have already been colonized, or at least visited. But no convincing evidence of this exists. Furthermore, no confirmed signs of intelligence elsewhere have been spotted, either in our galaxy or the more than 80 billion other galaxies of the observable universe. Hence Fermi's question "Where is everybody?".
In Landis's scenario, the gwyrxia
Quote
... have barely noticed us, so far ... audible frequency pressure waves do not matter much to them, and only since humans have been using radio waves—barely 100 years—has there been even a possibility of their being able to detect us. They communicate very slowly ... a century here or a millennium there is not terribly important to them.
So they are only just beginning to notice us.
For decades, we have been wondering, where are they?
The answer is, all around us.
We call them "rocks."
Post by: card9ats on 23 February 2013 06:29:41 PM
magnificent!
Post by: card9ats on 24 February 2013 07:20:34 PM
weed cannabis hashish
I don't know much about the dierection of the forum.
But I 'd like to hear points / views / opinions or anything else about this subject .....
I used to smoke so I can share experiences and *pieces* of knowledge.
~ ~ ~
Post by: ju4o on 25 February 2013 01:15:09 PM
The ancient bronze script (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_script) for ma 麻 "cannabis" depicted plants hanging in a shed.
Post by: card9ats on 26 February 2013 06:44:49 PM
Sorry for the inconvenience
I hope such 3 day edit is acceptable.
Sensed something weird with the previous video I 've posted and replaced it with one other without the cinematic introduction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUamtRE0dlM
:'(
Post by: card9ats on 26 February 2013 07:44:25 PM
Still, I don't know the direction of the forum ...so I am on my toes
Not that it feels bad. :pop:
Post by: âspen on 27 February 2013 01:05:28 AM
Direction
wardsPost by: card9ats on 27 February 2013 01:19:52 PM
(http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~wingrove/clover.gif)
~
Post by: âspen on 27 February 2013 03:00:13 PM
Traditionally, it is considered that few people, if any, could actually recognize the herb. However, in Bulgarian sources the raskovnik is sometimes described as a grass resembling a
leaf clover. It grows in meadows and may be picked either while green and blooming or in hay, when it is already dry. While it is not necessarily rare, nor does it thrive only in remote locations, it is nevertheless impossible to recognize by the uninitiated. In the words of Serbian linguist and folklorist Vuk Stefanovic Karadadzic, 'It is some (may be imaginary) grass for which it is thought that thanks to it (when brushed by it) every lock and every other closure would open by itself.'According to the legend, the raskovnik could unlock any gate or padlock, regardless of its size, material or key. It could also uncover treasures buried in the ground: in Bulgarian beliefs, it could split the ground at the place where a treasure lay so that people could locate it. In some regions of Serbia, the treasure itself was a black man in chains who requested that a raskovnik be brought to him. The raskovnik would break the chains and the man would disappear into the ground to be replaced by a cauldron filled with gold coins. Other supernatural properties attributed to the herb by Bulgarians include the alchemic ability to transmute iron into gold, the more general ability to make the one who picked it
ever happy or wealthy. In some interpretations, the raskovnik is a wonderful plant that makes true whatever its owner desires.As, according to Bulgarian mythology and some other traditions, tortoises were the only beings who knew the appearance of the herb and the location where it grows, such people would try to obtain the raskovnik by deceiving a tortoise. They would find a tortoise nesting site and hem it in with a fence while the tortoise is away. When it returns, the tortoise would be unable to access its eggs, so it would return with a raskovnik in order to breach the fence. Thus, the tortoise would reveal the herb and people would acquire it from the tortoise, which does not need it anymore.
While the tricking of a tortoise was the most popular method in Bulgarian mythology, in Dalmatia the legend refers to snakes, and among Serbs another version involves the locking of young hedgehogs in a box for their mother to unlock. In Serbia, one would also have to be quick to take the raskovnik, as the hedgehog would swallow it after use. In any case, turtles, snakes and hedgehogs are all animals with chthonic characteristics which were often variously associated with the underworld in South Slavic tradition.
Karadzic also mentions another Serbian method to obtain the raskovnik. He recorded a story from the town of Zemun about a merchant who desired to find the herb. The merchant locked an old woman into leg irons and let her wander in a field during the night; if the irons unlocked by themselves at a certain place, that would be a place where the raskovnik grows.
