i tend to kill my doubles

it just dawned on me that i may well be quite different than many people in this regard.  i don't know if it is just my constitution or perhaps even a defiency in my being ... but in any case i simply do not maintain a coherant "heigher" self. 

more about this perhaps later.

Tags

  1. aged context
  2. item 16960
  3. 16959
  4. no doubles here
  5. doubles

Comments


Mark de LA says
seth 2014-05-04 21:39:18 16960
source: mark
... & you & I will be deleted as contexts on death too in ~ 30 years ...
maybe contexts don't depend upon people after all; your mileage may vary.

well you and i probably have different associations to the word "context".   i call a collection of related marks and events and relationships collected by some being a "context".  it is a simple  mathematical concept.  once collected the collection can change but nothing can really delete it as such.   but of course people's awareness of the context changes as they move on to other contexts.  i realize that is a mathematical description with no spiritual or mystical associations ... but that is all that i need for the sake of analysis and mental comprehension of context for use in predicting and modeling reality.   but as you can see, by definition, such contexts absolutely depend on some being to do the collecting.  sans the collector, i can think of nothing that i could call context ... or for that matter, that i could call anything at all .

Pretty wrong about that - neither mathematical is your definition nor a correct idea about context except your made up stuff.  Context is a distinction about the way you hold other distinctions = not mystical nor magical nor mathematical - at most a classification of ontological things.  The example I use all the time is the context of an objective world i.e. something outside yourself that you interact with.  A World exists outside yourself.  Some sci-fi movies like the Matrix had a different context of everything is inside a computer.  You hold that your context is a the set of (or the residue you hold of such) of all your internal & external experiences as described above; partially digested no doubt by cognition elsewhere explained.  Such apparently can't be permanentized outside you & probably dies with you. Yep we can write about it but that depends upon the same from others. etc....
ZZzz....

Seth says
mark, you apparently have a very definite conception of what a "double" is  ... and you are asserting with your tagging that i am not talking about that same thing.  yet you are not informing me of the distinction that you are drawing ... either that you comprehend what i have only partially described above ... or what salient characteristics describe what *you* have come to believe a "double" is.   in other words you have communicated nothing to me whatsoever ... except that you believe you know what a double is and i do not.  thanks for nothing.

Seth says
hmm ... note i am relating "higher self" to "doubels" ... in other words RS guardian of the threshold and/or our personal arch Angele.   perhaps you are connecting that concept with a double as a mischievous devil who "makes" your play rwg games.   is that our confusion here?

oh plesase try to read that paragraph not as  a transaction in any  rwg game between ... i guarantee you that it is not ... i am only trying to clear up this confusion here in what we are referring to.

Seth says
hmm ... note i am relating "higher self" ... in other words RS guardian of the threshold and/or our personal arch angele ... as a "double".   perhaps you are connecting that concept with a double as a mischevious devil who "makes" your play rwg games.   is that our confusion here?

Seth says
seth 2013-12-14 11:20:16 16960
ME 2013-12-14 10:51:17 16960
seth 2013-12-14 10:46:42 16960
ME 2013-12-14 10:36:49 16960
seth 2013-12-14 10:20:24 16960

hmmm ... now why did i just know that you were going to wave at literature to authorize your point.
I guess in a solipsistic world you don't need any one else's ethos to coach you.
c.f. 16948.

i didn't say that.   i obviously can study all of this myself and re-read steinar about it.   thanks for the url ... someday i may go study this from his perspective again.

i am, however, much more interested in your particular experiences and conceptions on the subject.  

you made a definite connection with your tagging ... it seems to me that it is reasonable for me to ask you to tell me in your own words why you think this is connected to that. 
& I both explained it & gave you a reference.

huh?  where is your "explanation" ?  ... the only thing you said here was " guess in a solipsistic world you don't need any one else's ethos to coach you" ... which i take is not about "doubles" and 16948 is just more of the same.   
You must have missed it on 16959
ME: 2013-12-14 09:05:50

