| Users Online Now: 2,235 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 829,092 | |
| Pageviews Today: 1,474,255 | Threads Today: 491 | Posts Today: 10,382 |
| 02:40 PM | ||
| Users Online Now: 2,235 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 829,092 | |
| Pageviews Today: 1,474,255 | Threads Today: 491 | Posts Today: 10,382 |
| 02:40 PM | ||
True and Fully-Verifiable Meaning of "As Above, So Below" | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18151867  United States06/27/2012 06:50 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| THE OP AS AN AC.OH HELLzYEAH User ID: 18151867 United States06/27/2012 07:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | OK - so as of right now, this thread has received over 250 views. Quoting: simultaneous_final Do you guys understand what this thread is about? Do you understand that this is a clear and irrefutable explanation of one of the greatest mysteries of all time? Do you understand that when you ask "illuminated" individuals what the big "secret" is, that THIS is what you're asking about? Have I been correct all along in thinking that even when explained clearly, the uninitiated simply wouldn't value the knowledge? COME ON PEOPLE! THIS IS IT! So observing and observed, seems like a two directions kind of thing depending on perspective. Also seems to imply an interconnected aspect to 'all that' (and a bag of chips). It still feels like there is a disconnect present or skewed perspective. So those illuminated ones and the big secret, what is it to them and what is done with this? "...what is it to them and what is done with this?" This appears, to me, to be your main concern. And so I will answer it as best as possible. Thanks for your patience as I should have answered this some time ago. Also, please understand that I admit to using this response as a bump to my thread...and so I'm sorry for taking your important and very valid question and turning it into a promotion tool of some type. Answer to follow. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18151867 United States06/27/2012 07:25 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | This, believe it or not, is the SHORT answer: The purpose of initiation, in many cases, is to bring the initiate to the understanding of knowledge (in the strictest sense) and, thus, the understanding of what CAN be known is vital. Do MOST or even a respectable percentage of so-called "initiates" even half-grasp this concept? NO. Definitely NO. The people that you're asking about have no clue as to the true and fully-verifiable meaning of Aw Above, So Below. They think that they know but they are doofuses. Yes, complete doofuses. There are fail-safes within the orders such that no doofus can ever achieve real influence in the lodges. The people that you're asking about have no power over you or anyone else--save themselves. Read the original post again. These people don't even exist to you! |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 17858859 United States06/27/2012 07:35 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 17858859 United States06/27/2012 07:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18151867 United States06/27/2012 07:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18151867 United States06/27/2012 07:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18678226 United States06/27/2012 07:54 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18621181  Denmark06/27/2012 07:55 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | True and Fully-Verifiable Meaning of "As Above, So Below" Quoting: simultaneous_final Even though I am called Fr. Perspicuous in some circles, it is difficult to be perspicuous about these matters. That is why YOU, the fine forumites here at GLP, will have to do your due diligence in verifying/refuting the validity of my assertions in this thread. Of course, everyone knows this stuff instinctively but few people are consciously aware of it or recognize it for what it is. ************************************************************ The first assertion is this: A subject observes itself observing itself observing itself observing itself ad infinitum. That's obviously the short version. It represents the "below" aspect. ************************************************************ The second assertion is this: A subject is observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself ad infinitum. Again, that's obviously the short version. It represents the "above" aspect. ************************************************************ These two assertions are the result of long and tedious logical deduction by myself. There are no currently known (by "this subject"--but please argue if you can) logical fasifications available for these two assertions. These two assertions are the only two (that "this subject" has discovered--but please add more if you can) complete, unambiguous assertions that can NOT be logically falsified except for the assertion that "There are, at least, two logically unfalsifiable assertions". These two assertions (to the lay person) may look similar but they assert two very different things, in two different directions: "below" and "above". Please do your due diligence if you have trouble understanding this. I would recommend beginning by using logical deduction to find these two assertions. The first one is easiest to deduce. The second is the logical consequence of the first. This is not a thread to promote mysticism or somesuch thing. It is not