The legendary herb has entered the modern Bulgarian vocabulary as a metaphor for a magic key or a panacea in the wider sense. The phrase 'find the razkovniche' means to find the solution to a certain problem, usually a complex or difficult one. Razkovniche is also the common Bulgarian name for the plant European waterclover (Marsilea quadrifolia) which, in its appearance, has many similarities with the descriptions of the mythical raskovnik. ~wiki
Post by: card9ats on 27 February 2013 08:42:26 PM
Interesting...
when I first entered my name (registered) I had in mind the word kardia (heart) ...
Came out with card9ats :D
-
Post by: card9ats on 21 March 2013 03:52:58 AM
....
Sorry for the ruthless just 2 options.Actualy we can discuss it as well. :)
Post by: ju4o on 28 March 2013 09:58:30 PM
Hi. Probably. Except, his name was unlikely to have been Juan.
Post by: Mr X on 30 March 2013 07:39:10 PM
x.
Post by: ju4o on 01 April 2013 06:00:33 PM
Meighan thought he had native informants; his wife thought he had a particularly interesting native informant in Mexico; even arch-critic Beals thought that the character of don Juan was not entirely invented.
Quote
Other critics have doubted don Juan's very existence. In the light of my early contacts with Castaneda given previously, I personally believe someone called don Juan by Castaneda exists. But what is he? Clearly he is not culturally a Yaqui ... Don Juan clearly lived somewhere in the Sonoran desert-steppe region, but very large parts of this life zone lie in Arizona and California so this gives little clue to his residence.~'Sonoran Fantasy or Coming of Age?' American Anthropologist 80(2) June 1978
He could have fooled those people, but the ruse, if ruse it was, would have had to have been strangely elaborate, for Margaret writes,
Quote
The only thing for sure was that the Carlos Castaneda of the real world was making trips away from the apartment through the rest of 1960 to talk with the Indians. He was spending less time on South Detroit and only occasionally had friends over, and even then he didn't seem too interested in the current occult news. There was still some talk of Puharich, but Carlos' interest in astral projection, telepathy, ESP cards and the rest of it, was on the wane. For a while, he'd try to explain the importance of his trips to me, but I wasn't particularly interested. The only thing I knew was that he wasn't around the apartment very much any more and I didn't like it.~A Magical Journey with Carlos Castaneda
One afternoon he came in from the desert, with a bundle of what appeared to be dried Datura, though I couldn't be sure. He wanted to try an experiment and so he had me lie on the couch, while he lit the bundle with the gas burner on the stove and then he began waving the whole smoking flambeau back-and-forth over my head, telling me to inhale the smoke...
It seems likely that he was engaged in the kind of shenanigans with a native informant which he described in his first book.
Post by: card9ats on 01 April 2013 06:22:59 PM
why do you think the probably existed ?
x.
Mr x. you want to make this forum a sceptical one ?
I mean Oriented into sceptisism... ?
_
d9ats
Post by: Mr X on 02 April 2013 05:56:42 PM
i just happen to be oriented to skepticism personally. i am also agnostic to everything, so i dont know if don juan was real, but i would be suprised if he was. also suprised if it was 100% made up.
But what is he? Clearly he is not culturally a Yaqui - Meighan
that is sort of funny. it seems like the thinking of an anthropologist or someone looking at something but not knowing what they are looking at, so they think in certain ways to figure it out. and never figure it out.
the second quote works well with the first. this is why we need belifers to post, i would very much like to hear an variety of reasons why these quotes are interesting. but i am fairly sure the disconnection from the social order in casta books/don juan stories / warrio stuff is so total and disastrous to the user, that ideas like "Yaqui" or "South Detroit" would no longer be cared about. trying to classify the ideas or life of people like that would be extraordinarily difficult.
x.
Post by: ju4o on 02 April 2013 10:06:27 PM
One of the strange aspects of the saga is the amount of sheer rubbish which has been written (and, presumably, said) about Castaneda by people who ought to know better. That article by Beals provides a good example. He writes,
Quote
Castaneda calls his first book The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge (1968), and throughout his books variously labels Don Juan a shaman and a sorcerer, as if the two terms were synonymous.