Seth says
ME 2013-12-14 10:51:17 16960
seth 2013-12-14 10:46:42 16960
ME 2013-12-14 10:36:49 16960
seth 2013-12-14 10:20:24 16960

hmmm ... now why did i just know that you were going to wave at literature to authorize your point.
I guess in a solipsistic world you don't need any one else's ethos to coach you.
c.f. 16948.

i didn't say that.   i obviously can study all of this myself and re-read steinar about it.   thanks for the url ... someday i may go study this from his perspective again.

i am, however, much more interested in your particular experiences and conceptions on the subject.  

you made a definite connection with your tagging ... it seems to me that it is reasonable for me to ask you to tell me in your own words why you think this is connected to that. 
& I both explained it & gave you a reference.

huh?  where is your "explanation" ?  ... the only thing you said here was " guess in a solipsistic world you don't need any one else's ethos to coach you" ... which i take is not about "doubles" and 16948 is just more of the same.   

Seth says
anyway my society presents me with a plethora of advise and guidance ... most of which comes advertising that, were i to follow it i would become better than my fellow man.  that tantalizing sugar does seems to be in every jar.  yet i can see how that very sugar causes more harm than good around me. 

so i rebel.  thanks, but no thanks ... i prefer to do it myself ... based upon my own experience.

i think most religions have the concept of a higher self ... something that guides and something that i "should"  tune into and listen to.  well i can and have experienced that.  it comes to me like a story in which i am an acting character.  as such it is strong and motivating. 

all i am saying ... er,admitting ... in this item is that i destroy these stories.  i believe them for a while then i see throught them ... and continually construct and mutate new ones.  now what i say here may, or may not, be directly related to the lor of other's stories.  but to me that does not matter in the least.  what does matter to me is other's actual experience about this that they care to communicate to me.  

Seth says
seth 2013-12-16 10:59:16 16960
ME 2013-12-16 08:42:42 16960
experiences & in particular direct experiences can't be clothed in words, [deleted]
... interesting etymology
experience (n.) Look up experience at Dictionary.comlate 14c., "observation as the source of knowledge; actual observation; an event which has affected one," from Old French esperience (13c.) "experiment, proof, experience," from Latin experientia "knowledge gained by repeated trials," from experientem (nominative experiens), present participle of experiri "to try, test," from ex- "out of" (see ex-) + peritus "experienced, tested," from PIE root *per- "to lead, pass over" (see peril). Meaning "state of having done something and gotten handy at it" is from late 15c.

well where there are no words about a thing which are commonly understood, communication about it is difficult and may actually seem impossible.  still and all common experiences leads us to coin the phrases that refer to thingies which sans those common experiences would need to remain totally private. 

then too, if what you call "direct experiences" must of their very nature always remain private to just one individual ... then what could ever be a good reason to even refer to them publicly in the first place?  Would not such a communication always be also saying,  "I have a very important secret, that i know, and your don't".  Me, i call that "ego sugar", and have very little taste for it.
NOPE! but belittle it if you want - your results may vary with effort.  If there were something in a cave that was wonderful except there is no word to describe even how it seems - would you want me to keep it to myself?


Seth says
ME 2013-12-14 11:31:10 16960
seth 2013-12-14 11:27:21 16960
hmm ... note i am relating "higher self" to "doubels" ... in other words RS guardian of the threshold and/or our personal arch Angele.   perhaps you are connecting that concept with a double as a mischievous devil who "makes" your play rwg games.   is that our confusion here?

oh plesase try to read that paragraph not as  a transaction in any  rwg game between ... i guarantee you that it is not ... i am only trying to clear up this confusion here in what we are referring to.
You are the confused one. But fuck, I'm not the one to deconfuse you - you have missed your chance. Too much energy pissed away on it so far.
Droid Exeunt ...


oh hail the great bird of mark's ego ... who has found itself in the right ... and bozo confused.

that no understanding was ever found pails in comparison to this awesome event.

