Friday, 15 March 2013

Do galactic cannibals eat their own words?

I came upon this comment on an article called Five Smart Things to Say About the Higgs Boson

Galactic Cannibal
And what has DOG (GOD) got to do with Higgs B. Absolutely nothing.
The answer to Does GOD exits is more likely to be an affirminative NO

Lovely typo! The identification with an affirmative no, is of course the way G-d seems either absent or non existent.
The Higgs field postulates a pervasive field in which certain energetic particles acquire and embody the properties of mass.
The Unified Field embodies both existence and awareness of existence as an all pervading knowing, or Is.
Does man exist? As he defines or believes and experiences him/her self to be? Its make believe! - but even a fantasy has to work on or with something real. The true existence of man is neither the result of a dead god of religion or science. Every moment of everything experienced, real or imagined, is experienced within awareness - including space and time.
But a thinking machine doesn't relate, embrace or appreciate experience - only its thoughts.
When we wonder, our thought is paused and a stark fact is felt an instant before the thinking machine resumes its function.

Wednesday, 13 March 2013

Beauty and the Beast?

Beautiful people are attractive even when disgusted

Beautiful people are seen as good looking even if they distort their faces into grimaces of disgust, surprise, fear or anger, according to new research. (Telegraph article)

These scientists are rather daft whether they are attractive or not! (tongue in cheek).
Statistical norms - have you ever met one? (Lots of wannabe's though).
Social conditioning can set up all sorts of socially approved or socially compatible criteria of attractive and unattractive. And at the surface level (in which scientists often seem to live) - these things hold true - as does a lot of current theory. But at the Soul level, there is an entirely different criteria and one which doesn't yield to being objectified, quantified and wrapped up in theory.
Shared purpose is another name for one-mindedness. But separate purposes that share only at the surface level are split-mindedness.
This latter 'meets' in order to get - that is - it doesn't know real relationship at all - for something is always held back and something is always gotten from the other that serves to validate the self.
This is not as 'out of sight' or unconscious as social mores would have us believe and could roughly equate to the selfish gene idea.
A selfishness that seeks to establish its own genesis and seed itself.
Though there is a level at which this 'works' as a balancing interplay of competing forces, it is hardly more than a conditioned program of identifying with a sense of self in a hostile environment. The world seems to provide perfect proof of this excepting that this self is a virtual construct and so is the mapping or interpreted experience we call the world.
How could anyone possibly believe THIS! Well, let that sense be a proof of the power of belief to identify and react to information as true without a direct self enquiry - and I don't mean consulting one's database.
Anyway, I digress. The qualities of Soul - I could say Life, God, Spirit - (but none of them relate to anything within the framework that expresses self-definition), are Attractive to the Soul. The notion of Soul-mate is a rather personalized sense of such an attraction - but it isn't really a personal matter but a transpersonal or transcendence of what we usually trade with as 'self'.
True beauty is of the Soul and 'glamour' might be used for what is essentially fantasy that fulfils the dream subject to our moments of power to enact it. People are generally preoccupied with fantasy and a glance at Facebook shows that this identity can extend like chinese dolls into more and more dissociated levels. Why would one assume our self/world to be the Primary or Ultimate Reality?
The virtual self is a mask with which we access fantasy experience upon something real, and one can play out whatever personalities can be made up, copied, imbibed or carried in past baggage. These are an attempt to set rules and maintain a continuity - and a highly complex but largely tacit conspiracy of self interest makes the current experience of ourselves and the world.
Yes I've rambled off the point.
Guilt is a crippling sense of self and is both a means of manipulating our perception - and the behaviour of others. When anyone is disgusted with you - and extends loathing and utter derision - and you have ANY target where that hits home and activates guilt - then they are NOT attractive.
Now Jesus - whether historical or not - embodies the capacity to see what is ALWAYS ATTRACTIVE in everyone. That is not so far from us as we like to think - and we do like to think all the time, so as not to let anything disturb, undermine or violate a private sense of self.
This indiscriminate defence, is a blindness to and fragmentation of our Soul, which yet knows itself in all its parts whole because it is the direct Expression of the Individuality of God. Not a god out there or in here or in thinking - but the 'Boson' by which all particulate boson/fields express existence.
There is a mental split between the impulse and the control - and yet the impulse is a distorted expression of something true, arising from a deeper level of control.
We all know that the carrot and the stick keep the donkey under control and for carrot, read 'attractive'. But there is a qualitative difference in an allure and a truly lovely presence - whether that presence be Brian Cox or Steven Hawking.

- - -

Second comment to the following:

  • Beauty is in the eye of the beholder - all this generalisation about so-called "good looking" people is ridiculous.  But I suppose it is a means of selling celebrity magazines to the credulous in poverty stricken times.
  • Commenter's avatar
    I disagree. There are certain types looking at which the overwhelming majority of people would agree that they are beautiful. Beauty can acutally be quantified and there has been plenty of research on this. Distance between jaws, eyes, proportionality of face etc. Most people would agree that, for example, Monica Belucci, Natalie Portman, Nicole Kidman, Ben Affleck, Jared Leto or Tom Ford are beautiful.
    On the other hand, Sofia Loren or Kate Moss are not beautiful in a pure sense of the word but they are different and they stand out.

The experience of beauty is in the eye (mind) of beholding - but the definitions of beauty are indeed in the database of past conditioning.

