From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 5:21:14 AM UTC-7, slider wrote:

### - no jeremy, you're going out on a huge limb here quite unnecessarily, there's no need for all this except perhaps in your pedantic-type paranoid reasoning, as both chris & i are, ahem, fully grown up peeps who are perfectly able to laff & joke around on this so-well-known subject without getting into danger, ok? i mean duh! give it a fucking rest already! we're not talkin' Nietzsche here! :)

The fact that you contradicted yourselves every time you tried to speak
on the subject (and refused to even listen to my attempts to dig
into the real issues deeper) proves that this isn't "unnecessary".

i know you 'think' you mean well, but in truth *you're* the one who's all messed up with and by all this, not us! we're just horsing around having
fun here throwing these concepts around, and i for one don't appreciate
being jumped on and lectured each and every time when even just the very 'idea' crops up?? piss off!

I don't think you even "meant well".

You refused to contemplate the deeper concepts I wanted to discuss
and now say "piss off, we were only horsing around". Yes, exactly,
you were only horsing around with issues that are genuinely deep
and embedded in virtually every aspect of life, and at first your
only reaction was to try to "prove me wrong". (You've tried that
a hundred times without ever succeeding, one would think you'd get
tired of banging your own head). Oh no, I'm not supposed to discuss
anything deeper related to this very serious subject of belief
and imagination. Not when you guys are both busy "horsing around"
and laughing and "being right". :) You don't want to delve into
the truth about anything; you just want argue and be right and
horse around, so that's all anyone else here can do too.

The sad part is that you never get to even hear most of my deeper
ideas. We never almost never get there, because literally you won't
allow such concepts to be fully explored without starting a fight
and derailing the discussion. Apparently you're THAT threatened.

I wasn't even arguing with you at first. I only wanted to
more deeply explore these issues. Just as I always do. :)

imho, alpert was alright! and if he wants to describe his own personal experiences in india in hindu-type related terms then that's fine by me, having made some small study of inian history, their religions & beliefs myself, i think i know what he's talking about in the way he & they both
mean it in that 'very flowery' 10,000+ year old language of theirs, facets
of which there's absolutely nothing wrong with! they have 'their' long-evolved (& evolving) 'conceptualisations' and we have ours! to the
point that the world is literally 'full' of such man-made things! wading waist-deep in them we are! (well, chris & i are actually surfing on 'em
heh, but that's another story + your teabreak's nearly over lol...)

Have you even read the book?? I have it right here. It is literally
filled with religious beliefs from start to finish. When you both
JUST said you wanted to "imagine a world with no beliefs"
(although that is a naive view). If it is any consolation, Vini does
try to envision just such a world in his book. Yet obviously,
my opinion is that this too is merely an imaginative belief
that could not (and should not) come to pass.

You apparently DO still need to be lectured on this subject. :)

truth is, every culture has its own stories right? its conceptualised
ideas about what life, the universe & everything is supposed to be all
about, right? - and 'believe' me (a figure of speak only heh) ours is just 'as flowery' (if not as wacky) as theirs is! - 'coz the world of 'ideas'
is NOT the same as the underlying real world reality!

now what's so hard (or difficult) about that??

Contradicting yourself at every turn. First, in matters of belief
vs. fact, you admitted it was about "complete evidence", yet now
you turn around and act as if beliefs are only an undifferentiated
"world of ideas", and suddenly the whole concept of evidence has
completely *vanished*. Plus, you're still defending a book filled
with myriad religious beliefs for which there's no credible evidence.

Yet many beliefs ARE well-founded on a LOT of evidence. It's not only
"a world of ideas". That's a smokescreen. That's the way someone like
Trump acts - as if there IS NO TRUTH and thus it's ALL ONLY about
just making your own ideas "win" out, even if they're all lies.
Trump is a veritable prophet of "belief without evidence".
He's the anti-knowledge. He's the literal incarnation of '1984'.

the only 'real' problem, is that we're reduced to using 'words' (i.e. conceptualised ideas) to communicate with, so we have to know before we
even start that ya can't take anything too literally! (this being the
basis of my thing that all words are lies etc...) and because take things literally and ya ends up in wallyworld every time!

Wow. Now you descend to the ultimate deception. Just as Trump does.
See, it doesn't matter WHAT one says or believes or professes if
"all words are lies". It's impossible to even have an intelligible
conversation with someone who descends to that level of deception.
It's what I'd call the ultimate denial of responsibility.

"Hey, it doesn't matter WHAT I say, because it's all lies anyway."

In that world, Carlos Castaneda is still a great hero. After all,
he told his endless lies very artistically, yes?

Truly, I've never even heard Trump go quite that far although he
certainly behaves as if he might. Indeed, saying "all words are lies"
might be the most despicable smokescreen ever employed. With such a
belief, there is no longer even the possibility of real integrity.
Are you THAT afraid of not being right that you'll destroy the very
idea of even TRYING to express truth or describe evidence correctly
as to insist it's impossible to describe *anything* accurately, ever?

If you really believe that, then you don't even believe in the
efficacy of evidence and you shouldn't ever write here again.
Why do it? Do you think we all want to argue with endless lies?
How is there any 'sincerity' at all if anything said is 'lying'?
Recall that 'lying' isn't merely being wrong, it's intentionally
misleading and misinforming people.

If all words are lies, then ignorance is strength, freedom is
slavery, and war is peace. And only art matters. LOL.
Wow, talk about lost.

so ok, at some point chris gots around to considering 'imagine no
believing' + what would life be like under such circumstances... well
isn't vinny actually doing something very similar right now, and writing
out what he considers might just be key ideas that could possibly also liberate others in the way he now feels liberated? isn't he just also saying/suggesting that it's entirely feasible to just drop all that crap
and be/live more in the now (belive versus believe? smile...)