Beals continues with several paragraphs disentangling the two terms and charging Castaneda with being misleading about their usage.
Whereas, actually, the word shaman does not occur at all in any of Castaneda's books, until The Art of Dreaming (1993), 15 years after Beals' article. And when, finally, the word does occur, Castaneda defines it succinctly and accurately.
Quote
In anthropological works, shamanism is described as a belief system of some native people of northern Asia - prevailing also among certain native North American Indian tribes - which maintains that an unseen world of ancestral spiritual forces, good and evil, is pervasive around us and that these spiritual forces can be summoned or controlled through the acts of practitioners, who are the intermediaries between the natural and supernatural realms.
Don Juan was indeed an intermediary between the natural world of everyday life and an unseen world, which he called not the supernatural but the second attention. His role as a teacher was to make this configuration accessible to me. I have described in my previous work his teaching methods to this effect, as well as the sorcery arts he made me practice, the most important of which is called the art of dreaming.
If anyone has any theories about how Beals could have got it so wrong, I would like to hear them.
Post by: tosk on 04 April 2013 12:57:33 PM
Especially if they are intimidated or offended by what Carlos wrote.
In their zeal to get that "debunking high",
they get reckless and don't seem to care if they are inaccurate or not.
(witness Emilio, Ghost Dog, Tom, and yes Wu and Jeremy.)
Post by: card9ats on 07 April 2013 07:26:43 PM
As long as one becomes a skeptical being ..
the battle is lost.
Not why we came here. (that's my experience.)
Post by: card9ats on 07 April 2013 08:19:44 PM
mR x, One thing I know ....
As long as one becomes a skeptical being ..
the battle is lost.
Not why we came here. (that's my experience.)
This is not saying anything
and it may say everything...
It's up to the individual
..to decide.
P.S. I 'am the only one who voted. (http://www.punk.gr/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
|----\
Post by: ju4o on 08 April 2013 09:53:53 AM
~wiki
Ο σκεπτικισμός είναι μία σημαντική και αξιοπρόσεκτη τάση στην Φιλοσοφία, που ασχολείται κυρίως με την γνώση και την πηγή της αντίστοιχα. Αμφισβητεί την πιστότητα και την ορθότητα της γνώσης, πίστεύει ότι ο άνθρωπος είναι μερικώς ανίκανος στο να αποκτήσει έγκυρη και σωστή γνώση, γιατί γίνεται ασυνείδητα θύμα των αισθήσεών του. Δηλαδή ο άνθρωπος, κατά τον Σκεπτικισμό,σχηματίζει μια ψευδή αντίληψη για τον κόσμο που τον περιβάλλει και δημιουργεί γνώσεις που δεν μπορούν να έχουν γερά θεμέλεια. Σκεπτικιστικές αμφιβολίες είχαν εκφραστεί ήδη από την εποχή των προσωκρατικών σοφιστών αλλά και από τον ίδιο το Σωκράτη. Ωστόσο ο σκεπτικισμός, ως συστηματική φιλοσοφική στάση εκφράστηκε κυρίως από τους "πυρρώνειους" (οπαδοί του Πύρρωνα από την Ηλεία) και είχε πρακτικό χαρακτήρα.
Ο σκεπτικός συνήθως επιχειρεί να δείξει ότι για κάθε θέμα υπάρχουν δύο αντίθετες και ισοδύναμες απόψεις και ότι δεν μπορούμε να αποφασίσουμε ποια να προτιμήσουμε. Γι'αυτό πιστεύει ότι θα ήταν καλύτερο να τηρούμε στάση ουδετερότητας απέναντι σε τέτοιες πεποιθήσεις και έτσι θα καταφέρουμε να επιτύχουμε μια ψυχολογική γαλήνη και αταραξία. Ακραίοι Σκεπτικιστές, όπως ο Ρενέ Ντεκάρτ ή αλλιώς Καρτέσιος, πίστευαν ότι δεν μπορεί κανένας άνθρωπος να αποκτήσει γνώση γιατί δεν είναι σίγουρος για τίποτα. Άρα η γνώση είναι ανέφικτη. Επίσης σκεπτικιστές όπως ο Ντέιβιντ Χιουμ πίστευαν ότι είμαστε εντελώς εξαπατημένοι απο της αισθήσεις μας.