Seth says
experiences & in particular direct experiences can't be clothed in words, dude!
... interesting etymology
experience (n.) Look up experience at Dictionary.comlate 14c., "observation as the source of knowledge; actual observation; an event which has affected one," from Old French esperience (13c.) "experiment, proof, experience," from Latin experientia "knowledge gained by repeated trials," from experientem (nominative experiens), present participle of experiri "to try, test," from ex- "out of" (see ex-) + peritus "experienced, tested," from PIE root *per- "to lead, pass over" (see peril). Meaning "state of having done something and gotten handy at it" is from late 15c.

Seth says
ME 2013-12-16 08:38:07 16960
Why would you be interested in anyone else's accounts of experience given yours & theirs are just stories to throw away?  BTW, most religions are selling salvation (or something like it - heaven, bliss, Nirvana, or being right etc) not being better than someone else.
From G+,



it's the same idea of a better truth ... the stories can get better and better.   i respect other's experiences almost as much as i respect my own ... especially when they are honestly told.  just because you can discard a story ... or not believe it ...  does not mean that there was not something to be gleaned from it. 

incidentally i saw that meme go by this moring too ... and almost repeated it.   it is one of the best expressions of the religious right-wrong game that i have heard ... though it is strange that it comes associagted with a military image.   that right wrong game is certainly a manifestation of the "sugar" i referred to above.  it is so very strange how tightly it is associated with religion and spirituality.  me, i would like to take that out of spirituality ... and, er, see what is left.

Seth says
ME 2013-12-16 08:42:42 16960
experiences & in particular direct experiences can't be clothed in words, [deleted]
... interesting etymology
experience (n.) Look up experience at Dictionary.comlate 14c., "observation as the source of knowledge; actual observation; an event which has affected one," from Old French esperience (13c.) "experiment, proof, experience," from Latin experientia "knowledge gained by repeated trials," from experientem (nominative experiens), present participle of experiri "to try, test," from ex- "out of" (see ex-) + peritus "experienced, tested," from PIE root *per- "to lead, pass over" (see peril). Meaning "state of having done something and gotten handy at it" is from late 15c.

well where there are no words about a thing which are commonly understood, communication about it is difficult and may actually seem impossible.  still and all common experiences leads us to coin the phrases that refer to thingies which sans those common experiences would need to remain totally private. 

then too, if what you call "direct experiences" must of their very nature always remain private to just one individual ... then what could ever be a good reason to even refer to them publicly in the first place?  Would not such a communication always be also saying,  "I have a very important secret, that i know, and your don't".  Me, i call that "ego sugar", and have very little taste for it.

Seth says
ME 2013-12-16 09:52:04 16960
seth 2013-12-16 09:50:27 16960
ME 2013-12-16 08:39:08 16960
seth 2013-12-16 08:16:18 16960
anyway my society presents me with a plethora of advise and guidance ... most of which comes advertising that, were i to follow it i would become better than my fellow man.  that tantalizing sugar does seems to be in every jar.  yet i can see how that very sugar causes more harm than good around me. 

so i rebel.  thanks, but no thanks ... i prefer to do it myself ... based upon my own experience.

i think most religions have the concept of a higher self ... something that guides and something that i "should"  tune into and listen to.  well i can and have experienced that.  it comes to me like a story in which i am an acting character.  as such it is strong and motivating. 

all i am saying ... er,admitting ... in this item is that i destroy these stories.  i believe them for a while then i see throught them ... and continually construct and mutate new ones.  now what i say here may, or may not, be directly related to the lor of other's stories.  but to me that does not matter in the least.  what does matter to me is other's actual experience about this that they care to communicate to me.  
... for some value of this ...


this in my last sentence above = an experience with a higher self.
for some value of "higher self" or self even.


any such experiences would be of interest to me ... any whatsoever ... there is really no reason for me to over specify it ... whatever anyone interprets "higher self" to mean would be what would interest me.