Yes, and Vini was serious enough about this topic to write an entire
book about it. And I have read that entire book, not only read it,
but assisted him in editing it and clarifying some of it, and I have
a plethora of ideas of my own on this subject, some of which frankly
go beyond anything Vini ever says. I was only beginning to explore
a few of those ideas, when you insisted on having yet another
argument filled with lies, which I'll have to assume is one of
the few things you're genuinely interested in doing.

and if the fucking indians were talking 'bout all that too 10,000 years
ago in that fancy fuckin' language of their, then so what? virtually
'every' culture worldwide has some reference to this/aspects of this, and
as such we have to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to examining shit!

If any of their ideas are supportable with evidence, encompassing theory
and cogent argument, or if any of them are valuable purely as an
artistic expression, I'd be the last person to throw it out. But if all
of his book is merely lies as you claim, why not throw it all out?
Is the only possible value of ANY book supposedly just aesthetic?
Then call it the book "art" and don't present its content as fact.
It is presented as religious belief - as "ultimate incontestable truth".

It is presented as "advice for living", not just as "art".
You even offered it as advice. You touted "be here now" to me
(yet turned around hypocritically to attack my PAST beliefs,
when the very reason I'm so knowledgeable regarding 'belief' is
those past struggles).

And btw, it doesn't matter whether musical information is being
consciously recalled or unconsciously engrained, that process -
which may be different for every musician - is still a part of
the past that must be accessed every time the song is played,
and while playing you're also constantly considering what you're
about to play NEXT. You are not simply only "totally immersed
in the moment". Don't even bother claiming that; I've been playing
music myself since I was 8 years old.

have personally only really ever discovered just the ONE 'Truth' jeremy:
that humanity has its head stuck up its arse and as a consequence only
ever sees its own shit (heh) - only that doesn't absolutely have to be
(nor remain) the case indefinitely... (nurse: the culo-expander please! hah...)

So that's your ONE 'truth'. A derogatory over-generalization reducing
every human endeavor and every human to a generic pack of lies?
That's the ultimate cynicism and the ultimate dismissal of everyone
who ever lived (except yourself of course). Again, it isn't possible
to have a meaningful conversation with someone who professes such
beliefs. First, you say you want "no beliefs" yet here express a
truly diabolical *belief* - one that even arrogantly implies that
somehow you're the only one alive with any real idea of 'truth',
yet to my ears, it's merely unsupported insanity and cynicism.

plus it's not like you're even offering anything better! except maybe the eradication/extermination of Art, Poetry & Literature in the process
merely because YOU don't understand it??

and so now ya also wanna BURN the book 'Be Here Now' as well???

feck off! - it's a lovely book! a most unusual book! a beautiful book! :)

is actually a work of Art!

(you're dumping on Art jeremy! that's how 'wrong/off' you are!)

As you so often do, because you refuse to actually listen, now you're
trying to twist everything I said into something I never said at all.
Maybe all YOUR words ARE lies? :)

In fact, I distinguish between works of art and religious beliefs
and indeed any statements intended to be factual. Because to me,
not all words are lies. Some words are very well-supported by
voluminous real-world evidence. And a work of art, of course,
need not be. I'm fine with artists. Always have been.
I occasionally create works of art myself. You're so desperate
you're building yet another straw man to burn.

And I guess top-posting like that was supposed to show disrespect
and disregard for everything I was trying to explore. You have indeed
once again successfully derailed what could have been a genuinely
interesting discussion on the nature of belief. You might have
heard some ideas you haven't even fully heard before. Yet truly,
disrespect is the usual content of most of your posts anyway,
especially given that by your own admission, they're totally
filled from start to finish with nothing but lies.

How could anyone ever take your posts seriously after that admission?
Trump has already told thousands of lies, and that's exactly why
I refuse to accept him as our country's rightful leader.

On Thu, 31 May 2018 06:41:29 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
wrote:

Look guys... you were both talking about having "no beliefs".
But then you BOTH ended up defending this "be here now" *belief*. Apparently without noticing any contradiction?

This is one reason I was concerned about beliefs. :)
Many, many people are irrational as hell about their beliefs.

And 'Baba Ram Dass' goes far beyond merely saying "be here now".
His book is full of many, many other beliefs, really wild ones.
Reminder, you were both claiming you wanted "no beliefs", right?

For example, just a few pages into his book, the Baba says:
"energy = love = awareness = light = wisdom = beauty =
truth = purity... It's all the same."

That's not only a basketful of beliefs, it's metaphorical gibberish.
Ram Dass makes claims such as that if "you have left the gravitational field of time and space" then you can see "karma unfolding" in
such a way in which "this life is only part of a mosaic".
Here he professes his belief in karma and reincarnation.

I will remind you once again, you were wondering what it would be
like to get rid of "beliefs", and yet... just a little later you're
both defending this "be here now" belief from Ram Dass, whose book
is an endless series of metaphysical and religious beliefs. Weird.

Getting "stuck" obsessing on *anything*, including the past, future,
*or present*, isn't great. There are times when it's necessary to
focus on the past, and times when it's good to focus on the future.

For example, if you sit down to create a resume, or write your autobiography, or balance your checkbook, etc. you'll find it is
necessary to focus on past actions, although you'll perform
the activity itself in the present (again, there is no way
to actually perform an activity other than in the present).

And if you want to take a week-long trip somewhere, unless you
carefully plan a route encompassing everything you want to see
in an efficient way and make all needed reservations, I guarantee
you'll have trouble that could have been avoided by taking time
to focus on planning the future in an orderly fashion. Go ahead,
try always just showing up in the "now" for anything you decide
you want to do, without first focusing on the future long enough
to get reservations, tickets, and/or detailed info about where
you're going, and find out what happens, compared to how it goes
with good planning.

I know what happens because when I was young and foolish I tried
many times to do things spontaneously in the moment - since it was
my natural style. I got turned away from stuff I wanted to do
several times because I hadn't prepared for the future situation.
I'm still a big fan of leaving some space for spontaneous actions,

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: slider@anashram.com

On Thu, 31 May 2018 15:53:51 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan <david.j.worrell@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 5:21:14 AM UTC-7, slider wrote:

### - no jeremy, you're going out on a huge limb here quite
unnecessarily,
there's no need for all this except perhaps in your pedantic-type
paranoid
reasoning, as both chris & i are, ahem, fully grown up peeps who are
perfectly able to laff & joke around on this so-well-known subject
without
getting into danger, ok? i mean duh! give it a fucking rest already!
we're
not talkin' Nietzsche here! :)

The fact that you contradicted yourselves every time you tried to speak
on the subject (and refused to even listen to my attempts to dig
into the real issues deeper) proves that this isn't "unnecessary".

