Here is the link to the main page of this site it offers a lot of info about the mystical experience:http://www.egodeath.com/index.html
The tyranny of religious experience
by Narkissos 54 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
GetBusyLiving
Thanks Frank.
-
frankiespeakin
Here's something a little bit scary but very interesting about the ego:
http://www.egodeath.com/intro.htm
The Pre-set Stream of Injected Thoughts, Puppethood, and the Inability to Control Future Actions
When the mind models the ego-entity and its control coherently and vividly, the ego dies as a helmsman, the sense of being a self-governing entity profoundly changes. The mind has a latent potential to discover the self-control vortex, the strange-attractor vortex of self-control violation. There is a sudden homeostatic state shift out of the egoic mental mode. This vortex is the control singularity, at which point self-control perfectly cancels itself out. One discovers the possibility of the self in the near future deliberately violating one's long-term intentions and wreaking the worst havoc against oneself.
Such a demonstration would be intellectually and morally satisfying in several ways, though disastrous by definition. A demonstration of absolute self-violation could disprove the ability for self-control or self-restraint to forcefully reach across time, prove the impotence of moral self-restraint, and demonstrate the independence and isolation of each time-slice in the stream of self-control Responsible moral agency is manifestly invalid upon perceiving the predetermined character of the thinking that is injected into the mind by the spacetime block at each time-slice. A demonstration of self-control violation would also be of interest because it would concord with understanding that the ego entity who exerts control power is largely an illusory projection of the mind.
When the mind grasps its potential for control instability, the thinker trembles from the cybernetic instability and is shakingly disrupted and thrown off balance. The ego's accustomed virtual power is cancelled by overly vivid awareness of how one's thoughts and actions could very well be pre-set by the underlying block universe. Virtual moral agency collapses when the illusory aspect of the ego's power is vividly understood. In pursuit of truth and self-understanding, it is tempting to make a serious sacrifice of one's deepest values in order to reflect one's consciousness of one's true nature. Given the inherent insecurity of self-control over time, due to the inability to reach across time and due to the fact that one's future actions are already defined at all future points in time, one might begin to urgently wish to secure self-determination to forcefully extend self-control over one's near-future actions.
It feels like a trap, when fully confronting that there is logically no way, no possible move, that would forcefully extend self-control to restrain one's near-future actions. Stable self-control inherently requires distorted thinking, which obscures one's nature as a product of the completely predetermined block universe. Self-control can be stabilized by looking away from the radical potentials of one's near-future actions in the stream of control, by stopping the apprehension of them. One inherently cannot trust one's own near-future actions, which are beyond one's present control. Dissociative cognition combined with advanced rationality leads to the conscious experience of one's permanent situation of being a puppet of fate, a complete slave of the block universe.
Self-Distrust, Self-Violation of Personal Control, and Needing a Higher-Level Controller
Upon discovering the perfectly coherent model of self-control extending along a frozen stream in the block universe, one finds oneself in a submissive position, and it's effective action to pray, to turn one's attention away from the emptiness of the power at one's core, and regain the deluded but stable sense of controlling one's thoughts and actions.
In the midst of the self-control singularity, self-control cancels itself out and one is tempted to perform a sacrificial self-violation to prove this astonishing potential and disprove the moral agency upon which life depends. It would be ecstatic horror to make a high self-sacrifice of one's integrity as a moral agent, and perfectly violate one's personal wishes, to disprove moral culpability and reflect one's grasp of the astonishing truth about the nature of moral agency, self-control, and self-determination.
At the peak of grasping transcendent knowledge and fully confronting one's inability to restrain one's actions in the near future, one can completely lose trust in oneself, but it's a cybernetically effective move to project a trustworthy entity to a higher level in the control hierarchy and place faith in that entity instead of in oneself, that is, let the entity take one's cybernetic helm of self-control. The stability-producing prayer (a committed assumption and transmitted communication) for this purpose is that the creator of the block universe created it such that one's future stream of thoughts and actions are not disastrous to one's integrity of selfhood as a cross-time controller with values and investments. This assumes a personal god, because the universe itself is not easily conceived of as a controlling agent able to hear and respond.
