Meaning of or in life

One time in my life i got involved in some gangland type problems through a drug problem, certain people who werent my friends overblew the situation, the situation blew over but right afterwards and until about 5 weeks after i was nervous to go outside, nervous of any such people who looked the part to be "hard". basically i turned into a 80 year old women fearing all generation X clothing styles, and my conspiracy type of thinking overthought a lot of scenarios. i basically gave these peoples james bond type powers. and it didnt even matter they didnt even care enough to do anything i left the district and never went back.

but throughout that time every day was cherished completely.

what got me into the mess was that i didnt trust my convictions about things. i would let people re-explain things, allowing them to build up their credibility and through giving back my trust even though i took it away i got burned. its hard for me even still to put myself in other peoples shoes because im just that different from people. i EXPECT that if you are embarassed, and really sorry. somebody will really change their ways. especially after literally begging for forgiveness. but some people dont deserve any chances or any chance to explain themself.

i remember once a christian talked to me and tried to explain how in star wars episode 2 i think or 3 mace windu hesitated because the emperoer was pleading, then he got lightning blasted out the window. but when the emperor had the upper hand he was ruthless, you couldnt reason with him.

I actually think good and evil might exist but were not thinking about it the right way. i always see philosphy run down dead ends with the objective /subjective thing.

so i have tried not to think of it like that anymore. but good and evil is contract based.

for instance if I make a promise to kapis, and i intentionally never intended on keeping it, and by breaking it i caused 10 units of harm to kapis and gained 1 unit of pleasure. that would be an evil scenario. however if i could justify why kapis is unworthy of honoring contracts or giving respect to, i could wash my hands of my evil.

this is what most people actually do, they assign descriptions that make those they hurt seem deserving and reasons why their action was also neccessary, thereby reducing the contract as a meaningless construction.

also if you remove the "I" in your decision making, youll have a harder time breaking your promise. the promise trumps whatever other opportunities present itself. but you cant ignore opportunities that easily if you're focused just on yourself. opportunities just bait us to break our word. thats why its interesting to me that religion actually had people focusing on the "afterlife"...maybe this was a trick, but maybe a neccessary trick because those in the know knew we were too selfish to have honor unless we believed in something. by believing in the afterlife, you lose the sense of here and now and self, thereby allowing you to do good by allowing you to inadvertently keep your word in your daily affairs.

so i have tried not to think of it like that anymore. but good and evil is contract based.

A sort of Karma

for instance if I make a promise to kapis, and i intentionally never intended on keeping it, and by breaking it i caused 10 units of harm to kapis and gained 1 unit of pleasure. that would be an evil scenario. however if i could justify why kapis is unworthy of honoring contracts or giving respect to, i could wash my hands of my evil.
this is what most people actually do, they assign descriptions that make those they hurt seem deserving and reasons why their action was also neccessary, thereby reducing the contract as a meaningless construction.

Absolutely true, they call it "Self-Justification" or maybe "delusion" is more applicable in the majority of cases

I actually think good and evil might exist but were not thinking about it the right way. i always see philosphy run down dead ends with the objective /subjective thing.

Exactly how certain forces have tried to mold the philosophy activity into over the last 2000 years

I present here the best video ive ever seen on re-awakening the true spiritual ingredients of the platonic dialogues , giving a superb digestible interpretation of the platonic tetralogies and brief history of the recent suppression of true philosophy and the great accurate illustration of university teachings or should that be "blindings"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8109822533221897197#

I still have to listen to more than half about the platonic dialogues.....got to get in the left brain mode.
How and who gave humans intellect?
I thought it interesting he said one has go into their dreams to get to their past present and future. That is how one can connect to the inner dialogue, to the nous which is connected to the divine soul.
And a different take on the imagination and meditation.

Oh, importing and integrating the required formula of/for? expression, yep, Kapis you said it exactly! Now that is a flash of lightening right there!

Yeah Seraphim , looks like plato was talking in wisdoms way beyond what the education systems have slyly reduced him into

As that video presenter says, in recent times, platos dialogues have only been translated into english around the 1800s, then you have to be sure that only elite conditioned scholars have had access to that up until maybe the last 40 years or so.
In addition to that, the education systems using braindead conditioned philosophy professors, have absolutely extracted all spirituality out of plato and reduced his works to some ancient dated boring necessity that is required to pass a braindead philosophy course so one can say, oh yeah i read plato at uni, chuckle chuckle ....dead energy emittance engulfs all around .....