~Βικιπαίδεια
* edit * P.S. guessing that Ρενέ Ντεκάρτ (ntekart) is Descartes
Post by: card9ats on 08 April 2013 12:33:08 PM
Yeah Ju4o I knew that.
Post by: ju4o on 08 April 2013 06:19:51 PM
Well, what battle is lost as long as one becomes a skeptical being?
Post by: card9ats on 08 April 2013 06:54:54 PM
You get to think.
Post by: card9ats on 11 April 2013 03:30:04 AM
From the famous Eagles' song.
Are we programmed to receive?
Post by: card9ats on 11 April 2013 03:41:21 AM
I used to say No,
from my anarchy-resistance upbringing
but I find myself saying "oh, we 're programmed to receive." ...
what do you think about it ? Of the lyric or in general .
----
Post by: ju4o on 11 April 2013 10:24:42 PM
El viento me despeina
Sube el aroma de colita
Luna, luna de nadie
Ella a lo lejos
Una luz centela
La idea de mi estar
Quedar por la noche
Alli estaba a la entrada
Y las campanas a sonar
Y me di con llamarme mismo
Que es puerta del cielo
Ella enciende una vela
En muestra del camino
Suenan voces en el corredor
Y lo que indican diciendo
Welcome to the Hotel California
Such a lovely place
Such a lovely place (2x)
Ella al lado que brillaba
Tenia una Mercedes
Rodeada de chicos guapos
Ella llamaba amigos
Cuando viene despacio
Del tumba de verano
Aquel era pa’recordar
Y otro pa’ olvidar
Le pedi al capitan
Que sirve el vino
Y pedi con un amor
Tenido este alcohol
De este sesenta y nueve
Famosa y que llamando
Pues me va a despertar
La noche para decir
(coro)
El espejo en el techo
Champana en el hielo
Y ella dijo somos todos prisioneros
De propia voluntad
Y en los cuartos principales
Hacen sucias esta
Hasta aca a la bestia
Pero no la logra a matar
Mi ultimo recuerdo
Corria hacia la puerta
Ver una candela en el camino
Por donde habia llegado
Relax dijo el portero
Por mi es honor recibir
Puede salir cuando quiere
Pero nunca yo partir
Post by: Mr X on 14 April 2013 06:16:56 PM
possible.
Waving datura smoke around could be from anything, maybe an book he read or an hippy / drug culture
thing. i think the behaviour changes are more interesting, as and lot of the casta magic that isnt
paranormal or magic reliant is behaviour based, such as warriors and stalkers.
it would be interested to see and anthropology guy look at casta things an different way. such as put
it through the filter of cold brutal darwinism / evolution as an starting point for example. an lot of
the no magics parts seem to involve manipulation, total disconnection from the social order while being
an part of it, and not caring / sweet ruthless in an predatory world, all while not being an sociopath.
i find it interested whether he had an informant or whether he made it up, how did he come up with
those ideas. doubly interested that regardless, he did spawn some sort of strange semi spiritual
movment. what is that movement, what do those "toltec warriors" get out it ? is in any way similiar to
the coldness of don juan, or more like how christians dont reflect baby jesus ?
i can imagine old crusty anthros thinking of of stock standard ways to interpret something that have no
frame of reference for, and getting annoyed when it doesnt fit their stock frames of reference.
sr do seem to mess up at times with their zest. it is understandable that at an certain point they
would just want to win, after months or even years of daily belifers saying stupid things. even if
winning an arguement involves bring up incredibly stupid things like "har har , castaneda like to have
sex with women, so he was an pervert". what ever it takes, just to win, it seems quite human really.
after long enough, they might even forget the little comprimises they took along the way, the little
lies they told themsleves, just to win that day, and in the end they blocked out all sorts of paths of
investigation.
for the casta question, it seems there is still some unsolved mystery, it would be good to know the
full story even if it just something as medicore as he read some books and came up with some stuff,
or met an stoner who called himself don juan.
the "what is castanedas legacy ?" question is still may favourite one despite everything.
beals, meighan, sorry for the mix up. i dont know who either of them are.
x.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZ_RWwy-crQ
Post by: ju4o on 14 April 2013 11:13:35 PM
"As long as one becomes a skeptical being .. the battle is lost."
