In 1991 some interesting doors were opened to me at UCSD Cognitive Sciences Department, where I became a member of a club that met weekly for 2 hours, for 7 years.
15 hours ago, Mike said:
No. That looks too formal. What I joined was very informal. I never signed anything.
One of the reasons for it was for graduate students to have a chance presenting their work, and to cross pollinate ideas around the different departments. It was very informal.
See..you start out making it all sound formal and full of brainiacs and God opened these massive doors for you to study with the top neuroscientists when in reality it was so informal it didn't officially exist, so naturally having you along for the ride looked like it was all inclusive....but why exaggerate it in the first place? Joining a club is FORMAL and clobs formally exist and are recognized by the university as having FORMAL benefits to the students and such. You definately led people to believe it was something a LOT more than it actually was.....basically you were in an informal study group that didn't exist in any meaningful way as far as the university was concerned....just a group of folks getting together of which you were the tag-along-mascot kinda guy.
I used the words "a bit of" to mitigate my statement.
All forms of neuroscience see that there is lots of confabulating going on in both brain damage victims and in normal people.
The older schools of thought look at the confabulation as incidental, while smaller but very vocal schools of thought are looking at the confabulation as fundamental. I kid you not. It is, again, neuroscience coming around to agree with the Bible on consciousness, and "all men are liars."
So, I may have been expressing a minority point of view, but it is one that is growing.
But one by one, the unique things of the human mind are turning up to not be so unique after all, and "man has no preeminence over the beasts."
In the Bible man's mind is portrayed as egotistical and self boasting. and not possessing the great wisdom it likes to think. Neuroscience is finding this to be the case in many ways.
Here ya go, Mike. The TedTalk is for a wider audience and easier to understand, it seems to me. The Lex Friedman podcast is a deeper and more granular treatment with lots of math and science that goes over my head, but I still found it fascinating and profitable - it should be a walk in the garden for you. I don't remember confabulation mentioned once.
your lack of knowledge has never stopped you from posting before
Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding. That would be totally transparent to you, or you might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
Much more often it's the case that because I have been continuously reviewing PFAL since the mid 80s, I find that lots of things were forgotten by folks here, so I speak up. The more I know from my constant reviewing, the louder I post.
If you really want to make your "research" marketable to neuroscientists, you'll need to start by getting it peer reviewed and published in a reputable journal.
That is the old fashioned way. There are other ways to get an idea considered. Grad students are easy to get an hearing from. Most professors will read a well written and concise letter or text. I have had a lot of luck doing that. It also works for super-star authors, who spend a lot of time reading in airport lounges. In his autobiography, Abbie Hoffman relates how he did this in the olden days of pen, paper, and typewriters, and how often he got through to celebrities and politicians.
Geez. You obviously lack any depth of understanding in what you are actually talking about. There isn't a scientist anywhere that wants to hear anything about spirit becuase it can't be scientifically proven.
That is EXACTLY what I have been saying. Body and soul can be proved; spirit cannot.
And you just unequiviocally know when spirit is present, or not....
We are talking about a THEORY.
In my theory I START OUT with considering the body and soul man, because that it easier.
In Physics, students are started out with analyzing something very simple: a pendulum. By working on all the details of a pendulum, which is super simple, the details of how planets orbit the Sun becomes workable.
Science always limits itself to the measurable and the simple; that mean body and soul only for discussions on free will.
Spiritless man is where I start out in my theory, because that is a simple place to begin.
You definately led people to believe it was something a LOT more than it actually was.....basically you were in an informal study group that didn't exist in any meaningful way as far as the university was concerned....just a group of folks getting together of which you were the tag-along-mascot kinda guy.
You must have missed the post where I said I was like a groupie there.
You also missed the main point: "...it was just a group of folks (superstar brain scientists) getting together..."
If you ever get the chance to be a mere tag-along groupie with the world's top brain scientists, I would strongly suggest you jump on such a great learning experience.
Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding. That would be totally transparent to you, or you might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
Much more often it's the case that because I have been continuously reviewing PFAL since the mid 80s, I find that lots of things were forgotten by folks here, so I speak up. The more I know from my constant reviewing, the louder I post.
M: Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding.