### - oh don't be so daft heh... admittedly there is, however, a kinda contradictory/paradoxical element to Art if only because Art isn't really something rational per se that can be duly defined & nailed down... and is
in fact the very criterion that 'makes' it Art! and which is something ya
have to allow for whenever appraising it... Art is 'subjective' not
objective!

i know you 'think' you mean well, but in truth *you're* the one who's
all
messed up with and by all this, not us! we're just horsing around having
fun here throwing these concepts around, and i for one don't appreciate
being jumped on and lectured each and every time when even just the very
'idea' crops up?? piss off!

I don't think you even "meant well".

You refused to contemplate the deeper concepts I wanted to discuss
and now say "piss off, we were only horsing around". Yes, exactly,
you were only horsing around with issues that are genuinely deep
and embedded in virtually every aspect of life, and at first your
only reaction was to try to "prove me wrong". (You've tried that
a hundred times without ever succeeding, one would think you'd get
tired of banging your own head).

### - nooo... not so much trying to prove you wrong as just sticking to my original guns which 'you' were trying to prove wrong/casting doubt upon!
(a clarification isn't an attempt to prove something wrong, it's the
attempt to prove something right :)

Oh no, I'm not supposed to discuss
anything deeper related to this very serious subject of belief
and imagination. Not when you guys are both busy "horsing around"
and laughing and "being right". :) You don't want to delve into
the truth about anything; you just want argue and be right and
horse around, so that's all anyone else here can do too.

### - perhaps we just didn't feel we needed to 're-examine' all that
again? :)

our jokes & quips based on realisations already arrived at! and on 'that'
basis horsing around with a couple of novel + resulting ideas stemming
'from' those same realisations! the validity or no OF those realisations
wasn't even in question! (we'll find that out later wont we?) thus it was
just a novel 'what-if' situation! and we knew that already! iow: we were
merely 'modeling' a novel concept! turning it this way and that + enjoying
the many novel vistas applying such a model created! the puns on lennon
were brilliant! (at least his was anyway, a far step-up from my initial
one: his "imagine no believing!" was great IN THAT CONTEXT!!! hahaha :)))

The sad part is that you never get to even hear most of my deeper
ideas. We never almost never get there, because literally you won't
allow such concepts to be fully explored without starting a fight
and derailing the discussion. Apparently you're THAT threatened.

I wasn't even arguing with you at first. I only wanted to
more deeply explore these issues. Just as I always do. :)

### - your intention was a lot clearer than that from the outset jeremy!

you were there ONLY to piss on a parade! i did indeed think you were only
kinda joking at first and fully intended to come back to you on it
in-kind, that is until i saw the 'studied effect' you'd had on poor old
matey there? (you actually hurt his feelings there a tinge??) luckily, old slider was right there with the bandaids heh and there'll be no lasting
damage! (now aren't you glad of that? because am pretty sure you didn't 'actually' intend' to damage him, or did you? and because if you did then
we've gots another, even bigger problem!)

imho, alpert was alright! and if he wants to describe his own personal
experiences in india in hindu-type related terms then that's fine by me,
having made some small study of inian history, their religions & beliefs
myself, i think i know what he's talking about in the way he & they both
mean it in that 'very flowery' 10,000+ year old language of theirs,
facets
of which there's absolutely nothing wrong with! they have 'their'
long-evolved (& evolving) 'conceptualisations' and we have ours! to the
point that the world is literally 'full' of such man-made things! wading
waist-deep in them we are! (well, chris & i are actually surfing on 'em
heh, but that's another story + your teabreak's nearly over lol...)

Have you even read the book?? I have it right here. It is literally
filled with religious beliefs from start to finish.

### - as a matter of fact heh, at around age 23 it was actually one of the
very first books i ever read on the subject, given to me by some
half-crazed dealer-dude, who, after talking/listening to me for about 15 minutes, announced that i was a 'hindu' and so handed me that book as a
gift to go play with hehehe (true story!) - i didn't even know wtf he was talkin' about at the time lol but accepted his gift and duly studied it +
i'd never come across anything even remotely like it before!

plus funny how you can 'step on a path and then begin to see it
everywhere'; because the next thing ya know i bumped into a couple of
dudes doin' meditation at some local hindu temple, tellin' me stories
about getting 'knowledge' (or something) from some guru there and shit
(the implication being that he could just somehow impart this 'knowledge' direct into your head, not an explanation as such but the sudden
understanding of something you previously didn't know anything about etc etc...)

i never went there personally, but the idea grew! and so began my long investigation into such things beginning with the hindu-aspect of it all
(well ya gots to start somewhere don'tcha?)

When you both
JUST said you wanted to "imagine a world with no beliefs"
(although that is a naive view). If it is any consolation, Vini does
try to envision just such a world in his book. Yet obviously,
my opinion is that this too is merely an imaginative belief
that could not (and should not) come to pass.

### - and you, no doubt, saw it as us sinking into quicksand i suppose
hehehe :)

as for vinni i think he's doin' alright! so leave him be!

let him get it all out in his own way! (write your own book if you have a different idea)

You apparently DO still need to be lectured on this subject. :)

### - hehehe :)))

truth is, every culture has its own stories right? its conceptualised
ideas about what life, the universe & everything is supposed to be all
about, right? - and 'believe' me (a figure of speak only heh) ours is
just
'as flowery' (if not as wacky) as theirs is! - 'coz the world of 'ideas'
is NOT the same as the underlying real world reality!

now what's so hard (or difficult) about that??

Contradicting yourself at every turn. First, in matters of belief
vs. fact, you admitted it was about "complete evidence", yet now
you turn around and act as if beliefs are only an undifferentiated
"world of ideas", and suddenly the whole concept of evidence has
completely *vanished*.

