Discussion Forum Discussion Forum

Miscellaneous

The "unknowable"

The "unknowable"
Answer
9/4/13 9:19 PM
Hi...

Let me recount an experience I had yesterday and talk about the extreme fear and doubt that have been arising as a result of it. So yesterday afternoon I started to think about the issue of 'honesty' in practice.

I thought to myself that "any freedom which has the slightest dependence on ignoring something is not really free." I looked at my current practice and it was suddenly so obvious that I was ignoring many, many things. Places normally that are simply too frightening to look into. The normal practice strategy is more or less one of ignoring and suppressing. It is like this: doubt comes up, I look at it and I say "that is just doubt adam, a mere condition of the mind that I must not give validity to. accept it, don't repress it, but don't believe it."

Anger arises and I say "ah just accept it and do not act on it. surrender resistance. allow it within awareness. if you keep doing this it will eventually stop arising because it will not have any fuel."

More or less I 'take refuge' in some sort of manipulation of experience or belief. At this point it started to feel like I was going crazy... doubts that really plague me at a deep level were just allowed to come up. my only strength was the sense that honesty was need to progress. complete honesty, nothing could be too scary or destructive.

"Maybe enlightenment is just a complex delusion and a sort of subtle manipulation of consciousness."

"Maybe actual freedom is really truly something different, something that is actually just the opposite."

These doubts are hard to admit to as there is something arising in consciousness about being proven wrong despite how many times I have argued fervently (to myself and others) to the contrary. Specific individuals come to mind and I think to myself "good job adam now you are letting them win." I think "they aren't even really free themselves this will just strengthen their self-deception if they see you writing this."

Also I don't even want to admit that I think about these issues. They seem so stupid and petty and not about real life.

Then there is the thought that maybe being free means an abandonment of this concern about being part of "real life." I won't let myself rest there. Not on the cynical view that i must simply find a way to live well and I can settle for second best as long as it works out ok.

At this point I start to think I am literally on the brink of going insane. The thought stops me in my tracks and I start reaching for something, anything to hold on to. I consider that I could become an actualist and find a new "resting place" for self there... or I could just go back to my old practice. the rationale being that maybe I could gain strength for that and then it would be easier to face this apparent total oblivion.

At this point I more or less backed down. It was simply too scary. I literally thought that I could go totally insane and I felt very worried about how my friends and family would perceive me and the pain it would cause them and the unknown agony I would experience as a crazy person.

It occurs to me that there has never, ever been a period in my practice where this total doubt, total lack of belief was not there, beneath the surface, terrifying me into conforming into some belief or practice. Usually I would just be really good at suppressing it.

It occurs to me that writing this is basically asking for an invitation to some new belief or practice. Asking for someone to say that "i have cured that doubt, just do like me (and maybe it will take time)'. I know I have done the same to other people experiencing doubt, and it was probably quite comforting (to some).

I don't think I can back out of the doubt like usual. Step back and create a 'bigger container' for it as is usual, Richard's concept of enlightenment as just an ever-expanding version of self seems to have merit. Your awareness just gets bigger and so the psychological issues seem smaller by comparison. I have to go straight forward into knowing absolutely nothing about anything. I just can't try to have faith in anything else. So i guess now I am just going to look for the places in myself where there is any belief and encounter it directly without any refuge, nothing can be made a safe place for 'me' to land... including any actualist beliefs or practices...

It also occurs to me that whatever it is I am experiencing right now will probably be gone in a week and I don't know what to make of that. Also that I am relinquishing any sort of reputation and I don't think I will ever try to give any advice to anyone about how to live ever again, because I just don't know. This is certainly not freedom that I am experiencing now. Again I don't know what to make of this all.

I know the way back out of this which would be to more or less some form of repression that I am not going to settle for.

I am sorry if this sounds hysterical or has anybody worried I think I will be more or less ok but I am just not going to take the easy way out of doubt this time and see what happens.

p.s. a few hours later i have calmed down a lot but still see the same basic insight. that rather than suppressing doubts and fears I have to go directly into the doubt and fear and have no beliefs to be doubtable. i am going to take a break from the dho and reading dharma books for some time and just work on this challenging beliefs thing.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 6:01 AM as a reply to Adam . ..
Adam .:
I thought to myself that "any freedom which has the slightest dependence on ignoring something is not really free." I looked at my current practice and it was suddenly so obvious that I was ignoring many, many things. Places normally that are simply too frightening to look into. The normal practice strategy is more or less one of ignoring and suppressing. It is like this: doubt comes up, I look at it and I say "that is just doubt adam, a mere condition of the mind that I must not give validity to. accept it, don't repress it, but don't believe it."