-
frankiespeakin
A little more about what happens from enlightenment:
In a dissociative cognitive state, the usual cognitive structures constituting the ego cease, and the projection of the ego image also ceases. Oneself still exists in many ways, such as a body, a brain, a mind, possessions, and a personal past. One genuine aspect of oneself has temporarily ceased to firmly exist: the egoic cognitive processing, which is largely but not entirely suspended. The projection of the self-image is also partly suspended. Insofar as the mind confuses the projected self-image with that part of the self which is genuine, that projected self never existed, other than a perceptual illusion, and so could not cease to exist. If the ego is defined strictly as the natural assumption that the mentally projected self-representation is literally oneself, then it can be said that "the ego is only an illusion". But such a narrowed definition of "ego" raises the question of what to call the real cognitive structures that reliably project that illusion. The ego is more than just an illusion. It's a large, complex, and dynamic set of mental processes, of which the deceivingly tangible mental representation is only one part.
The will exerts control power, but this power is virtual rather than literal. There is some control-power, but the normal perception of this power is distorted. The sense of having control power is taken too literally and too simply. Ego structures are refined after enlightenment, not eliminated. Physics cannot provide a legitimate dwelling place for the ego entity, because the ego is largely illusory. Delusion or enlightenment are collective: first there is a uniform interegoic control field, deluded about control agency, then the rational, cybernetics explanation of enlightenment is discovered and communicated. There is a shocking feeling of helplessness upon realizing the insubstantiality of the cross-time ego.
-
frankiespeakin
More interesting info:
The dissociative cognitive state enables deep-level symbolic re-indexing of mental constructs. There are multiple triggers for the dissociative cognitive state, including psychedelics, meditation, schizophrenia, sensory deprivation, hyperventilation, temporal-lobe epilepsy, UFO abduction, and near-death experiences. The most powerful trigger for long sessions of cognitive dissociation is lysergic acid, a key technology. Psychoactive substances should be of great interest to theorists in many fields. The absence of such psychoactive keys preserves delusion, to preserve the sense of freedom and autonomous agency. The New Testament morally permits ingesting anything (Mark 7:6, Matthew 15:7). Acid-rock mysticism vividly alludes to and resonates with ego death and the dissociative cognition that leads up to it.
-
frankiespeakin
Another interesting book review about psychedelics:
http://www.egodeath.com/merkurpsychedelicsacrament.htm
Book Review: The Psychedelic Sacrament: Manna, Meditation, and Mystical Experience. Author: Dan Merkur, 2001
Merkur shows the existence of a more or less continuous tradition of psychoactive Western religion. Various separate threads of mystic techniques have sometimes come together to form an approach to the mystic altered state that is based on rational reflection, together with short-session use of visionary plants, rather than continuous long-term meditation.
-
Narkissos
One related topic (but I doubt it is worth another thread) would be the connection between mysticism and pathology.
It is a highly sensitive subject (as it can easily be understood as insulting), but I guess a very important one: in various ancient societies there were "sacred illnesses" (e.g. epilepsy) which were ascribed a social role. In a more collective way, the charismata of the Corinthian church clearly sounded crazy (and Paul tries to control them by the use of paradox: wisdom through folly, etc.).
But now this connection is seldom thought of in a positive way. Dostoievsky stands out as a remarkable exception.
-
Abaddon
Ross
I think my rendering of what faith is is close enough for jazz, but I can order some pins if you've a yen for dancing with angels ;-)
I also think that either there is a god, or there isn't. Of course, what one means by god reduces the clarity of this statement unless one adds a precise definiton of god as regards that sentence. But getting lost in semantic soup is easy. Either the god you believe in exists or it doesn't, unless you adopt a statagy of making your definiton of god so tenuous and adaptable that it loses much of its traditional meaning. A bit like defining felatio as NOT sexual intercourse.
Of course, god (definiton #1,245,532) not existing doesn't mean god (definiton #1,675,132) doesn't exist. So I agree with "there are surely more potential explanations than "it's God", or "it's only in your head"?", largely on semantic grounds regarding 'god'. I also feel you do everything to discount the possibility of non-existence purely due to utterly subjective experiences which whilst sincere as any subjective experience are as relaible as a politician's promise when it comes to determining reality.
I think the statement most likely to be true based on the evidence is "if there is a god it's not exactly like any of the major world religions, or possibly even any religion, say it is".