### - hey presto! :)

Plus, you're still defending a book filled
with myriad religious beliefs for which there's no credible evidence.

### - there is NEVER ever gonna BE "creditable evidence" for... ART!

Art exists on an entirely different plane :)

Yet many beliefs ARE well-founded on a LOT of evidence. It's not only
"a world of ideas". That's a smokescreen. That's the way someone like
Trump acts - as if there IS NO TRUTH and thus it's ALL ONLY about
just making your own ideas "win" out, even if they're all lies.
Trump is a veritable prophet of "belief without evidence".
He's the anti-knowledge. He's the literal incarnation of '1984'.

### - correction: merely the most 'recent' incarnation 'coz they're all
like that!

the only 'real' problem, is that we're reduced to using 'words' (i.e.
conceptualised ideas) to communicate with, so we have to know before we
even start that ya can't take anything too literally! (this being the
basis of my thing that all words are lies etc...) and because take
things
literally and ya ends up in wallyworld every time!

Wow. Now you descend to the ultimate deception. Just as Trump does.
See, it doesn't matter WHAT one says or believes or professes if
"all words are lies".

### - am not hitler either so stop attempting to 'demonise' me with trump hehehe...

and... IF it's correct that all words ARE lies, then it really *doesn't*
matter what we say/believe! and would prolly be better if we didn't say anything at all! such is the conundrum involved!

we can, however, speak while bearing all that in-mind, and as a result not
get too tied-down to definitions etc...

It's impossible to even have an intelligible
conversation with someone who descends to that level of deception.
It's what I'd call the ultimate denial of responsibility.

"Hey, it doesn't matter WHAT I say, because it's all lies anyway."

### - if you 'really' knew/understood that perhaps you wouldn't take
yourself quite so seriously?

you'd allow a little 'lea-way' in your calculations for error? plus you'd dabble in ideas with maybe a little more detachment so as not to get stuck
in any one of them in particular instead of needing/having everything
nailed down?

In that world, Carlos Castaneda is still a great hero. After all,
he told his endless lies very artistically, yes?

### - who can possibly deny, that IF he REALLY 'made up' ALL that shit,
that he wasn't a brilliant + incredibly inventive/creative writer?
(convinced you for 10 years didn't he??) :)

Truly, I've never even heard Trump go quite that far although he
certainly behaves as if he might. Indeed, saying "all words are lies"
might be the most despicable smokescreen ever employed. With such a
belief, there is no longer even the possibility of real integrity.

### - yeah imagine that... just forgetting all that shite and letting it
all go??

what a relief! :D (that's wot vinny says anyways heh...)

plus don't forgets to flush! lol :)

Are you THAT afraid of not being right that you'll destroy the very
idea of even TRYING to express truth or describe evidence correctly
as to insist it's impossible to describe *anything* accurately, ever?

### - i think my 'point' all along has been that Truth per se cannot BE described accurately! that 'any' description necessarily distorts the
original thereof due to the nature of the limiting terms used to define
it... that the 'life' aspect of it all pertains more to the world of Art
than to rational science! that to 'explain' pears in 'apple-terms' is thus impossible! ya have to keep 'em separate! ;)

If you really believe that, then you don't even believe in the
efficacy of evidence and you shouldn't ever write here again.

### - hahaha don't think i haven't thought of it lol, after all, buddha's 'silence' apparently said volumes more than all those clever speeches at
the mela heh ;)

Why do it? Do you think we all want to argue with endless lies?
How is there any 'sincerity' at all if anything said is 'lying'?
Recall that 'lying' isn't merely being wrong, it's intentionally
misleading and misinforming people.

### - people aren't deliberately 'lying' when they state that the week
starts on a monday and ends on a sunday? that there's only 7 days to a
week? that's genuinely what they think is really occurring! the Egyptians
otoh, asserted a 10-day week?? so who's right and who's wrong or is the
whole fucking thing just arbitrary anyway?!

iow: peeps are born into that reality! thus they don't realise that their
words are clothing the underlying reality with an inherited/invented
reality of their own! they're not even aware that they're doing it! it's
all they've ever known!

and so now here's the problem: how to fuckin' tell 'em!

how to tell 'em that; beyond everything they 'think' they know to be real
& final, vast though it all appears to be, is in fact, another world! a
much bigger world! one that literally dwarfs their own!

well, chances are they'd just nail ya to the nearest tree and have done
with ya innit lol! (such quaint little customs they have on this planet hehehe...)

If all words are lies, then ignorance is strength, freedom is
slavery, and war is peace. And only art matters. LOL.
Wow, talk about lost.

### - (slider singing...) 'i once was lost but now am found' hehehe :)))

so ok, at some point chris gots around to considering 'imagine no
believing' + what would life be like under such circumstances... well
isn't vinny actually doing something very similar right now, and writing
out what he considers might just be key ideas that could possibly also
liberate others in the way he now feels liberated? isn't he just also
saying/suggesting that it's entirely feasible to just drop all that crap
and be/live more in the now (belive versus believe? smile...)

Yes, and Vini was serious enough about this topic to write an entire
book about it. And I have read that entire book, not only read it,
but assisted him in editing it and clarifying some of it, and I have
a plethora of ideas of my own on this subject, some of which frankly
go beyond anything Vini ever says. I was only beginning to explore
a few of those ideas, when you insisted on having yet another
argument filled with lies, which I'll have to assume is one of
the few things you're genuinely interested in doing.

### - no jeremy, we were horsing around with some of vinny's ideas, and
you wanna shit all over it and stomp it under 'coz YOU'VE gots... BETTER ideas!?

so write your OWN book then why don'tcha! plus that way ya wont keep
getting interrupted hah

and if the fucking indians were talking 'bout all that too 10,000 years
ago in that fancy fuckin' language of their, then so what? virtually
'every' culture worldwide has some reference to this/aspects of this,
and
as such we have to be careful not to throw the baby out with the
bathwater
when it comes to examining shit!