Anger arises and I say "ah just accept it and do not act on it. surrender resistance. allow it within awareness. if you keep doing this it will eventually stop arising because it will not have any fuel."

More or less I 'take refuge' in some sort of manipulation of experience or belief. At this point it started to feel like I was going crazy... doubts that really plague me at a deep level were just allowed to come up. my only strength was the sense that honesty was need to progress. complete honesty, nothing could be too scary or destructive.


In my opinion, you are touching on the essence of what is wrong with actualism. Actualism is one of the most radical acts of magick you can do, it is one gigantic act of "felicitous" reinterpretation.

"Just see that doubt is silly, and be sensible" :-P

And if the idea of learning to arbitrarily reinterpret reality as perfect, your own motivations as sincere, and your intentions as pure scares you, well then

"That is just you being afraid of your own extinction" :-)

If you believe that, then you'll just carry on anyway... ah, the power of positive feedback loops!

You are entirely correct in being afraid. That IS the adequate response. The fact that you can learn to change your mind so arbitrarily is terrifying, because if you can change your interpretations at whim, then there is nothing preventing you from being utterly convinced in something that simply isn't true. And when you are so convinced, the brain has this way of magically reinterpreting the world to conform to your conviction. There is no safety net, no god to come down and tell you that you're wrong. Your friends might try, but maybe you won't listen.

This I have glimpsed with my very eyes, and it seems you may be close to this territory yourself. Take the opportunity and make it into an irreversible insight into self-delusion: all it takes is for you to catch yourself lying to yourself.

A friend might be able to help you with that. Maybe one of those "specific individuals that come to mind" is a close friend?

If not, maybe seeing the sheer arrogance, the self-serving flavor of the whole thing, or the a-posterioriness of it, will help.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 9:46 AM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
In my opinion, you are touching on the essence of what is wrong with actualism. Actualism is one of the most radical acts of magick you can do, it is one gigantic act of "felicitous" reinterpretation.


yea I am not switching to actualism per se. I just considered my practice from that angle because the idea that they really are right and I am "doing it wrong" was scary

And if the idea of learning to arbitrarily reinterpret reality as perfect, your own motivations as sincere, and your intentions as pure scares you, well then

"That is just you being afraid of your own extinction" :-)

If you believe that, then you'll just carry on anyway... ah, the power of positive feedback loops!

You are entirely correct in being afraid. That IS the adequate response. The fact that you can learn to change your mind so arbitrarily is terrifying, because if you can change your interpretations at whim, then there is nothing preventing you from being utterly convinced in something that simply isn't true. And when you are so convinced, the brain has this way of magically reinterpreting the world to conform to your conviction. There is no safety net, no god to come down and tell you that you're wrong. Your friends might try, but maybe you won't listen.

This I have glimpsed with my very eyes, and it seems you may be close to this territory yourself. Take the opportunity and make it into an irreversible insight into self-delusion: all it takes is for you to catch yourself lying to yourself.


I totally agree. this is the "crisis" here. never knowing for sure. my approach is basically to have no ground to stand on, no belief to be doubtable. yes I am trying to avoid any lying to myself. I am looking at every what if situation to find the lies there. "what if I am still getting it wrong?" "what if actualism is right?" "what if buddhism is right?" "what if none of them are right?" "what if I am crazy?" "what if I am enlightened?" "what if there is no more progress I can make?" "what if I am stuck asking what ifs forever"

I am using the fear and doubt as pointers to where I am still landing.

If not, maybe seeing the sheer arrogance, the self-serving flavor of the whole thing, or the a-posterioriness of it, will help.


not sure exactly what you mean. though I have been considering "maybe this is all a big delusion put on to make me feel like i know things no one else does."

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 11:47 AM as a reply to Adam . ..
I think I grossly misinterpreted your post, my apologies. (though, in fairness, wanting to be more right than others is generally a bad sign)

Here is a question: Do you think you have any choice in following a path of some kind, be it buddhist or actualist? Could you possibly drop all practices and paths?

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 1:31 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
Bruno Loff:
I think I grossly misinterpreted your post, my apologies. (though, in fairness, wanting to be more right than others is generally a bad sign)

Here is a question: Do you think you have any choice in following a path of some kind, be it buddhist or actualist? Could you possibly drop all practices and paths?