T: On the contrary, I notice you plow ahead with nonsense anyway
M: That would be totally transparent to you, or you might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
T: You’re absolutely correct – it’s plain to see that you’re dodging to avoid being wrong
M: Much more often it's the case that because I have been continuously reviewing PFAL since the mid 80s,
T: well…that might be part of the problem – you’ve got you head stuck in a place where the shine never shines
M: I find that lots of things were forgotten by folks here, so I speak up.
T: That’s another problem…I’ve never forgotten the twisted nonsense that wierwille/PFAL taught – matter of fact, I usually can remember in great detail everything BETTER THAN YOU CAN…and I wish I could forget the 12 years of making bad decisions based on a cult-leader’s agenda…but Grease Spot Café is part of my therapy now and where and when I can, I like to help others – and what I share with others isn’t always “This is how you can recover…”rather it’s something inexplicable – maybe as a subtext to what I share – it may provide hope to a reader. NOT as a guide for how to leave The Way International and unpack the mental and emotional baggage. But merely as proof that it can be done, and it won’t ruin your life. Their how-to’s, therapies, and recovery strategies may be totally different than mine. And they'll probably work just as well……and for those reasons I speak up.
M:The more I know from my constant reviewing, the louder I post.
T: absorbing huge amounts of LoShonta to reach critical mass – I understand
iyay absorbyay ereforethay iyay ostpay
(pig-Latin for the greatest philosophy in Mike’s world today: I absorb therefore I post)
Here ya go, Mike. The TedTalk is for a wider audience and easier to understand, it seems to me. The Lex Friedman podcast is a deeper and more granular treatment with lots of math and science that goes over my head, but I still found it fascinating and profitable - it should be a walk in the garden for you. I don't remember confabulation mentioned once.
Thanks for the links.
Without listening yet, I will predict that the WHOLE TOPIC he is explaining is a GIANT CONFABULATION we all suffer from, which is our perception of reality.
Just a guess. Since the rainy season is happening here lately I may have time to listen to them today.
Here ya go, Mike. The TedTalk is for a wider audience and easier to understand, it seems to me. The Lex Friedman podcast is a deeper and more granular treatment with lots of math and science that goes over my head, but I still found it fascinating and profitable - it should be a walk in the garden for you. I don't remember confabulation mentioned once.
YIKES!
What are you doing to me?
I just noticed that one of those videos is over 3 hours long!
your lack of knowledge has never stopped you from posting before
48 minutes ago, Mike said:
Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding. That would be totally transparent to you, or you might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
Much more often it's the case that because I have been continuously reviewing PFAL since the mid 80s, I find that lots of things were forgotten by folks here, so I speak up. The more I know from my constant reviewing, the louder I post.
40 minutes ago, waysider said:
Can you list 3 of those things here?
I don't mean expound on them, I mean simply list them as such:
1.)
2.)
3.)
38 minutes ago, Mike said:
That is the old fashioned way. There are other ways to get an idea considered. Grad students are easy to get an hearing from. Most professors will read a well written and concise letter or text. I have had a lot of luck doing that. It also works for super-star authors, who spend a lot of time reading in airport lounges. In his autobiography, Abbie Hoffman relates how he did this in the olden days of pen, paper, and typewriters, and how often he got through to celebrities and politicians.
37 minutes ago, Mike said:
It is all in the archive for you to find, if you are interested.
coming full circle:
Mike said: Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding. That would be totally transparent to you, oryou might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
T-Bone: your lack of knowledge has never stopped you from posting before
I try my best to not consider what other people say what they think was on the mind of VPW.
What I have learned to focus on are his printed writings that went through a bunch of filters (including holy spirit in many of his editors), and re-writings over the years.
His recorded teachings are a secondary focus for me, and after that I find it useful to not do very much considering about him.
It matters almost nothing to me what you think VPW's "obsessions" were.
It matters almost nothing to me what VPW's actual "obsessions" were.
It took me years to find that this way of thinking is best.
I choose to look at what went most right in VPW's life: the collaterals.
I offer this as an alternative to the mental rut many are stuck in here.
So this sounds like a really comfortable version of Plato’s cave. Furnished with a complete set of signed versions of collaterals.