Now as this video presenter points out, plato was illustrating and elaborating on deep connections of the conscious and unconscious, the stages of knowledge , the origin of thought and beauty and much more , prophecy, stuff that really threatened the religious fanatics over the last 2000 years , in fact much of the stuff that modern revered philosophers and psychologists talk about is completly relatable to platos dialogues like a lot of jung stuff as the guy points out
I guess about 99% of claimed plato readers completly never understood about 90% of what he was getting at .

Rupert Everett , i always found interesting in some of his interviews and a guy who took care of his physique.
He does a great job of presenting this documentary , maybe found his niche , about the victorian sex explorer Richard Burton who was drawn into the hidden erotic secrets in the search for meaning in life
Everett is not afraid to talk about things and ask the questions many would not

Once again, not allowed to view where I'm at!

damn licence controls , you just get the age verification jive in uk
i have it also on tape, but too big to email, if i recall any little segment of interest, i may try an convert from tape to youtube, but quality would be down.should have digitally recorded

The guy that narrates this second video and its subsequent further 3 parts intrigues me, he says he lectures about the book , and hes insistent that the stranger character should fit his "educated" interpretation of it and even phrases his beleifs with "We" i presume that he , a conventionally higher educated person completly beleives he is speaking for the majority of learned people .

Now i find that Strange , although i like his insightful comment at the end of 4 of 4 , they try to teach him to be human....to be guilty


The Absurd - One of Camus examples of absurd is the myth of sisyphus whereby the Gods have condemned sisyphus to push a rock up a mountain , watch it roll down then do it all over again

Absurd ties in well with the meaning or lack of meaning in life , from the dict ,

"The Absurd" refers to the conflict between the human tendency to seek inherent meaning in life and the human inability to find any. In this context absurd does not mean "logically impossible," but rather "humanly impossible."[1] The universe and the human mind do not each separately cause the Absurd, but rather, the Absurd arises by the contradictory nature of the two existing simultaneously.

A person finds themselves in a world doing things that were not completly chosen by themselves , even their birth may not have been chosen and yet they are here , been schooled in certain ways to do certain things .
Some people accept this suit and just wear it never allowing a contradictory flow of inquiry deep in them to voice its protest
Others are haunted by this inner inquiry which eventually opposes the very life they find themselves existing in, but cannot muster the considerable alternative self-generated motion to change, in a sense both types of people can be related to the myth of sisyphus , they both find themselves condemned in this cyclical repetition that seems to have its own propulsion , they , by their engagement with it , continue to agree with its motion , and yet they retain this vague hope or faith that it is leading to something , which it may or may not do , but this vague hope or faith , if not acted on, is also a donation of their fuel always adding to the "rocks" propulsion

Life begins and remains absurd when the selfs thoughts begin to reflect on its existance and are in conflict with whats been and is happening to it , cannot find purposeful meaning in it

Mr Cs solution to the meaning of existance was to discover ones TRue Will

It is defined at times as a person's grand destiny in life, and at other times as a moment to moment path of action that operates in perfect harmony with Nature. This Will does not spring from conscious intent, but from the interplay between the deepest Self and the entire Universe. Thelemites in touch with their True Will have eliminated or bypassed their false desires, conflicts, and habits, and accessed their connection with the divine. Theoretically, at this point, the Thelemite acts in alignment with Nature, just as a stream flows downhill, with neither resistance nor "lust of result."

Instead of humans looking for or trying to find meaning in life, it may be they have an even greater responsibility that they have forgotten, that they themselves have the inherent power to control what gives meaning in their life, they generate their own meaning , and from this possibility, a whole new idea of meaning in life opens up

What is the relationship between suffering and meaning in life, is suffering an obstacle in the way of meaning or is it a means to meaning
There are 2 categories of suffering
The direct physical suffering which can overwhelm all thoughts and even consciousness
The non physical suffering (in consciousness ) which can lead to physical suffering , and this non-physical suffering can be split into 2 types
Conscious and sub-conscious suffering
A person can be suffering in consciousness but not be consciously aware of it which directly affects the meaning of their life
The question being, is this suffering a direct result of a conflict , that they created with their conscience
And if so, then Conscience is a key to some form of inner guiding knowledge and also of the possibility that the i-consciousness, that which makes the conscious choices , is at the subtle level , potentially in communications with another or others consciousness
Conscious or subconscious Suffering is an area of awareness that cannot be sufficiently verbalised , because of the subjective components that amount to the term suffer
But most people have their very own secret definition of what suffering means as they have experienced it