Wanting to be right was a good sign in a way because it showed me where I was hiding. I had no certainty but wanted to portray such in basically each new practice I took up be it Buddhism or Actualism (or being pragmatic and finding a good and integrated way to live based on no dogma from any path). All of these things are just new places to set up shop for self. My tendency was to argue in these things, like getting into arguments with 'actualism purists' about actualist aims and methods being fundamentally similar to Buddhist ones. Each time I made that argument and portrayed a false certainty about this claim I kind of dug myself deeper into the hole of denial. Admitting that I just wanted to be right and that I never really felt sure about whether I was right is/was a step in the direction of honesty and freedom.

As to your second question, that is sort of the "practice" i just came out of. Some sort of stance on life based on the idea that I just have to find a good way to live life regardless of any dogma or whatever, just be my own guide etc. Basically the founding belief of "pragmatic dharma". But consider that the very ground on which such a practice stands on is some idea that there *isn't* a "objective" freedom which renders your "good life" a meaningless delusion based on attachment and impurity. Maybe that very ground is just as shaky as the "I am following the true path and you aren't" ground.

I have been investigating this interest in a "good life" and find that even it is based on ignoring the possibility of an "objectively best life" and as such can not possibly be truly free. There can be so much fear in that place because it usually is a place people come to after "finally seeing through" their "dogmatic" beliefs and deciding "oh I am just gonna follow my own understandings and place no head above my own." There is fear there because what if there really is a head above your own?

The place I am in right now is so wacky. I am still looking for any fear, any comfort based on a belief based on ignoring some other possibility. At the moment I am finding it impossible to think in statements. Or believe the statements of others. The words just ring hollow. Even the ones I am saying now. Which is why I think I will shut up.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 3:04 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
Bruno has some very good advice here, though I would just add six words to his post:

Bruno Loff:
In my opinion, you are touching on the essence of what is wrong with [my misinterpretation of] actualism. [My misinterpretation of] Actualism is one of the most radical acts of magick you can do, it is one gigantic act of "felicitous" reinterpretation.

"Just see that doubt is silly, and be sensible" :-P

And if the idea of learning to arbitrarily reinterpret reality as perfect, your own motivations as sincere, and your intentions as pure scares you, well then

"That is just you being afraid of your own extinction" :-)

If you believe that, then you'll just carry on anyway... ah, the power of positive feedback loops!

You are entirely correct in being afraid. That IS the adequate response. The fact that you can learn to change your mind so arbitrarily is terrifying, because if you can change your interpretations at whim, then there is nothing preventing you from being utterly convinced in something that simply isn't true. And when you are so convinced, the brain has this way of magically reinterpreting the world to conform to your conviction. There is no safety net, no god to come down and tell you that you're wrong. Your friends might try, but maybe you won't listen.

This I have glimpsed with my very eyes, and it seems you may be close to this territory yourself. Take the opportunity and make it into an irreversible insight into self-delusion: all it takes is for you to catch yourself lying to yourself.

A friend might be able to help you with that. Maybe one of those "specific individuals that come to mind" is a close friend?

If not, maybe seeing the sheer arrogance, the self-serving flavor of the whole thing, or the a-posterioriness of it, will help.

With just that slight modification, I agree 100%. These are the dangers of taking on actualism as a belief system. Another relatively recent example of the dangers of doing this is Tommy:
Tommy M:
Contrary to my previous claims, I do indeed still experience affective emotion; in the last four or five weeks, I had been lower than I can recall at any time in my life and actually ended up hospitalized with chest pains brought about by the stress of my current situation.
[...]
As I’ve contemplated what’s gone on over the last four to six months of my life, it’s occurred to me that I used the whole AF/no affective emotion idea as a way to avoid facing up to the stressful and genuinely difficult situation I found myself in. Not that I didn’t pursue that outcome with complete sincerity, but my overwhelming desire to not have to feel the way I did led to me deluding myself and, through strong intent, creating a reality-tunnel for myself where I basically stopped registering emotions…temporarily.

It's good that Bruno managed to stop going before before something like that happened to him, and I'm not being facetious here.

So, whatever you do, don't get sucked into another belief system.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 3:20 PM as a reply to Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem.
Claudiu, I won't believe you are doing any different as long as your way of writing brings me a certain sense of familiarity with what I was experiencing back then.

I could dissect those aspects of how you write about stuff that put me on alert, but frankly I prefer that you don't know what they are.

I'm sure you'll do your best not to be annoyed emoticon Don't let that rotten core get the best of you emoticon

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 3:24 PM as a reply to Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem.
So, whatever you do, don't get sucked into another belief system.


