What you don't know can't hurt them.
https://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/
https://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?t=39426
Iamwhomiam » Thu Dec 24, 2015 8:44 am wrote:I remember the standoff and the fellow moving to stay in its path. But I also remember seeing a body, not his, run over. Perhaps his death was caused by the military's advance during the night. Or is it now being claimed there was no body run over by a tank?
But the guy who stood in front of the tank was disappeared, afaik.
Just past 6:00 am on June 4, as a convoy of students who had vacated the Square were walking westward in the bicycle lane along Chang'an Avenue back to campus, three tanks pursued them from the Square, firing tear gas and one drove through the crowd, killing 11 students, injuring scores.
DrEvil wrote:They did run over people with tanks, just not that particular guy.
Just past 6:00 am on June 4, as a convoy of students who had vacated the Square were walking westward in the bicycle lane along Chang'an Avenue back to campus, three tanks pursued them from the Square, firing tear gas and one drove through the crowd, killing 11 students, injuring scores.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen ... ary_action
IanEye » Thu Dec 24, 2015 10:27 am wrote:
it turns out that it is actually quite easy to hold a candle in the warm December rain.
coffin_dodger » Tue Dec 22, 2015 1:37 pm wrote:Brandon wrote:Language has reversed our perception, we see ourselves as the indigestible object and the visible world as the body, when in reality it is the reverse. The visible world is a subjectivity composed of language, a language that determines what we will perceive and not perceive.
Have you ever researched sigils?
A sigil is the physical manifestation - through written form - of a magical ideal, made real.
Imagine that we are saturated in thought and deed with someone else's sigils - that we use to communicate, not only with each other - but to think using them - this can begin to explain some things that you are intuitively noticing. The very words written upon this page lock us into, bind us into and intentionally blind us to a imposed, controlled reality. Sigils work - take a look around. The Anglo-Saxon sigils - our 26 different 'letters', when combined as words and then as sentences, (especially within our minds), form an indelibly powerful 'field' in which we exist. The good news is, that once we know them for what they are, their power diminishes. They work like all 'magic' - best when occult.
Check out some of the most powerful sigils ever created:
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z
Each sigil has it's own meaning and associated 'power'. It's not important to know what they mean - simply knowing them for what they are is sufficient to begin breaking the 'spell'.
The exquisite, natural beauty of this system is that it's 'hidden in plain sight'.
As an example - take the 'words' that describe (and incant) the everyday use of our language:
SPELL - what an interesting word. When we form individual sigils (a,b,c etc) into words, we SPELL them out. Coincidence?
1. spell - to name, write, or otherwise give the letters, in order, of (a word, syllable, etc.):
2. spell - a word, phrase, or form of words supposed to have magic power; charm; incantation:
Spell and spell - one begets the other, one means the other. How's that for 'eyes wide shut'?
also of possible interest -
'letter' - i.e. ' spell the letters out to form the word ' - 'letter' - to 'let' - to 'allow' - to 'enable' - to allow the incantations of the sigils to breathe - 'letters'
'sentence' i.e. spell the letters out to form words that become sentences - although spelt differently, the incantational pronounciation of sentence is exactly the same as sentance - the written word 'sentence' is simply pronouncing the sentance that the combined sigils place upon the recipient reader.
'word' - is ultimately related to Latin verbum, ‘put forth’ To put forth the meaning of the letters.
All in front of our eyes and in our minds, every day, every where. It's a miraculous way to keep order. One amongst many that Nature is finally beginning to relinquish, as we begin to evolve a new layer of consciousness - and understanding.
Elvis » Thu Dec 24, 2015 5:34 pm wrote:DrEvil wrote:They did run over people with tanks, just not that particular guy.
Just past 6:00 am on June 4, as a convoy of students who had vacated the Square were walking westward in the bicycle lane along Chang'an Avenue back to campus, three tanks pursued them from the Square, firing tear gas and one drove through the crowd, killing 11 students, injuring scores.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen ... ary_action
The two sources given for that sentence don't inspire a lot of confidence. If that's the best sourcing Wikipedia has on that, I have doubts about the the claim. Not that it couldn't have happened; no question that plenty is suppressed in China.
I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning; and consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics. He is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do. For myself, as no doubt for most of my friends, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom. The supporters of this system claimed that it embodied the meaning - the Christian meaning, they insisted - of the world. There was one admirably simple method of confuting these people and justifying ourselves in our erotic revolt: we would deny that the world had any meaning whatever.” --Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means
Interestingly, TIME obscures whatever it is that is stabbing the boy in the back.
82_28 » Fri Dec 25, 2015 5:08 pm wrote:There's no foul in being a Christian, divideandconquer. There is a foul in being a fundie bigot which obviously you are not. I'm a someone who doesn't care what anyone has as their religion and I don't think any member here does or would.
jakell » Sat Dec 26, 2015 7:06 am wrote:82_28 » Fri Dec 25, 2015 5:08 pm wrote:There's no foul in being a Christian, divideandconquer. There is a foul in being a fundie bigot which obviously you are not. I'm a someone who doesn't care what anyone has as their religion and I don't think any member here does or would.
There's a bit of a can of worms here. Over the last few years I've been spending time talking to Christians (and a smattering of those who subscribe to other religions), and something I've noticed that has emerged is those who call themselves 'Christian Truthers'.
In some ways, these are closer to an RI sensibility that you're average ('nice') pick n' mix Christian, but at the same time they could nearly always be described as fundamentalists too, which sort of makes sense because to call yourself a 'truther' you need something to set your compass by (what some might call 'the truth). Those of a more secular bent tend to cleave to what might be called 'secular humanism', which is a conveniently invisible belief that is centred around the more current 'religion of progress'. Funnily enough though, these seem to have an angle of 'the truth' too, this is often stated less baldly but sometimes emerges in sharp relief in the form of denunciations of individuals and groups.
divideandconquer » Sat Dec 26, 2015 1:56 pm wrote:jakell » Sat Dec 26, 2015 7:06 am wrote:82_28 » Fri Dec 25, 2015 5:08 pm wrote:There's no foul in being a Christian, divideandconquer. There is a foul in being a fundie bigot which obviously you are not. I'm a someone who doesn't care what anyone has as their religion and I don't think any member here does or would.
There's a bit of a can of worms here. Over the last few years I've been spending time talking to Christians (and a smattering of those who subscribe to other religions), and something I've noticed that has emerged is those who call themselves 'Christian Truthers'.
In some ways, these are closer to an RI sensibility that you're average ('nice') pick n' mix Christian, but at the same time they could nearly always be described as fundamentalists too, which sort of makes sense because to call yourself a 'truther' you need something to set your compass by (what some might call 'the truth). Those of a more secular bent tend to cleave to what might be called 'secular humanism', which is a conveniently invisible belief that is centred around the more current 'religion of progress'. Funnily enough though, these seem to have an angle of 'the truth' too, this is often stated less baldly but sometimes emerges in sharp relief in the form of denunciations of individuals and groups.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said, "something to set your compass by". Jesus Christ is my Truth. I set my compass by my understanding of Him, who I believe is God. It's not something I can measure or prove to anyone else but it's something that I feel very deeply, thus it's my Truth. Yet, I don't feel the need to denunciate individuals or groups who believe differently unless what they believe is characterized by worship of those with the most at the expense of the least amongst us, or involves treating certain groups of people as less than human or less worthy, or their belief requires engagement or participation in sadistic or evil acts, etc.
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."