To become aware of ones conscience may require cleaning out the cupboards
Consciousness Suffering may be the noise that occupies the seat of the ignored conscience
And prayer used to be a technique to clear noise and let the conscience sit and speak
Said the riddler to the batman

They been showing some reruns of the columbo tv series, and ive watched a couple of them .
The first one i watched was called prediction murder and on doing a search, i noticed that this was the first ever episode, made in 1968 it said

In the plot, a perfect planned murder has been commited , and i waited all the time for columbo to find the vital clue to convict the murderer which he never quite did without finally a little manipulation by himself

Columbo seems to be a detective that works on instinct , he identifies the murderer early on, then just has to find the flaw in the crime

In this episode he couldnt find enough to convict the guy, so he had to use trickery and a little entrapment to snare the guy and did


My initial memory from watching columbo episodes before, was that he always was a straight guy that could not be manipulated , but the first episode showed me that he used cunning and active manipulations to ensnare his cuplrit because he instictively identified the person as the murderer.

The next episode i checked out was from the comeback series in the 90s, it starred faye dunaway and that nice woman from babylon 5.
The plot is that there was an italian playboy having an affair with the baby 5 woman who was attractive and just happened to have a rich mother faye dunaway, the playboy then has an affair also with the mother with the intention of getting her money cause hes a gambling junkie in debt, and he apparently had almost killed the daughter and slit her throat (told later by the mother to columbo)
The mother and daughter had got wind that their lover was in fact the same man and so had plotted to and indeed killed him, with the mother pulling the trigger.
The mother had tried to seduce and corrupt columbo during the investigation so that he would lay of a bit , but he never did although been charmed by her
In the end, columbo finds enough evidence to force the mother to confess , but makes a deal with the mother to let her daughter of the hook, and accept a lie in the mothers confession that she had an unamed male accomplice.

So columbo because he believed maybe the murder was a just cause, allows the daughter to go scott free even although by the letter of the law, he should be convicting her as an accessory to murder.

The moral of the story is that every law that has ever been written is only as potent as the person in control of upholding it , and every human has an emotional sidedoor through which their conscience can be influenced to flaunt or break that law in the interests of their own ethical or criminal inclinations

This is good in that it allows a form of human undestanding of justice to overthrow any cold unfeeling inflexible law
But it is also a licence to corruption

In theory, the cop called columbo is a proven corrupt operator, but ethically he is immaculate ...depending on ones ethics

I think his tv series has highlighted something quite important in human consciousness beyond the plotsolving, something about a form of justice that sometimes overides written laws, even in the so called straight man

The series is predominantly about the importance of cool intellect over irational emotion in the plotsolving , but when looking deeper , it is shown that columbos final line is drawn with his emotion overiding the intellect , which was quite interesting for me to discover , and i think he mirrors exactly how societys are run at the important levels

well maybe emotion over intellect is not quite accurate, what i mean is being emotionally influenced to break the code of his sworn duty and doing so allowing individual emotionally heated ethics to overide pre-considered collective intellectual law

otherwise playing god for a moment

further commentary ......

i carried out a search on columbo episodes and it seems that this may have been the only incident that columbo lets a healthy criminal (interpretation by law) of the hook, the other instance being where the criminal was not of sane mind

And it is a womans influence that makes him break the law or should i say ... a decision of the heart...so as not to appear chauvinistic

One question thats been puzzling me all day, is that seeing as mr Pope is the mob acclaimed first point of contact on earth for god.
How come that after a psunamee or any other "natural disaster" , the worlds press (or even the doctrines beleivers) arent over knocking down the vatican walls trying to get some feedback regarding their masters take on what went down .
After all, the book that they live by doesnt stop reminding its readers whos directing the "natural disasters" , so surely when another one happens there should be some form of christian explanation

im scratchin my head on this one and probably always will be

The Vaticanites are too busy crouched in their dark hovels applying annointing oils to hairless young altar boys while flesh-pounding their rectums. No one can hear their screams.