Precisely emoticon I am doin my best

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 3:43 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
Bruno Loff:
Claudiu, I won't believe you are doing any different as long as your way of writing brings me a certain sense of familiarity with what I was experiencing back then.

Ok, but I will keep pointing it out to others when it comes up. Maybe you will get it eventually but I doubt it.

Bruno Loff:
I could dissect those aspects of how you write about stuff that put me on alert, but frankly I prefer that you don't know what they are.

Ok. But as it's really not a matter of language I don't think I'd change the way I write to avoid those things, if that's what you were getting at.

Anyway, here are some things that I'm not doing that it seems that you were:
1) Re-interpreting things in a felicitous light. If I'm anxious then I'm anxious, not felicitous.
2) Labeling doubt as 'silly' and then proceeding to continue doing what I am doing without taking it into account.
3) Re-interpreting reality as perfect. If I'm anxious then reality is certainly not perfect.
4) Always assuming my motivations are sincere. They are often not. I usually recognize when that is.
5) Always assuming my intentions are pure. This is similar to #4.

Bruno Loff:
I'm sure you'll do your best not to be annoyed emoticon Don't let that rotten core get the best of you emoticon

Ha. I'll be annoyed if I want to be! Besides, I am not my own enemy here.

Last thing:
Bruno Loff:
(though, in fairness, wanting to be more right than others is generally a bad sign)

Do you think that applies to you here? If not then why not?

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 3:48 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
Way to hijack Adam's thread guys! You partisans make me want to puke.. j/k

Bruno, no offense but you did the practice all wrong. So has everyone else it seemed including claudiu and myself. And of course we continue to err but hopefully our understanding is correct at least. Everyone wants to interpret the words on the AFT according to their own prior understanding going so far as to call it a religion, a cult, a marketing scheme, even insisting that the Buddha had no feeling. No one is able to read just the words.

Adam, I think your questions are admirable. Don't run from them. Take your time and sort them out. Even if it takes years. Your diligence will be comforting and give you confidence. Don't settle for anything less than certainty. When you are certain, you won't have doubt. And don't settle for merely experimenting until you think you get it right. Combine experiment with rational though: Think through the merits of whatever practice you chose to experiment with. It should make rational sense after all. And, of course, compare the practices to each other. Use this forum and others to meet friendly people and engage them intellectually about the most important subject in the world; how do we live? why are we here?

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 3:55 PM as a reply to Jon T.
Adam, I think your questions are admirable. Don't run from them.


Thank you Jon for this compliment that the questions are admirable. I think everyone has them but the usual approach is to run from them as you say. I won't settle for less than certainty, but I have convinced myself of certainty many times before haha.

Bruno, no offense but you did the practice all wrong. So has everyone else it seemed including claudiu and myself.


are you sure? so only Richard and Vineeto and Peter then? I am just curious and perhaps it will help with your own inquiry.

When you are certain, you won't have doubt.


I dont think i even know what that would look like, very interesting

Use this forum and others to meet friendly people and engage them intellectually about the most important subject in the world; how do we live? why are we here?


A delightful prospect haha sounds like fun.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 4:39 PM as a reply to Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem.
Just so you know, my main motivation in replying to you in this discussion and others like it is not to argue with you, but to keep on public record a view that is different to your own. This is not so that I am declared correct by you or someone else, it is so someone who reads this thread has at least access to a different perspective.

My motivation is the previously mentioned sense of familiarity. I recognize my thinking patterns of that time in how you write, and in parts of what Adam has written ("projections" you'll undoubtedly think), and I know how seductive these patterns are are, and how they can take over unseen. So I write warnings: there is something wrong with actualism. Richard's writing is full of it, too.

As for trying to be more right than others, the specific phenomenon that I have in mind (let's call it X) has not happened to me in replying to this thread, no. Though I admit that the phrasing wasn't very fortunate, as in, there are instances (let's call them Y) where one might want to be more right than others, which are not instances of X, and in which I see no problem whatsoever. Even then, my writing is not an instance of Y; oh how I wish I was wrong emoticon But nowadays I require more objectivity from my evidence, even more so when it concerns things that I want.

The sentence that alerted me to X was:

Adam .:
These doubts are hard to admit to as there is something arising in consciousness about being proven wrong despite how many times I have argued fervently (to myself and others) to the contrary. Specific individuals come to mind and I think to myself "good job adam now you are letting them win." I think "they aren't even really free themselves this will just strengthen their self-deception if they see you writing this."