If you look beneath the 'face' there are these creaturely aspects of mortal combat (death wins). Face is perhaps our first 'language' in the world. (We brought touch with us as innate sense).

Most people? Look at other cultures and look at the art and even the old photos to see it is a cultural expression.
Faces are learned. Faces are masked - unless open.
Face recognition is now standard in digi cameras. One can see that with more processing power and corresponding software  attractive faces could be identified and selected over unattractive faces. And with advances in biotech - we'll be able to have ours rendered attractive - according to the mutating social mores of the day.

Beauty transcends form but a poverty of Spirit grabs at the form and tries to recreate the experience - hence the database of past conditioning...

Power over Life? (Antibiotics are becoming ineffective)

This is one facet of a surge in our apparent capabilities which has fuelled a blind and overreaching arrogance, the pride that comes before the fall.

In computer games - which I met briefly when my kids were young - the character one plays through can uncover a temporary invulnerability - and hence passed unharmed through what otherwise would be hazardous. This so very easily resulted in the 'death' of one's character the instant the effect wore off!

Our scientific advances have in some measure enabled us to live in disregard of what Life truly is - to indulge our own vanities while unconscious of the actuality beneath our personal and cultural definitions.

In ignorance we feed back a sense of OUR power - or at least the power to use science to manually manage, as forceful manipulation upon everything about life that it can 'improve' to fit into its own current thinking of how life should be.

Science does not encompass or embody wisdom  - only risk assessment, and it is rarely used wisely by human beings who are largely confused within their own ego sense so as to be self and other destructive. Depleting our Commonwealth and unaware of the true nature of health and well-being.

In concert with the disappearing magic wand of antibiotics is the finitude of fossil fuel, the finitude of phosphates for agriculture and an enormous and increasing demand to mine and use up non renewable resources - which are part of the cost of everything and so are dividing the haves from the have nots even at the level of basic needs.

The scientific mind is a specialised tool and worthy of appropriate tasks - but it is not seeing a unified picture and it is not free of dependency on vested interests that express not only a desire to retain power but outpicture the mentality of a managed and controlled 'reality' rather than a truly communicated presence.

Why is the media drip drip dripping the poison of scare and fear and calamity - along with a flood of trivia and distraction? Surely there is a mood of fear inherent in the desire to control Life. It may not seem so for we present our masks of justification to ourselves and each other. But the only ones who don't know what is going on are those who are so seduced by their own theories that they actually believe them regardless of reality.

Scaremongering can work in timely ways to herd others where you want them to go, but a pervasive mood of fear and distrust is poisonous to our wellbeing.

Ultimately is will - and is - going to cause many to withdraw allegiance to so called authorities or news sources - or even their own conditioned thinking - and listen and feel in a fresh desire for a foundation from which to live  - not a managed existence - but a shared be-ing.

There is a hollowness that hides in 'good causes'. There is a great crusade in 'making sure xyz will never happen again', but it will, in one form or another, over and over again, until there is a fundamental waking of responsibility for what we think.

All cultures embody and express the ideas upon which they are founded. It isn't that we need more or better thinking - but that we need to put our thinking down and listen and observe in all humility and honesty to reconnect with Life - not in beliefs, symbols or theories - but Feel the Life.

When people cant Feel their own Life they are in the grip of reactive thinking. I write these things to the underpinnings of our human problems - but it is like trying to get the attention of people who are engaged in a fight. They just are not interested, while the fight is ON - unless of course you are offering super powers, magic pills and tactical advantage.

Life Heals. This is its INNATE movement. Human consciousness imposes itself upon Life as a distorting and interrupting filter. That is a conditioned action/reaction. When apparent power OVER Life is withdrawn or rendered useless there are two apparent options; acceptance or denial. Denial will seek magical protection by whatever means so as to maintain its private sense of 'separated power over', while acceptance releases the wish to 'Lord it' - and yields into a Felt Relationship with Life in which it extends and share the Life that is its own true Inheritance.

We cannot and do not by our own power exist, not a thought or any experience of anything can occur but that the gift of life is Presence-ing Itself right where you may think whatever you like and believe these thoughts your own.

I feel the failure and breakdown is an inherent part of uncovering what we do not want to know. What we greatly fear - and so try to 'discover' out in the world within a context of division and rule.

Death and disease are like terrorists. The more one wars on them the more there are and the more we become them.

A true culture of support first opens to the Feeling of Life and shares that in whatever practical ways are available - including the administering of drugs where these are serving the felt need of the situation and not the mere convenience or insulated unconsciousness of those who minister. Pain and conflict are ugly, hateful and hard to live with and come through.Where there is willingness to come through it calls for joining with. If we don't hold this in our culture, we become machines with a 'controlling avatar' front end.

I read today on another page of Facebook deletion phobia. Death is not what it seems to a mind engaged in its own thinking. There is Life beyond the social/personal ego sense. Now, now and always now. I have lost my own daughter and know directly the scouring of grief. But I also know what it is to truly be love - and let guilt and fear be released of its unconscious foundational role of guide and protector. A scratch can suddenly reveal the source of terror - but only if the surface is used to hide from Life. It is what we hide from that we are afraid - not what we face in light.

Thanks for your attention. What we do with our attention attests to what we value and give reality to. There is a great truth in that but only if we awaken to use it.

- - -

This article arose in response to a Telegraph page: Is this antibiotic apocalypse?