Sing higher son , thrust , thats better

Some comments extracted from a socrates commentary

socrates attempts to show that acting justly will make a person happier, acting morally and justly are in fact the same psychic order as being happy
the argument from superior judgement
the argument from mental health


both these arguments backed up by the crucial tripartheid theory of consciousness where socrates claims that the human psyche has 3 basic aspects , its rational aspect devoted to the pursuits of truth and reality , its spiritual aspect which loves honour , success and respect and the appetitiff faculty which is devoted to physical pleasures of food , sex , and the aquasiion of the money needed to satisfy them .
All 3 aspects have their own objects of desire and depending which aspect of your psyche is controlling you from, you will be a different person with a different life and have different points of view on what constitutes the good life

the argument from superior judgement
each person devoted to their own particular aspect of psyche believes that their own kind of pleasures and way of life is best , but the view of the philosopher (socrates) in this instancewhos life is devoted to truth and reality , his view or her view is the superior view because the views of the philosopher are supported by experience and intellect and training and rational argument , and those 3 things wil enable the philosophers judgement about which way of life is the best life to be the best or superior judgement , only the philosopher has experience of all 3 kinds of pleasure, has the truing and the intellect need to assess that experience

the argument from mental health
socrates states that ones psyche will only be in a state of good order if your reason is in control and telling the other 2 parts what to do and the other 2 parts harmoniously agree to be ruled by reason because they accept that reasons dictates shall be for the good of the whole psyche and so the spirited aspect is going to devote its energies to supporting what reason says and the appertitiff aspects are basically going to do as their told and only satisfy the necessary physical desires needed for survival and reproduction and not go off on a tangent satisfying unnecessary desires
if your psyches in that state of reason being in control, socrates says you will b in a state of mental health which is a state of psychic health which is at least as important as bodily health
so this state of rational harmonious health is directly related to ones concept of justice and happiness which is a beautiful order where all the greek values concentrate in

Hmmm

Happiness is...positive cash flow.

i can't deny that i just love seeing funds coming in , but although i gravitate in an area which is open to abuse as in doing people for more money than is fairly due, i am handicapped by some strange conscience that will not allow that to occur ...and I'm still waiting for my reward for this penalty on my existence

No but i think it may even affect the libido positively

Flames , as you say, human consciousness is definitely limited in its existing physical entity , but who set the limits , are we limited by our ancestors concept of limits conditioned into us , but then again drink drugs doctrine etc allow a fast reconditioning

it could be that every piece of intuitive breakthroughs have been but consciousness software upgrades by our hidden masters

if consciousness is intentionally limited by god or other higher control , it must be to teach us a lesson or for some harvesting of energy or some testing ground

at least we are apparently free to choose what to believe in this area of human origin and purpose , or are we

So if the idea of a human being as a vehicle for consciousness to experience itself in physical form, governed by the laws of human biology is true, then why in the hell would consciousness or "soul" ever choose to be human with its extreme limitations?

I wondered that too.
And how short life can be and how and person can be here one minute and gone the next.
And the miracle of life itself.
And in this thing called consciousness, how one of the very few choices we have is to decide how we want to feel.
And that we can really control our own minds, but when does that ever happen.

Flames , as you say, human consciousness is definitely limited in its existing physical entity , but who set the limits , are we limited by our ancestors concept of limits conditioned into us , but then again drink drugs doctrine etc allow a fast reconditioning

HERE THIS IS QUITE INTERESTING IF NOT REALLY RELEVANT

Scientist Prove DNA Can Be Reprogrammed by Words and Frequencies:

http://wakeup-world.com/2011/07/12/scientist-prove-dna-can-be-reprogrammed-by-words-frequencies/

I was going to add that whoever has the rights to our template DNA and such, and thus created our physicality, who we are, how we think in other words, has the ability to control our evolution. I guess you can think of it in terms of updating, downloading programs, making the hardware just right.
I believe we used to have quality programs, with perhaps updated organs that were not defunct or missing that allowed us somewhat to be able to think more for ourselves.

The pituitary gland is not just an organ. All those folks in robes meditating for thousands of years don't put their tongues on the roof of their mouth for no reason at all.

then why in the hell would consciousness or "soul" ever choose to be human

I wonder everyday why I am here, and about death.
I have actually always thought about why a person would do such a thing and be here at all. Maybe it's not their choice.
And who in their right mind, or even better if a person had their own mind would want to be a human or come back time and time again, but I guess the supercomputer has to keep running somehow.

That is kind of scary, but my archaic mind won't really ever understand it, it can just wonder. And that's not too bad itself, there is a lot of good things in wondering.