The word 'becomes' is puzzling in that context. Perhaps he simply meant 'is' ... i.e., as long as one *is* a skeptical being, the battle is lost ...
and if one could somehow stop being a skeptical being, then the battle might begin to be won, or at least be less lost.
Or perhaps he meant that it is a long-drawn-out process of *becoming* a skeptical being which is the real battle-loser.
i.e. if one could simply manage to complete the process of *becoming* a skeptical being, and actually *be* one, then there might be an improvement in one's military fortune.
Anyway, what is this battle he is talking about? I tried asking "what battle is lost as long as one becomes a skeptical being?", and the answer was (or appeared to be),
"You get to think."
Is he saying that skeptics "get to think", and that this somehow constitutes losing a battle?
Or perhaps he wasn't actually answering my question. Perhaps he was pointedly not answering it, and thereby was giving me an opportunity to think.
Which is what I've been doing. Here is the thought I've come up with:
Nick, please consider posting in Greek. Your meaning might become clearer.
Post by: card9ats on 15 April 2013 08:19:50 PM
Δεν εννοώ ότι παύει να σκέφτεται, παύει να βρίσκεται σε ισορροπία με τον κόσμο.<Τώρα μιλάω λίγο σα φιλόσοφος ..
θα το μεταφράσω και στα αγγλικά.
When a man becomes is a way a skeptical being, finds himself disconnected from the real world.
Ο άνθρωπος είναι σώμα, μυαλό και πνεύμα, για να λειτουρήσει ως πρέπει πρέπει να μη χρησιμοποιεί το μυαλό του ξεχωριστά, ή αν προτιμάς σαν κάτι ξέχωρο γιατί αυτό τον διαχωρίζει.Όχι μόνο από το σώμα και το πνεύμα του, αλλά σαν άνθρωπο.
Δε χρειάζεται να μιλάμε χωρίς λόγο.
Post by: Mr X on 15 April 2013 09:05:22 PM
some people think dinosaur bones are put in the ground by satan to test the belifers faith, as they think the world is 6000 years old. if those people were suddenly skeptical, the battle would be just starting for them.
x.
Post by: card9ats on 24 April 2013 02:06:32 PM
There is being skeptical and being-becoming a skeptical being. -I used the word becoming as a final outcome of the being/state of being of somebody.
...
Post by: ju4o on 24 April 2013 10:10:29 PM
Quote
It is one thing for an object to be in the understanding, and another to understand that the object exists. When a painter first conceives of what he will afterwards perform, he has it in his understanding, but be does not yet understand it to be, because he has not yet performed it. But after he has made the painting, he both has it in his understanding, and he understands that it exists, because he has made it.
Hence, even the fool is convinced that something exists in the understanding, at least, than which nothing greater can be conceived. For, when he hears of this, he understands it. And whatever is understood, exists in the understanding. And assuredly that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, cannot exist in the understanding alone. For, suppose it exists in the understanding alone: then it can be conceived to exist in reality; which is greater.
Therefore, if that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, exists in the understanding alone, the very being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, is one, than which a greater can be conceived. But obviously this is impossible. Hence, there is no doubt that there exists a being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, and it exists both in the understanding and in reality.
~Saint Anselm
Post by: card9ats on 25 April 2013 04:05:19 AM
I have somewhere hidden a philosopher in me . (http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/8182/smirkn.png)
Post by: card9ats on 10 May 2013 08:06:30 PM
Post by female warrior
http://femalewarrior.net/2013/05/10/knowledge-and-language-are-separate/
Post by: ju4o on 19 May 2013 11:14:56 AM
σκεπτικός (skeptikos, “thoughtful, inquiring”)
Post by: card9ats on 07 June 2013 08:33:06 AM
σκεπτικός (skeptikos, “thoughtful, inquiring”)
Things are more simple than you think ...
8)
...On the other hand, -do what you love. ---
--..
Post by: card9ats on 13 June 2013 06:43:38 PM
I 'm off this place, enjoy.
Post by: ju4o on 13 June 2013 08:45:29 PM
Post by: card9ats on 14 June 2013 03:11:46 AM