Seth says
seth 2013-12-18 00:03:24 16968
incidentally, the assumptions that i put into my mind and which knit my beliefs together in some semblance of a coherent story are not factual ... they are not of that nature ... they can not be proven one way or another ... they are indefeasible.  if i hold them fast ... if am are passionate about them ... then i do so by dint of habit or faith or personal profit.

is it not the same with you ??

incidentally i originally wrote the paragraph above from the stance of third-person-wise ... but i though it was a better truth were i just admit it in the first person. 
...

Seth says
Einai 2014-05-04 12:54:24 16960
If they are doubles how do you know which is which. How do you know you didn't kill off the wrong one?


well this is certainly an old context from here and one that would need much more study that i care to devote to answer your question.   most of our discussion of doubles seem to happen on 16959 and not here. 

i really do not know what the RS  "double" refers to ... perhaps as you say it means ...
source: mark 16959
RS does NOT describe the Double as a higher self. Where do you think he does? He describes it as Ahriman-Luciver cohabiting all the 4 vehicles of a man i.e. the physical, etheric, astral & ego.
As the ego works on the other three & "purifies" or evolves the higher self evolves out of the other three : spirit-self, life-spirit, spirit-man. the latter 3 are not the doubles we speak of . I suppose it all depends upon what you identify with.  If you identify with the human being in it's sublime state of being you call the Ahriman-Lucifer-Asuras part as the "double".  If you identify with the latter then the other is the double. RS identifies with the more Christ like part.
The Outline of Occult science or KofHW makes this more clear here.
... i simply do not know as that story is way to unknown relative to my current mind.

So perhaps i should not have used the term "doubles" in my title.   I was presuming that RS's occult story of doubles was refering to a "higher self" ... but your description above is far more complicated than that simple understanding permits. 

That said, the paragraph under the title of this item is still true about me.  I am continually killing the stories i find myself living within ... higher or not.   I kill them when they no longer match my experience ... see navigation


Seth says
source: mark
... & you & I will be deleted as contexts on death too in ~ 30 years ...
maybe contexts don't depend upon people after all; your mileage may vary.

well you and i probably have different associations to the word "context".   i call a collection of related marks and events and relationships collected by some being a "context".  it is a simple  mathematical concept.  once collected the collection can change but nothing can really delete it as such.   but of course people's awareness of the context changes as they move on to other contexts.  i realize that is a mathematical description with no spiritual or mystical associations ... but that is all that i need for the sake of analysis and mental comprehension of context for use in predicting and modeling reality.   but as you can see, by definition, such contexts absolutely depend on some being to do the collecting.  sans the collector, i can think of nothing that i could call context ... or for that matter, that i could call anything at all .


Seth says
Einai 2014-05-04 14:16:32 16960
I was just playing off a meme which I can't find now which said something like when you look in the mirror how do you know that the real you is not the one in the mirror & you are the reflection?

Nevertheless, here we have found that a context can age. Is it the context or the person who once had the idea or thought in a context of some kind?
Funny thingy an aging context . I suspect it might be more aging grey matter.


well i like your concept of "contexts aging"

This one certainly has and it has not been all that long.   Of course it is not really the context that has aged by rather we who have gone on to include different things within the context of our minds and/or have forgotten the old associations ... and that transporting our minds back to these aged contexts would take way too much study.  A wise author once said , "You can't go home again".  For me the contexts of RS and GW and AC seem aged quite beyond a casual visit.

See Also

  1. Thought Context with 5 viewings related by tag "item 16960".
  2. Thought Thought, will, emotion, movement. Paint the whole picture. with 0 viewings related by tag "16959".
  3. Thought The Ego with 0 viewings related by tag "doubles".