For some ... the PacSelf Game
About: Werner Erhard & his optical illusion of a self structure
Tags
- pacself
- pacman
- who am i
Comments
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-12-30 13:47:13 16997
very kewl visual gestalt 
. not sure how it becomes a pacman 
game 
i wonder if you can see how this gestalt is dealing with some of the same things that make me say my ego is just a festering pit and the more i focus on who i am, the more the answer hazes into oblivion.
. not sure how it becomes a pacman
i wonder if you can see how this gestalt is dealing with some of the same things that make me say my ego is just a festering pit and the more i focus on who i am, the more the answer hazes into oblivion.
This is more like the PR version of the Ego. You & I use the same word for different things. Sometimes I think I am just having a conversation with myself, & imagining some of it in your voice (or posts) - #s 5 & 2 in the diagram not fulfilled by external response. Sometimes it is just a dual monologue playing as a dialogue.
Mark de LA says
Being has no tangible thingness to it. Such is similar to the words "I" and "being" etc. I've pointed to them before in BofNK . Such is what I was pointing to here. You might say that this is the picture of the false or lower ego. I use RS's distinction of the Ego as one body amongst the 4 we have in a 4-part analysis of a human at this time in evolution. They are of course integrated into one, but the distinctions are not all available with the 5-physical senses. There is nothing wrong here it's just so & time away from the spiritual worlds to develop logic, rationality & the like.
Seth says
well frequently i feel the same way
... me thinks the trick is to break through from dual monologue to actual dialogue. with good will and common purpose on both sides, i actually think it is possible, even with an ass hole like myself.
just a technical note on words: each single word will of its nature means something different to you than it does to me even in the same context .... but just by virtue of arithmetic a phrase of several words tends to evolve to meaning more the same thing to both of us. for example "ego as a festering pit" means more than just "ego" ... "PR's and Alan Watt's version of ego" is more likely to match up between us than just "ego".
MeE 2013-12-30 15:11:44 16997
seth 2013-12-30 13:47:13 16997
very kewl visual gestalt . not sure how it becomes a pacman
game
i wonder if you can see how this gestalt is dealing with some of the same things that make me say my ego is just a festering pit and the more i focus on who i am, the more the answer hazes into oblivion.
. not sure how it becomes a pacman
i wonder if you can see how this gestalt is dealing with some of the same things that make me say my ego is just a festering pit and the more i focus on who i am, the more the answer hazes into oblivion.
This is more like the PR version of the Ego. You & I use the same word for different things. Sometimes I think I am just having a conversation with myself, & imagining some of it in your voice (or posts) - #s 5 & 2 in the diagram not fulfilled by external response. Sometimes it is just a dual monologue playing as a dialogue.
well frequently i feel the same way
... me thinks the trick is to break through from dual monologue to actual dialogue. with good will and common purpose on both sides, i actually think it is possible, even with an ass hole like myself.just a technical note on words: each single word will of its nature means something different to you than it does to me even in the same context .... but just by virtue of arithmetic a phrase of several words tends to evolve to meaning more the same thing to both of us. for example "ego as a festering pit" means more than just "ego" ... "PR's and Alan Watt's version of ego" is more likely to match up between us than just "ego".
Mark de LA says
seth 2014-01-01 09:48:31 16997
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
MeE 2013-12-30 15:55:13 16997
Being has no tangible thingness to it. Such is similar to the words "I" and "being" etc. I've pointed to them before in BofNK . Such is what I was pointing to here. You might say that this is the picture of the false or lower ego. I use RS's distinction of the Ego as one body amongst the 4 we have in a 4-part analysis of a human at this time in evolution. They are of course integrated into one, but the distinctions are not all available with the 5-physical senses. There is nothing wrong here it's just so & time away from the spiritual worlds to develop logic, rationality & the like.
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
Hmmm... glory & jealousy are YOUR attitudes, not mine. I seek the unity of it all.