a thread to dismiss mysticism or somesuch thing. This is a thinking (wo)man's thread. This is NOT one of those enigmatic threads where people speak in allegorical terms. This is a "face-value" thread. I am open to logical falsification. I am open to providing strict definitions for all nouns/verbs in the assertions. I hope that this will not be necessary because that's where being perspicuous becomes very difficult but I'm open to it. Thanks for reading and enjoy your newfound awareness of what CAN be known. wrong |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18151867 United States06/27/2012 07:56 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 18151867 United States06/27/2012 08:01 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | True and Fully-Verifiable Meaning of "As Above, So Below" Quoting: simultaneous_final Even though I am called Fr. Perspicuous in some circles, it is difficult to be perspicuous about these matters. That is why YOU, the fine forumites here at GLP, will have to do your due diligence in verifying/refuting the validity of my assertions in this thread. Of course, everyone knows this stuff instinctively but few people are consciously aware of it or recognize it for what it is. ************************************************************ The first assertion is this: A subject observes itself observing itself observing itself observing itself ad infinitum. That's obviously the short version. It represents the "below" aspect. ************************************************************ The second assertion is this: A subject is observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself ad infinitum. Again, that's obviously the short version. It represents the "above" aspect. ************************************************************ These two assertions are the result of long and tedious logical deduction by myself. There are no currently known (by "this subject"--but please argue if you can) logical fasifications available for these two assertions. These two assertions are the only two (that "this subject" has discovered--but please add more if you can) complete, unambiguous assertions that can NOT be logically falsified except for the assertion that "There are, at least, two logically unfalsifiable assertions". These two assertions (to the lay person) may look similar but they assert two very different things, in two different directions: "below" and "above". Please do your due diligence if you have trouble understanding this. I would recommend beginning by using logical deduction to find these two assertions. The first one is easiest to deduce. The second is the logical consequence of the first. This is not a thread to promote mysticism or somesuch thing. It is not a thread to dismiss mysticism or somesuch thing. This is a thinking (wo)man's thread. This is NOT one of those enigmatic threads where people speak in allegorical terms. This is a "face-value" thread. I am open to logical falsification. I am open to providing strict definitions for all nouns/verbs in the assertions. I hope that this will not be necessary because that's where being perspicuous becomes very difficult but I'm open to it. Thanks for reading and enjoy your newfound awareness of what CAN be known. wrong LOGICALLY FALSIFY MY ASSERTIONS AT ONCE, THEN. Argue with a solipsist and FAIL EVERY TIME. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 1243743 United States06/27/2012 10:21 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | True and Fully-Verifiable Meaning of "As Above, So Below" Quoting: simultaneous_final The first assertion is this: A subject observes itself observing itself observing itself observing itself ad infinitum. That's obviously the short version. It represents the "below" aspect. ************************************************************ The second assertion is this: A subject is observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself ad infinitum. This seems to be saying that you can only know what you know. You can't know what you don't know. Also, if you observe yourself observing, doesn't that require that you identify that what you are observing is separate from you? Especially if you observe yourself observing yourself observing yourself? |
| OP as AC User ID: 14676088 United States07/09/2012 01:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | True and Fully-Verifiable Meaning of "As Above, So Below" Quoting: simultaneous_final The first assertion is this: A subject observes itself observing itself observing itself observing itself ad infinitum. That's obviously the short version. It represents the "below" aspect. ************************************************************ The second assertion is this: A subject is observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself being observed by itself ad infinitum. (1). This seems to be saying that you can only know what you know. You can't know what you don't know. (2). Also, if you observe yourself observing, doesn't that require that you identify that what you are observing is separate from you? Especially if you observe yourself observing yourself observing yourself? (1). Implications of my assertions range from the obvious (like your comments) to the obscure (like "as above, so below"). (2). Observe your hand. Observe your toes. Are these things seperate from you? Do they become seperate as soon as you identify them with a name (ie "hand" or "toes")? What do the answers imply about other things we observe and even "other people"? |