If any of their ideas are supportable with evidence, encompassing theory
and cogent argument, or if any of them are valuable purely as an

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: david.j.worrell@gmail.com

On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 10:14:24 AM UTC-7, slider wrote:

On Thu, 31 May 2018 15:53:51 +0100, Jeremy H. Denisovan
wrote:

On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 5:21:14 AM UTC-7, slider wrote:

### - no jeremy, you're going out on a huge limb here quite
unnecessarily,
there's no need for all this except perhaps in your pedantic-type
paranoid
reasoning, as both chris & i are, ahem, fully grown up peeps who are
perfectly able to laff & joke around on this so-well-known subject
without
getting into danger, ok? i mean duh! give it a fucking rest already!
we're
not talkin' Nietzsche here! :)

The fact that you contradicted yourselves every time you tried to speak
on the subject (and refused to even listen to my attempts to dig
into the real issues deeper) proves that this isn't "unnecessary".

### - oh don't be so daft heh... admittedly there is, however, a kinda contradictory/paradoxical element to Art if only because Art isn't really something rational per se that can be duly defined & nailed down... and is in fact the very criterion that 'makes' it Art! and which is something ya have to allow for whenever appraising it... Art is 'subjective' not objective!

I wasn't talking about 'Art'. That's just one of your smokescreens
attempting to derail the real discourse. It's just as idiotic to try
to equate 'art and religious belief' as it is to try to equate 'religious belief and science'. If that's what you're now trying to do now?

No surprise. With you, there's "no error of reasoning unturned". :)

i know you 'think' you mean well, but in truth *you're* the one who's
all
messed up with and by all this, not us! we're just horsing around having >> fun here throwing these concepts around, and i for one don't appreciate
being jumped on and lectured each and every time when even just the very >> 'idea' crops up?? piss off!

I don't think you even "meant well".

You refused to contemplate the deeper concepts I wanted to discuss
and now say "piss off, we were only horsing around". Yes, exactly,
you were only horsing around with issues that are genuinely deep
and embedded in virtually every aspect of life, and at first your
only reaction was to try to "prove me wrong". (You've tried that
a hundred times without ever succeeding, one would think you'd get
tired of banging your own head).

### - nooo... not so much trying to prove you wrong as just sticking to my original guns which 'you' were trying to prove wrong/casting doubt upon!
(a clarification isn't an attempt to prove something wrong, it's the attempt to prove something right :)

As much as you love being deceptive, your words are recorded.
First, you said: "'beliefs' are not real!" That's incorrect.
Some beliefs pertain to real things and some don't. And the effects
of beliefs are so real that they indeed change major civilizations.
Next, you challenged my definition of belief and yet gave one that
wasn't that different while calling me "liar! distorter of reality!"
(A redundant thing to assert for one who thinks ALL words are lies.
Yet it implies that - even worse than merely being "wrong" -
supposedly I'm intentionally misleading people. I'm not, btw.)

You then proceeded to make more errors in reasoning such as claiming
that beliefs become facts via "proof of course". Also incorrect.
'Proof' seldom applies to beliefs, and is not even attempted
outside specialized disciplines like mathematics and logic.
Scientists, detectives, attorneys, etc. don't "prove" things.
They provide evidence, which is provisional, and if there's enough
evidence and enough insight they also provide theories that tie
together large amounts of evidence.

Thus, beliefs are either well-supported with evidence and
perhaps theory, or not well-supported, or... completely unsupported,
as is the case with most of the beliefs in "Be Here Now".

It is not even possible to have an honest conversation with you.
Indeed, you are what you called me: a distorter of reality.

Oh no, I'm not supposed to discuss
anything deeper related to this very serious subject of belief
and imagination. Not when you guys are both busy "horsing around"
and laughing and "being right". :) You don't want to delve into
the truth about anything; you just want argue and be right and
horse around, so that's all anyone else here can do too.

### - perhaps we just didn't feel we needed to 're-examine' all that
again? :)

You've never examined "all that" with regard to "belief".
And I can tell already that you probably never will.

our jokes & quips based on realisations already arrived at! and on 'that' basis horsing around with a couple of novel + resulting ideas stemming 'from' those same realisations! the validity or no OF those realisations wasn't even in question! (we'll find that out later wont we?) thus it was just a novel 'what-if' situation! and we knew that already! iow: we were merely 'modeling' a novel concept! turning it this way and that + enjoying the many novel vistas applying such a model created! the puns on lennon were brilliant! (at least his was anyway, a far step-up from my initial one: his "imagine no believing!" was great IN THAT CONTEXT!!! hahaha :)))

Neither of you realized a thing. :) In his book "The Believing Brain",
Michael Shermer writes things like: "The brain is a belief engine"
and: "We can’t help believing. Our brains evolved to connect the dots
of our world into meaningful patterns...". He, of course, goes into
many aspects how this works and the neuroscience behind it all.

But above I put it simply already: beliefs are either well-supported
with evidence relevant human 'experts' can agree upon, or they're not.
And an 'expert' may just be anyone in a position to know. If I say
"I was home all day today after 10 am", and my partner doesn't believe
it because she came home for lunch and my car and me were both gone,
she needs to hear the additional evidence that I took my car to the
shop in the morning and that around noon took a nap in the guest room
(which I seldom do). Further evidence comes when it's time to go
pick up my car from the shop. (Belief, and a set of evidence.)
Notice that it's still not "proof", though. Because perhaps I had
a friend pick me up at the car shop and we both went to the track...

That wasn't a real situation; I made it up - but similar situations
happen every day in human life. Most of the time, beliefs are normal
and natural. There is not a thing wrong with the human tendency to
endlessly form, test, and confirm or fail to confirm... beliefs.

But you, you've been saying things like:

"how's about just not harbouring ANY beliefs at all??"

You might as well have said:
"how's about we all just stop being human beings??"
And you didn't realize how clueless your comment was.

You're not prepared to have a serious discussion on 'belief',
and I'm not wasting more of my time trying to talk to you
about it, since now you're being a facile troll, whereas
before you were merely expressing ignorance. Iow, you're
still just 'horsing around', while doing everything in
your power to disrupt what I wanted to explore more deeply.