The collaterals themselves are Rhoda’s sermon notes basically. The bullshonta spoken extemporaneously by VP in the BRC was edited by Rhoda and circulated widely. They represent a minuscule fraction of any of the research effort put into the JCPS and JCOP books. So not even the research described by penworks in her book is performed on the collaterals.
People have brainwashed themselves on repeating it to themselves for years. Like the camera analogy from the blue book. It’s basically a 15 minute lift from another source that people have been trying to extract more meaning from for decades. There’s not more meaning. There is only logic like The Promise.
No I will pass on visiting your rut. At least whatever ones I’m in I can see 15 feet ahead and jump from one to an adjacent one.
Mike said: Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding. That would be totally transparent to you, oryou might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
So you don’t think we are aware you are trolling?
As a former failed stand up comic you are hyper focused on how you play to an audience.
You we’re sheltered from any personal effects of these amoral a holes so you have no skin in the game.
And you choose to live with blinders only focusing on a small portion of the truth and or facts that make your comfortable.
And you have no original thought. You survive off the second hand vomit from 2 decades ago emitted by a narcissistic joke of a preacher who stole everything in sight and chased everything available with a skirt.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
120
259
157
205
Popular Days
Nov 2
154
Oct 30
111
Nov 3
106
Nov 4
104
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 120 posts
T-Bone 259 posts
OldSkool 157 posts
Nathan_Jr 205 posts
Popular Days
Nov 2 2022
154 posts
Oct 30 2022
111 posts
Nov 3 2022
106 posts
Nov 4 2022
104 posts
Popular Posts
penworks
VPW's statement that the Bible interprets itself is nonsense. The act of interpretation of any text is done by the reader of the text. People interpret what they read. They are the ones who give it me
waysider
And in doing so, he was violating his own "To Whom it is Written" rule.
Charity
What I see in what you wrote Chockfull is that we were meant to have a relationship with the class - you know the one that replaced our relationship with Christ. It was our lord in that it had power,
Posted Images
waysider
Disregard
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
See..you start out making it all sound formal and full of brainiacs and God opened these massive doors for you to study with the top neuroscientists when in reality it was so informal it didn't officially exist, so naturally having you along for the ride looked like it was all inclusive....but why exaggerate it in the first place? Joining a club is FORMAL and clobs formally exist and are recognized by the university as having FORMAL benefits to the students and such. You definately led people to believe it was something a LOT more than it actually was.....basically you were in an informal study group that didn't exist in any meaningful way as far as the university was concerned....just a group of folks getting together of which you were the tag-along-mascot kinda guy.
Edited by OldSkoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
that sounds a little creepy…but I think you may have found a loophole to get around a nonconsensual charge…
For some reason I’m reminded of wierwille, slipping a Roofie to a woman in the way corps - cheers
Edited by T-BoneFound a loophole in my Fruit Loops
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
You did?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Here ya go, Mike. The TedTalk is for a wider audience and easier to understand, it seems to me. The Lex Friedman podcast is a deeper and more granular treatment with lots of math and science that goes over my head, but I still found it fascinating and profitable - it should be a walk in the garden for you. I don't remember confabulation mentioned once.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Not so fast!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
83. Because watching a man squatting over and taking a dump in the mouth of God for 36 hour sucks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding. That would be totally transparent to you, or you might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
Much more often it's the case that because I have been continuously reviewing PFAL since the mid 80s, I find that lots of things were forgotten by folks here, so I speak up. The more I know from my constant reviewing, the louder I post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Can you list 3 of those things here?
I don't mean expound on them, I mean simply list them as such:
1.)
2.)
3.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That is the old fashioned way. There are other ways to get an idea considered. Grad students are easy to get an hearing from. Most professors will read a well written and concise letter or text. I have had a lot of luck doing that. It also works for super-star authors, who spend a lot of time reading in airport lounges. In his autobiography, Abbie Hoffman relates how he did this in the olden days of pen, paper, and typewriters, and how often he got through to celebrities and politicians.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
It is all in the archive for you to find, if you are interested.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That is EXACTLY what I have been saying. Body and soul can be proved; spirit cannot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
We are talking about a THEORY.
In my theory I START OUT with considering the body and soul man, because that it easier.
In Physics, students are started out with analyzing something very simple: a pendulum. By working on all the details of a pendulum, which is super simple, the details of how planets orbit the Sun becomes workable.