Mark de LA says
seth 2014-01-01 11:24:09 16997
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
MeE 2014-01-01 10:28:10 16997
seth 2014-01-01 09:48:31 16997
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
MeE 2013-12-30 15:55:13 16997
Being has no tangible thingness to it. Such is similar to the words "I" and "being" etc. I've pointed to them before in BofNK . Such is what I was pointing to here. You might say that this is the picture of the false or lower ego. I use RS's distinction of the Ego as one body amongst the 4 we have in a 4-part analysis of a human at this time in evolution. They are of course integrated into one, but the distinctions are not all available with the 5-physical senses. There is nothing wrong here it's just so & time away from the spiritual worlds to develop logic, rationality & the like.
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
Hmmm... glory & jealousy are YOUR attitudes, not mine. I seek the unity of it all.
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
Why did you bring those two words into the conversation? huh? I didn't except to point them out. Bad mind reading .
Seth says
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
MeE 2014-01-01 10:28:10 16997
seth 2014-01-01 09:48:31 16997
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
MeE 2013-12-30 15:55:13 16997
Being has no tangible thingness to it. Such is similar to the words "I" and "being" etc. I've pointed to them before in BofNK . Such is what I was pointing to here. You might say that this is the picture of the false or lower ego. I use RS's distinction of the Ego as one body amongst the 4 we have in a 4-part analysis of a human at this time in evolution. They are of course integrated into one, but the distinctions are not all available with the 5-physical senses. There is nothing wrong here it's just so & time away from the spiritual worlds to develop logic, rationality & the like.
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
Hmmm... glory & jealousy are YOUR attitudes, not mine. I seek the unity of it all.
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
Seth says
wow, your still on those words ... which as you observe i did not pick out of your mind ... rather out of the edges of the topic itself.
MeE 2014-01-01 12:37:35 16997
seth 2014-01-01 11:24:09 16997
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
MeE 2014-01-01 10:28:10 16997
seth 2014-01-01 09:48:31 16997
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
MeE 2013-12-30 15:55:13 16997
Being has no tangible thingness to it. Such is similar to the words "I" and "being" etc. I've pointed to them before in BofNK . Such is what I was pointing to here. You might say that this is the picture of the false or lower ego. I use RS's distinction of the Ego as one body amongst the 4 we have in a 4-part analysis of a human at this time in evolution. They are of course integrated into one, but the distinctions are not all available with the 5-physical senses. There is nothing wrong here it's just so & time away from the spiritual worlds to develop logic, rationality & the like.
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
Hmmm... glory & jealousy are YOUR attitudes, not mine. I seek the unity of it all.
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
Why did you bring those two words into the conversation? huh? I didn't except to point them out. Bad mind reading .
wow, your still on those words ... which as you observe i did not pick out of your mind ... rather out of the edges of the topic itself.
Mark de LA says
seth 2014-01-01 12:47:55 16997
wow, your still on those words ... which as you observe i did not pick out of your mind ... rather out of the edges of the topic itself.
MeE 2014-01-01 12:37:35 16997
seth 2014-01-01 11:24:09 16997
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
MeE 2014-01-01 10:28:10 16997
seth 2014-01-01 09:48:31 16997
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
MeE 2013-12-30 15:55:13 16997
Being has no tangible thingness to it. Such is similar to the words "I" and "being" etc. I've pointed to them before in BofNK . Such is what I was pointing to here. You might say that this is the picture of the false or lower ego. I use RS's distinction of the Ego as one body amongst the 4 we have in a 4-part analysis of a human at this time in evolution. They are of course integrated into one, but the distinctions are not all available with the 5-physical senses. There is nothing wrong here it's just so & time away from the spiritual worlds to develop logic, rationality & the like.
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
Hmmm... glory & jealousy are YOUR attitudes, not mine. I seek the unity of it all.
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
Why did you bring those two words into the conversation? huh? I didn't except to point them out. Bad mind reading .
wow, your still on those words ... which as you observe i did not pick out of your mind ... rather out of the edges of the topic itself.
Well they are nothing I had anything to do with nor are they in the topic which is self or "I" in some form. Delete them from YOUR conversation & I will delete them from mine.