But whilst I conceed at every point there may be a 'god', albeit one unlike most people's expectations, I find it interesting few religious people consider the liklihood of no god seriously, as no sooner have you pointed out one big fat flaw they are dancing the apologetics fandango and plea-bargining their definiton of god. Which, given that human conceptions of god are quite silly, is probably a good idea, but doesn't give one much hope for logic or consistancy.
however active disbelief appears to have a detrimental (though not always unsurmountable) effect, from what I can see.
Why? I would say wilful credulousness is far more harmful than active disbelief. 'Active disbelief' is a thought stopper matey; if there's a problem with the logic underlying claims that god doesn't exist, address that. Don't pigeon hole it in a varient of the thought stopping label 'apostates'. How can I throw the baby out with the bath water if there was no baby? I added aluminum oxide to the water to make it clear, and then filtered it, then I distilled it and assayed it and any by products of filtration and distilation. Result? No baby, honest. I can't even find any identifiable fragment of baby skin I could DNA analyse or something to show there was a baby in the bath in the first place. It could be a few gallons of hot water with some soap suds and dirt stirred in.
Don't criticize the act of claiming god doesn't exist; there's a difference between responding to an opinion and saying an opinion is detrimental.
You ask GetBusy;
"Further, how do you then ascertain for yourself if it was more than just bio-chemical head-stuff?"
Quite. How do you? You don't have to have a needle in your arm (so to speak) to have bio-chemical head-stuff going on.
Then it's astonishing how three people can be seeing exactly the same "head-stuff at the same time".
Not particulary. People see UFO's all the time in groups. Doesn't mean we're being visited by aliens. Group psychology is a very interesting subject which pretty much boils down to the fact that only widely seperated observers can truely claim to be observing independently of but synchronously with others. When you observe or experienece as a group one persons reactions and perceptions can alter those of other members of the group, making it a shared experience but not neccesarily one where the number of witnesses adds to the certainty of interpretation.
frankie
Yup, which would indicate no one really kows what they are talking about and either we are, as a species, suseptable to flights of fancy (maybe beliving in figments of imagination is also what made us what we are in other ways too), or that there is a god and it doesn't fit in any of the silly boxes we humans put it in.
Getbusy
For me accounts of LSD experiences often cite similar transformational events or insights as religious experiences or NDE's. Take it with people you know and trust when you feel happy and calm, in a controlled environment. After you've used it a few times you will be able to decide which of these 'rules' you can break, but these guidelines will likely make your first trip a pleasent one. Best of all trip the first time with someone who has tripped before.
Allow at least 12 hours, and no, if you decide (as nearly everyone does) halfway through that that was fun but you'd like to stop it now, tough luck, you're on it to the end. If there is any history of mental instability in you or your family avoid it like the plauge, and bear in mind LSD is fun but definately not a drug for long term or regular use even if you are as sane as a sane thing, or else you will get very lose and whimsical and have no edge.
Mushrooms are very similar to LSD chemically speaking, as is mescalin.
E (X) make everyone seem lovely and is probably better for a cheap shot of universal love, but is not really mind expanding.
There's no way you could convince me that God has chosen you or anyone else for that matter to get a special vision and the rest of us have to just suffer (apart from showing me the apparition).. and there is no way I could convince you that it never happened. Correct?
Yes. But then you can have the concept of an 'elect', which allows such partiality on the part of a god. Just another of those silly ideas humans have about gods. If god is not impartial we are fucked as it is and may as well give the unfair bastard the finger as we party unto our deaths.
-
Midget-Sasquatch
You bring up an excellent point Narkissos with epilepsy.
Persinger, a university researcher here in Ontario, was able to induce different kinds of paranormal experiences in unaffected people, by fluctuating magnetic fields mostly around their temporal lobes. They heard voices or felt an invisible presence much like if they had temporal lobe epilepsy. At least in the past they weren't marginalized like in our more enlightened(?) society.
Now before anyone gets upset, this mostly points to the "how" of the phenomenon. What brings on that storm of neural activity could be a number of things, like external changing magnetic fields, or some psychoactive drugs, or who knows maybe even a genuinely supernatural agent.
-
Narkissos
The value I see in taking "pathology" or "altered mental states" into account, if this is done in a non-judgemental way (implying that such experiences are not any "worse" or "better" than "common sense") is letting such experiences play some role in society without becoming an obliged and extensive pattern. A civilisation without art is unthinkable, but a "civilisation of artists" wouldn't work, and requiring every person to be an artist or even to bow before any artwork would be the most stupid of tyrannies. My take is that "religious experience" should be approached in a similar way.