Science always limits itself to the measurable and the simple; that mean body and soul only for discussions on free will.
Spiritless man is where I start out in my theory, because that is a simple place to begin.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You must have missed the post where I said I was like a groupie there.
You also missed the main point: "...it was just a group of folks (superstar brain scientists) getting together..."
If you ever get the chance to be a mere tag-along groupie with the world's top brain scientists, I would strongly suggest you jump on such a great learning experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You mind has become jaded.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
M: Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding.
T: On the contrary, I notice you plow ahead with nonsense anyway
M: That would be totally transparent to you, or you might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
T: You’re absolutely correct – it’s plain to see that you’re dodging to avoid being wrong
M: Much more often it's the case that because I have been continuously reviewing PFAL since the mid 80s,
T: well…that might be part of the problem – you’ve got you head stuck in a place where the shine never shines
M: I find that lots of things were forgotten by folks here, so I speak up.
T: That’s another problem…I’ve never forgotten the twisted nonsense that wierwille/PFAL taught – matter of fact, I usually can remember in great detail everything BETTER THAN YOU CAN…and I wish I could forget the 12 years of making bad decisions based on a cult-leader’s agenda…but Grease Spot Café is part of my therapy now and where and when I can, I like to help others – and what I share with others isn’t always “This is how you can recover…” rather it’s something inexplicable – maybe as a subtext to what I share – it may provide hope to a reader. NOT as a guide for how to leave The Way International and unpack the mental and emotional baggage. But merely as proof that it can be done, and it won’t ruin your life. Their how-to’s, therapies, and recovery strategies may be totally different than mine. And they'll probably work just as well……and for those reasons I speak up.
M:The more I know from my constant reviewing, the louder I post.
T: absorbing huge amounts of LoShonta to reach critical mass – I understand
iyay absorbyay ereforethay iyay ostpay
(pig-Latin for the greatest philosophy in Mike’s world today: I absorb therefore I post)
Edited by T-Boneixnay on the post ay
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Thanks for the links.
Without listening yet, I will predict that the WHOLE TOPIC he is explaining is a GIANT CONFABULATION we all suffer from, which is our perception of reality.
Just a guess. Since the rainy season is happening here lately I may have time to listen to them today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Your mind has stayed orange
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
YIKES!
What are you doing to me?
I just noticed that one of those videos is over 3 hours long!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Mike: "Most professors will read a well written and concise letter or text. I have had a lot of luck doing that."
Hey, how about doing that here? Making your posts "well written and concise"?
That way, maybe we could all benefit. You might not get so many attacks, and everyone else might begin to understand what you're saying.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
And it barely scratches the surface.
But it's less than 10% the length of PFAL - 36 focking hours! Yikes!
Edited by Nathan_JrLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
coming full circle:
Mike said: Actually, it is often the case that I back off or avoid a topic due to my lack of understanding. That would be totally transparent to you, or you might conclude I was dodging to avoid being proved wrong.
T-Bone: your lack of knowledge has never stopped you from posting before
Edited by T-BoneTypo vs Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
So this sounds like a really comfortable version of Plato’s cave. Furnished with a complete set of signed versions of collaterals.
The collaterals themselves are Rhoda’s sermon notes basically. The bullshonta spoken extemporaneously by VP in the BRC was edited by Rhoda and circulated widely. They represent a minuscule fraction of any of the research effort put into the JCPS and JCOP books. So not even the research described by penworks in her book is performed on the collaterals.
People have brainwashed themselves on repeating it to themselves for years. Like the camera analogy from the blue book. It’s basically a 15 minute lift from another source that people have been trying to extract more meaning from for decades. There’s not more meaning. There is only logic like The Promise.
No I will pass on visiting your rut. At least whatever ones I’m in I can see 15 feet ahead and jump from one to an adjacent one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
So you don’t think we are aware you are trolling?
As a former failed stand up comic you are hyper focused on how you play to an audience.
You we’re sheltered from any personal effects of these amoral a holes so you have no skin in the game.
And you choose to live with blinders only focusing on a small portion of the truth and or facts that make your comfortable.
And you have no original thought. You survive off the second hand vomit from 2 decades ago emitted by a narcissistic joke of a preacher who stole everything in sight and chased everything available with a skirt.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.