shiels
_
We don’t need that outward facing self now, that nervous, twitchy social self searching for social cues, trying to gauge the mood of the room and fit itself to what it finds.
good
We don’t need that outward facing self now, that nervous, twitchy social self searching for social cues, trying to gauge the mood of the room and fit itself to what it finds.
Air is unboundaried. One great unitary plane of perfect freedom. Everything connected under its auspices. And this gives a clue to our own condition, this great and terrible secret, that everything for us is also open and shared. That there is no private experience. That there is no subjectivity. That the imagination is a great commons we all visit, that consciousness is of the same condition as air. It is the shared medium. and The etymology of inspiration is instructive here I think,
The danger, the great temptation, is to retain the dualism between the impersonal and the personal that Freud had so expertly dismantled. Ray put this to me very well once: we cannot think in terms of an opposition between the personal and the impersonal, as if granny doing her knitting was the personal, and the impersonal was the remorseless, gleaming wheels of the Kaptitalist megamachine. No. Granny too is impersonal, and the Kapitalist megamachine produces personality alongside cars and computers.
The great Cold Rationalist lesson is that everything in the so-called personal is in fact the product of impersonal processes of cause and effect which, in principle if not in fact, could be delineated very precisely. And this act of delineation, this stepping outside the character armour that we have confused with ourselves, is what freedom is.
Often you can find very specific, often quite malevolent characters in there. for instance I’ve come across these sneering, very young bully boys. Infants actually, hahah. These mocking and jeering presences. That want to trample on your flowers! These are among the cast of characters I refer to as the squatters in the tower. They’ve created a kind of tulpa or eregore and implanted it in your mind and it lives there, at least until you can find the means and wherewithal to eject it.
Is this the internalised voices of childhood bullies? and masculinities? How did you eject?
I doubt Luka would identify as a cold rationalist but I see parallels
Thanks a lot lads. I was really flying when I wrote this. That whole year was magical. It happens sometimes and it doesn't last, so when it's your turn, make sure you get some work done!
Good advice entertainment and no doubt true.
The Freudian "censor" is less of a moral function than an indispensable condition of learning. Were we to accept fully and directly every shock to our various structures of awareness, we would soon be nervous wrecks, doing double-takes and pressing pan c buttons every minute. The "censor" protects our central system of values, as it does our physical nervous system by simply cooling off the onset of experience a great deal. For many people, this cooling system brings on a lifelong state of psychic rigor mortis, or of somnambulism, particularly observable in periods of new technology.
Folks have asked me recently how I am able to write so much.
The answer is that it isn't me who's writing.
Modesty? Metaphor? Or (lol) post-structuralism?
No. A strictly technical desciption of how this body has been used as a meat puppet for channeling uttunul signal.
It's only when the writing is bad that 'I' have produced it. When it's good 'I' am just a space through which Lemuria speaks.
The writing is already assembled on the plane and all 'I' can do is bodge it by introducing subjectivist fuzz.
Schizophrenia? Religious mania?
Well, what makes these things dangerous is the thing that make drugs dangerous - i.e. it is not the state of ego-loss itself but the imprecision of the art of maintaining it, the fact that the organism might resume its rights at any moment, crashing you into psychic mini-deaths and meleancholy catatonia.
The problem with drugs is that they only put the Alien Parasite Entity (= His Majesty the Ego = the thing that calls itself you) to sleep. Their dissolution of the APE is temporary, all-too temporary. And after a while, the neuronal battleground - what you are fighting over AND what you are fighting with, i.e. the only resources you have - is itself damaged. APE has its way as you are dragged/drugged into permanent low-to-deep level depression.
It is only as part of a Cold Rationalist program that you can begin to permanently dissolve the APE. It's a lifelong struggle, it'll always lurk in the shadows and in your reflection and photographs, waiting for another opportunity to drag you back down into the looking glass world of personalised misery.
APE won't listen to reason but it can be dissolved by it.
Hey kids: could there be a better reason to read Spinoza? He tells you not to get out of your head but how to get out through your head.
(But let's not fetishise Spinoza, it's not about Spinoza the Genius but about the Cold Rationalist program that he delivers. The Gnostics got there too, sorcerers, Burroughs, Castenada...).
The Cold Rationalist program is Abstract Ecstasy.
Drugs are like an escape kit without an instruction manual. Taking MDMA is like improving MS Windows: no matter how much tinkering $ Bill does, MS Windows will always be shit because it is built on top of the rickety structure of DOS. In the same way, using ecstasy will always fuck up in the end because Human OS has not been taken out and dismantled.
The Cold Rationalist program tells you how to auto-affect your brain into a state of ecstasy.