The sad part is that you never get to even hear most of my deeper
ideas. We never almost never get there, because literally you won't
allow such concepts to be fully explored without starting a fight
and derailing the discussion. Apparently you're THAT threatened.

I wasn't even arguing with you at first. I only wanted to
more deeply explore these issues. Just as I always do. :)

### - your intention was a lot clearer than that from the outset jeremy!

you were there ONLY to piss on a parade! i did indeed think you were only kinda joking at first and fully intended to come back to you on it
in-kind, that is until i saw the 'studied effect' you'd had on poor old matey there? (you actually hurt his feelings there a tinge??) luckily, old slider was right there with the bandaids heh and there'll be no lasting damage! (now aren't you glad of that? because am pretty sure you didn't 'actually' intend' to damage him, or did you? and because if you did then we've gots another, even bigger problem!)

Good old Slider, always there to flatter and protect poor Chris
to make sure he never actually has to think about something. :)
And you're not really a "problem", just an endless nuisance.

imho, alpert was alright! and if he wants to describe his own personal
experiences in india in hindu-type related terms then that's fine by me, >> having made some small study of inian history, their religions & beliefs >> myself, i think i know what he's talking about in the way he & they both >> mean it in that 'very flowery' 10,000+ year old language of theirs,
facets
of which there's absolutely nothing wrong with! they have 'their'
long-evolved (& evolving) 'conceptualisations' and we have ours! to the
point that the world is literally 'full' of such man-made things! wading >> waist-deep in them we are! (well, chris & i are actually surfing on 'em
heh, but that's another story + your teabreak's nearly over lol...)

Have you even read the book?? I have it right here. It is literally
filled with religious beliefs from start to finish.

### - as a matter of fact heh, at around age 23 it was actually one of the very first books i ever read on the subject, given to me by some half-crazed dealer-dude, who, after talking/listening to me for about 15 minutes, announced that i was a 'hindu' and so handed me that book as a gift to go play with hehehe (true story!) - i didn't even know wtf he was talkin' about at the time lol but accepted his gift and duly studied it + i'd never come across anything even remotely like it before!

plus funny how you can 'step on a path and then begin to see it everywhere'; because the next thing ya know i bumped into a couple of
dudes doin' meditation at some local hindu temple, tellin' me stories
about getting 'knowledge' (or something) from some guru there and shit
(the implication being that he could just somehow impart this 'knowledge' direct into your head, not an explanation as such but the sudden understanding of something you previously didn't know anything about etc etc...)

i never went there personally, but the idea grew! and so began my long investigation into such things beginning with the hindu-aspect of it all (well ya gots to start somewhere don'tcha?)

Unless you want to "imagine no belief", eh?

When you both
JUST said you wanted to "imagine a world with no beliefs"
(although that is a naive view). If it is any consolation, Vini does
try to envision just such a world in his book. Yet obviously,
my opinion is that this too is merely an imaginative belief
that could not (and should not) come to pass.

### - and you, no doubt, saw it as us sinking into quicksand i suppose hehehe :)

as for vinni i think he's doin' alright! so leave him be!

let him get it all out in his own way!

I totally did that. Most of my ideas are not in his book. I only
corrected grammar and spelling and asked him a few pointed questions
about issues I found a bit problematic. He made very few changes
to content based on my input. So it's definitely all his book,
not mine at all - and he sincerely thanked me for the help.

(write your own book if you have a different idea)

Maybe. And yeah, I do have different ideas.

You apparently DO still need to be lectured on this subject. :)

### - hehehe :)))

truth is, every culture has its own stories right? its conceptualised
ideas about what life, the universe & everything is supposed to be all
about, right? - and 'believe' me (a figure of speak only heh) ours is
just
'as flowery' (if not as wacky) as theirs is! - 'coz the world of 'ideas' >> is NOT the same as the underlying real world reality!

now what's so hard (or difficult) about that??

Contradicting yourself at every turn. First, in matters of belief
vs. fact, you admitted it was about "complete evidence", yet now
you turn around and act as if beliefs are only an undifferentiated
"world of ideas", and suddenly the whole concept of evidence has
completely *vanished*.

### - hey presto! :)

Yeah! Hey! Just throw it all out the window!
What, did you think I was talking seriously? Surprise! :)

Plus, you're still defending a book filled
with myriad religious beliefs for which there's no credible evidence.

### - there is NEVER ever gonna BE "creditable evidence" for... ART!

Art exists on an entirely different plane :)

Religion is not just Art. Neither is belief, in general. Duh.

Yet many beliefs ARE well-founded on a LOT of evidence. It's not only
"a world of ideas". That's a smokescreen. That's the way someone like
Trump acts - as if there IS NO TRUTH and thus it's ALL ONLY about
just making your own ideas "win" out, even if they're all lies.
Trump is a veritable prophet of "belief without evidence".
He's the anti-knowledge. He's the literal incarnation of '1984'.

### - correction: merely the most 'recent' incarnation 'coz they're all like that!

No, they really aren't all like that. This article came out today.
Notice, if you're capable of it, how humble this man was...

How Trump’s Election Shook Obama:
http://tinyurl.com/y8wmb9hw

Excerpts:

“What if we were wrong?” he asked aides riding with him in
the armored presidential limousine.

“Maybe we pushed too far,” Mr. Obama said. “Maybe people
just want to fall back into their tribe.”

“Sometimes I wonder whether I was 10 or 20 years too early,”
he said.

“Maybe this is what people want. I’ve got the economy set up well
for him. No facts. No consequences. They can just have a cartoon.”
He added that “we’re about to find out just how resilient our
institutions are, at home and around the world.”

The day Mr. Obama hosted Mr. Trump at the White House after the
election seemed surreal. Mr. Trump kept steering the conversation
back to the size of his rallies, noting that he and Mr. Obama
could draw big crowds, but Mrs. Clinton could not, Mr. Rhodes writes.