Seth says
er ... well can you actually delete them?? ... i mean with your I sitting there and all? try saying something about the topic that does not imply them in the dialogue meaning of your message ... if you can demonstarte that to me ... well then i might believe that they, which attitudes shall henceforth remain un-named, were actually deleted ...
... er, ??
MeE 2014-01-01 12:51:53 16997
seth 2014-01-01 12:47:55 16997
wow, your still on those words ... which as you observe i did not pick out of your mind ... rather out of the edges of the topic itself.
MeE 2014-01-01 12:37:35 16997
seth 2014-01-01 11:24:09 16997
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
MeE 2014-01-01 10:28:10 16997
seth 2014-01-01 09:48:31 16997
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
MeE 2013-12-30 15:55:13 16997
Being has no tangible thingness to it. Such is similar to the words "I" and "being" etc. I've pointed to them before in BofNK . Such is what I was pointing to here. You might say that this is the picture of the false or lower ego. I use RS's distinction of the Ego as one body amongst the 4 we have in a 4-part analysis of a human at this time in evolution. They are of course integrated into one, but the distinctions are not all available with the 5-physical senses. There is nothing wrong here it's just so & time away from the spiritual worlds to develop logic, rationality & the like.
well i HAIL your experience in the spiritual world and even its heritage ... even thought i don't want it myself ... and even though the word "glorious" cannot describe it ... and i truly mean the hail even though i predict you expect that i am just "jealous", which word also could not have described my feelings either. you see, i also seek the higher thing with no tangible thingness to it. but that glory i seek, from choice and nature, from the outside-in rather than from the inside-out ... or said differently i expect it outside myself so i don't look for it inside. that your direction informs mine and visa versa is quite very enough for me to entice communication about it, sans the "itness", of course ... eh?
Hmmm... glory & jealousy are YOUR attitudes, not mine. I seek the unity of it all.
like i said ... er, quite specifically .... those cannot be the words and cannot descirbe either my attitudes or yours, all uppercase. yet something had to be put there as a place holder just like you use a word "being" with no tangeable thingness ... strange that you woud pick up on those as important to highlight. to tell the difference re-read my message without those unnamed thingies in there.
"unity" is now a new word in the mix ... me, i am not so very sure i seek that ... inside or outside myself. i mean why, er how, where, when do you seek such a thing? i mean are not there many different and separated processess or beings or sprits in your world ... why must needs they collapse??
Why did you bring those two words into the conversation? huh? I didn't except to point them out. Bad mind reading .
wow, your still on those words ... which as you observe i did not pick out of your mind ... rather out of the edges of the topic itself.
Well they are nothing I had anything to do with nor are they in the topic which is self or "I" in some form. Delete them from YOUR conversation & I will delete them from mine.
er ... well can you actually delete them?? ... i mean with your I sitting there and all? try saying something about the topic that does not imply them in the dialogue meaning of your message ... if you can demonstarte that to me ... well then i might believe that they, which attitudes shall henceforth remain un-named, were actually deleted ...
... er, ??
Seth says
hmmm ... interesting discussion above ... hard to follow with all the nesting. why did this come up again?
hmmm ... interesting discussion above ... hard to follow with all the nesting. why did this come up again?
Mark de LA says
seth 2014-04-01 19:53:33 16997
hmmm ... interesting discussion above ... hard to follow with all the nesting. why did this come up again?
hmmm ... interesting discussion above ... hard to follow with all the nesting. why did this come up again? Because this showed up in FBk & I replied on it. I had originally thought there was more to Erhards revival of it, but I guess not except the "I" question. Anyway, I like my reply.
See Also
- Thought I am a variable with 115 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought I am what i do with 28 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought Distinctions that I can make that make more sense to ME with 14 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought To BE or NOT 2 B ? Is There a Question in There Somewhere? with 12 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought Who am I ? with 9 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought Creative use of the Conscience with 1 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought Going Meta with 0 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought moment 2 moment with 0 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought I change ... with 0 viewings related by tag "who am i".
- Thought The I of Seth with 0 viewings related by tag "who am i".