[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)

From: thangolossus@gmail.com

On Thu, 31 May 2018 07:53:51 -0700 (PDT), "Jeremy H. Denisovan" <david.j.worrell@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 5:21:14 AM UTC-7, slider wrote:

### - no jeremy, you're going out on a huge limb here quite unnecessarily, >> there's no need for all this except perhaps in your pedantic-type paranoid >> reasoning, as both chris & i are, ahem, fully grown up peeps who are
perfectly able to laff & joke around on this so-well-known subject without >> getting into danger, ok? i mean duh! give it a fucking rest already! we're >> not talkin' Nietzsche here! :)

The fact that you contradicted yourselves every time you tried to speak
on the subject (and refused to even listen to my attempts to dig
into the real issues deeper) proves that this isn't "unnecessary".

i know you 'think' you mean well, but in truth *you're* the one who's all
messed up with and by all this, not us! we're just horsing around having
fun here throwing these concepts around, and i for one don't appreciate
being jumped on and lectured each and every time when even just the very
'idea' crops up?? piss off!

I don't think you even "meant well".

You refused to contemplate the deeper concepts I wanted to discuss
and now say "piss off, we were only horsing around". Yes, exactly,
you were only horsing around with issues that are genuinely deep
and embedded in virtually every aspect of life, and at first your
only reaction was to try to "prove me wrong". (You've tried that
a hundred times without ever succeeding, one would think you'd get
tired of banging your own head). Oh no, I'm not supposed to discuss
anything deeper related to this very serious subject of belief
and imagination. Not when you guys are both busy "horsing around"
and laughing and "being right". :) You don't want to delve into
the truth about anything; you just want argue and be right and
horse around, so that's all anyone else here can do too.

Rant starts<>

While I don't particularly care what you think or how you express
yourself (you lack insight and therefore seem to me to have a
relatively shallow inner life) - you, here, by this statement, are
guilty of tarring everyone with the same brush.

I am not like slider and I don't mean that in a kind way. As for
Chris, he and I are definitely not peas in the same pod, but I mean
that in a kind way because I get the distinct impression that Chris is
a kind person or at least, not a malevolent person.

I'm probably similar in outlook to you but with a richer inner life. I
have some similarity with Art (thanks for the heads up on his name
BTW) but he wanders into areas which are even too obscure for me -
yet, he's genuine.

I don't fucking horse around, ok? Get it? If you and I were face to
face pal, you would understand that I'm a very serious man. I can't
prevent you or dissuade you, however try to use that mind of yours, it
can be impressive from time to time, so put it to use. Don't make
sweeping generalisations, it belittles you and doesn't do you justice.

Rant finishes <>

The sad part is that you never get to even hear most of my deeper
ideas. We never almost never get there, because literally you won't
allow such concepts to be fully explored without starting a fight
and derailing the discussion. Apparently you're THAT threatened.

I wasn't even arguing with you at first. I only wanted to
more deeply explore these issues. Just as I always do. :)

You are definitely wasting your time with slider. Slider vs
Netherlands, Australia, and all the other practically non-aligned,
non-nuclear weaponised, pacifist countries who became victims of that monstrous act of villainy by Russia. This prick Brian only exists to
take the piss out of people regardless of what topic is on the table.
He is so insensitive he will besmirch the memories of dead children in
order to push that peurile agenda.

Don't waste your time. Leave the cunt to me.

imho, alpert was alright! and if he wants to describe his own personal
experiences in india in hindu-type related terms then that's fine by me,
having made some small study of inian history, their religions & beliefs
myself, i think i know what he's talking about in the way he & they both
mean it in that 'very flowery' 10,000+ year old language of theirs, facets >> of which there's absolutely nothing wrong with! they have 'their'
long-evolved (& evolving) 'conceptualisations' and we have ours! to the
point that the world is literally 'full' of such man-made things! wading
waist-deep in them we are! (well, chris & i are actually surfing on 'em
heh, but that's another story + your teabreak's nearly over lol...)

Have you even read the book?? I have it right here. It is literally
filled with religious beliefs from start to finish. When you both
JUST said you wanted to "imagine a world with no beliefs"
(although that is a naive view). If it is any consolation, Vini does
try to envision just such a world in his book. Yet obviously,
my opinion is that this too is merely an imaginative belief
that could not (and should not) come to pass.

You apparently DO still need to be lectured on this subject. :)

truth is, every culture has its own stories right? its conceptualised
ideas about what life, the universe & everything is supposed to be all
about, right? - and 'believe' me (a figure of speak only heh) ours is just >> 'as flowery' (if not as wacky) as theirs is! - 'coz the world of 'ideas'
is NOT the same as the underlying real world reality!

now what's so hard (or difficult) about that??

Contradicting yourself at every turn. First, in matters of belief
vs. fact, you admitted it was about "complete evidence", yet now
you turn around and act as if beliefs are only an undifferentiated
"world of ideas", and suddenly the whole concept of evidence has
completely *vanished*. Plus, you're still defending a book filled
with myriad religious beliefs for which there's no credible evidence.

Yet many beliefs ARE well-founded on a LOT of evidence. It's not only
"a world of ideas". That's a smokescreen. That's the way someone like
Trump acts - as if there IS NO TRUTH and thus it's ALL ONLY about
just making your own ideas "win" out, even if they're all lies.
Trump is a veritable prophet of "belief without evidence".
He's the anti-knowledge. He's the literal incarnation of '1984'.

the only 'real' problem, is that we're reduced to using 'words' (i.e.
conceptualised ideas) to communicate with, so we have to know before we
even start that ya can't take anything too literally! (this being the
basis of my thing that all words are lies etc...) and because take things
literally and ya ends up in wallyworld every time!

Wow. Now you descend to the ultimate deception. Just as Trump does.
See, it doesn't matter WHAT one says or believes or professes if
"all words are lies". It's impossible to even have an intelligible >conversation with someone who descends to that level of deception.
It's what I'd call the ultimate denial of responsibility.

So, Slider = Trump? Jeez, Brian is gonna just love that one!

"Hey, it doesn't matter WHAT I say, because it's all lies anyway."

In that world, Carlos Castaneda is still a great hero. After all,
he told his endless lies very artistically, yes?

Truly, I've never even heard Trump go quite that far although he
certainly behaves as if he might. Indeed, saying "all words are lies"
might be the most despicable smokescreen ever employed. With such a
belief, there is no longer even the possibility of real integrity.
Are you THAT afraid of not being right that you'll destroy the very
idea of even TRYING to express truth or describe evidence correctly
as to insist it's impossible to describe *anything* accurately, ever?

If you really believe that, then you don't even believe in the
efficacy of evidence and you shouldn't ever write here again.
Why do it? Do you think we all want to argue with endless lies?
How is there any 'sincerity' at all if anything said is 'lying'?
Recall that 'lying' isn't merely being wrong, it's intentionally
misleading and misinforming people.

If all words are lies, then ignorance is strength, freedom is
slavery, and war is peace. And only art matters. LOL.
Wow, talk about lost.

so ok, at some point chris gots around to considering 'imagine no
believing' + what would life be like under such circumstances... well
isn't vinny actually doing something very similar right now, and writing
out what he considers might just be key ideas that could possibly also
liberate others in the way he now feels liberated? isn't he just also
saying/suggesting that it's entirely feasible to just drop all that crap
and be/live more in the now (belive versus believe? smile...)

Yes, and Vini was serious enough about this topic to write an entire
book about it. And I have read that entire book, not only read it,
but assisted him in editing it and clarifying some of it, and I have
a plethora of ideas of my own on this subject, some of which frankly
go beyond anything Vini ever says. I was only beginning to explore
a few of those ideas, when you insisted on having yet another
argument filled with lies, which I'll have to assume is one of
the few things you're genuinely interested in doing.

Look, from what I've gleaned from my considerable time in this NG -
you and Chris are original members of Catenada's cult, knew him face
to face and involved yourselves on a daily, hand-in-pocket type of
existence. You were both disciples.

I can't speak for Art and I don't know whether he is of that set.

I never knew him or had any involvement with him and my involvement
here was purely based on chance encounter with the NG and my late
father's interest in what Carlos purveyed. But at least I've spent
time in the US including almost a month based in Mountain View, SF.
Cali is very, very similar to the west coast of Australia, where I
live.

Slider as far as I know has never had any involvement with Carlos or
his cult and I'm certain he's never had the opportunity or the funds
to travel to the US. I don't know how he came here but he may have
forged some interaction with this guy Vini who was from evidence also contemporaneously involved with Carlos to the same, or even greater,
extent than you and Chris.

So, how does Slider get off on referring to him by first name, as
thought Brian is a contemporary of Vini? I don't know Vini, so I
don't refer to him. It's called "name dropping", right?

Perhaps Slider's association with Vini is the same as his association
with marijuana - that is, imaginary.

and if the fucking indians were talking 'bout all that too 10,000 years
ago in that fancy fuckin' language of their, then so what? virtually
'every' culture worldwide has some reference to this/aspects of this, and
as such we have to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater >> when it comes to examining shit!

If any of their ideas are supportable with evidence, encompassing theory
and cogent argument, or if any of them are valuable purely as an
artistic expression, I'd be the last person to throw it out. But if all
of his book is merely lies as you claim, why not throw it all out?
Is the only possible value of ANY book supposedly just aesthetic?
Then call it the book "art" and don't present its content as fact.
It is presented as religious belief - as "ultimate incontestable truth".

Evidence? Slider? You *still* use those two words in the same
sentence, paragraph, page, chapter, book? Really?

It is presented as "advice for living", not just as "art".
You even offered it as advice. You touted "be here now" to me
(yet turned around hypocritically to attack my PAST beliefs,
when the very reason I'm so knowledgeable regarding 'belief' is
those past struggles).

How the flying FUCK can you NOT be "here now"? lol

I know what's meant, but it's so simplistic, such propaganda for the
stupid, that it makes me laugh (sorry, slider, "laff").

And btw, it doesn't matter whether musical information is being
consciously recalled or unconsciously engrained, that process -
which may be different for every musician - is still a part of
the past that must be accessed every time the song is played,
and while playing you're also constantly considering what you're
about to play NEXT. You are not simply only "totally immersed
in the moment". Don't even bother claiming that; I've been playing
music myself since I was 8 years old.

What is a "moment"? A nanosecond? Is time quantized? If it's
analogue, then there *is* no moment. At the very "moment" one thinks
he has seized and recognised a "moment", it's in the past.

Brian would never think about time like this, he's too fucking busy
revving up that imaginary 160+ IQ of his.

How can you accept anything this moron says when he boasts of a 160+
IQ? WTF? To even think he could slip that one past to the keeper...
(that's a cricket term, David Jerome).

have personally only really ever discovered just the ONE 'Truth' jeremy:
that humanity has its head stuck up its arse and as a consequence only
ever sees its own shit (heh) - only that doesn't absolutely have to be
(nor remain) the case indefinitely... (nurse: the culo-expander please!
hah...)

So that's your ONE 'truth'. A derogatory over-generalization reducing
every human endeavor and every human to a generic pack of lies?
That's the ultimate cynicism and the ultimate dismissal of everyone
who ever lived (except yourself of course). Again, it isn't possible
to have a meaningful conversation with someone who professes such
beliefs. First, you say you want "no beliefs" yet here express a
truly diabolical *belief* - one that even arrogantly implies that
somehow you're the only one alive with any real idea of 'truth',
yet to my ears, it's merely unsupported insanity and cynicism.

You got it. A "derogatory over-generalisation reducing every human
endeavour and every human to a generic pack of lies". That's Brian
from London, abandoned by his family (if *that's* not imaginary as
well), abandoned by common-sense. A cunt who despoils the memory of
little kids slaughtered by renegade, cold blooded russians.

plus it's not like you're even offering anything better! except maybe the
eradication/extermination of Art, Poetry & Literature in the process
merely because YOU don't understand it??

and so now ya also wanna BURN the book 'Be Here Now' as well???

feck off! - it's a lovely book! a most unusual book! a beautiful book! :)

is actually a work of Art!

(you're dumping on Art jeremy! that's how 'wrong/off' you are!)

As you so often do, because you refuse to actually listen, now you're
trying to twist everything I said into something I never said at all.

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)