This kind of thing reeks of X. Fortunately Adam is at least aware that this kind of mental dynamic is happening. "Good job adam now you are letting them win" and "they aren't even really free themselves etc" betray two different patterns of thought that I associate with actual freedom (it is splattered everywhere in the AF website).

I would have engaged in X if I had, for instance, pitied you for being trapped in the actualist meme, or if I had tried to use the things you write to support my own worldview, or if I used my jhana powers to feel OK even when you write things I dislike, and then mentally declare myself superior for this OKness. The common theme, I guess, is to subtly disregard what someone else says by mentally placing them at "a lower level" (which can be done in many ways).

However, I expect that in reading this, you will think that it is reasonable and that it should not be done. And in doing so you have engaged in phenomenon Z. X and Z exist together, support each other, and there are many more letters in this intricate alphabet, the beautiful mental edifice that is actualism. For instance letter W: coming up with a reason for having done something, easily and on demand. Or letter V: the belief that it is possible to interpret reality without beliefs. Or U: the belief that it is possible to see reality directly, as it actually is.

Indeed it is a very powerful act of magick emoticon How are your purely calorific energies doing? emoticon

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 4:49 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
Bruno Loff:
Just so you know, my main motivation in replying to you in this discussion and others like it is not to argue with you, but to keep on public record a view that is different to your own. This is not so that I am declared correct by you or someone else, it is so someone who reads this thread has at least access to a different perspective.

Alright. That was also the reason I replied to you so it seems we're on the same page.

Bruno Loff:
The sentence that alerted me to X was:
[...]
The common theme, I guess, is to subtly disregard what someone else says by mentally placing them at "a lower level" (which can be done in many ways).

Ok, so are you not mentally placing me at "a lower level" when you write comments such as:
Bruno Loff:
I'm sure you'll do your best not to be annoyed emoticon Don't let that rotten core get the best of you emoticon

and:
Bruno Loff:
Indeed it is a very powerful act of magick emoticon How are your purely calorific energies doing? emoticon

If not, then why not? Because when you write that, I get the impression of smug self-superiority.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 4:52 PM as a reply to Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem.
I'm sorry, I just felt I needed to frame your response, a bit like one frames a painting and puts it on a wall.

Wonderful sentence that came out, as an example of X, "if I had tried to use the things you write to support my own worldview"

Actually this isn't exactly X, it is a mix of X and Z, maybe it is its own thing let's call it XZ... either way:

Now notice how you posted a gigantic quotation from me, while changing it in the slightest way, so that your worldview remains untouched. That is such a beautiful, concise, even pictorical illustration of phenomenon XZ, that I repost here, a bit like one hangs a painting:

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:
Bruno has some very good advice here, though I would just add six words to his post:

Bruno Loff:
In my opinion, you are touching on the essence of what is wrong with [my misinterpretation of] actualism. [My misinterpretation of] Actualism is one of the most radical acts of magick you can do, it is one gigantic act of "felicitous" reinterpretation.
(...)
If not, maybe seeing the sheer arrogance, the self-serving flavor of the whole thing, or the a-posterioriness of it, will help.

With just that slight modification, I agree 100%.
(...)
It's good that Bruno managed to stop going before before something like that happened to him, and I'm not being facetious here.

So, whatever you do, don't get sucked into another belief system.


Amazing, with just six words, and a little post-scriptum, you managed to take what I consider a legitimate attack on your worldview, and turn it into something that reinforces it. Funnily enough, while at the same time denying that you are doing acts of arbitrary reinterpretation! If that's not illustrative enough, what is?

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 5:08 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
[Oo! Everyone, get your logician pants on! This is a nice logician hoe down! I can't start reading it til tomorrowy... shooey.]

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 5:10 PM as a reply to Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem.
Claudiu, Bruno seems to have offered you an invitation to a particular line of thought and investigation. You then offered that he do the investigation himself. Between those two events did you with total openness do the investigation?

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 5:15 PM as a reply to Adam . ..
Adam . .:
Claudiu, Bruno seems to have offered you an invitation to a particular line of thought and investigation. You then offered that he do the investigation himself. Between those two events did you with total openness do the investigation?

I've re-read the thread and can't see what you're referring to when you say "Bruno seems to have offered you an invitation to a particular line of thought and investigation." Can you be more specific? I opened the exchange with "Do you think that applies to you here? If not then why not?" and have been following up on that.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 5:37 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
Bruno Loff:
I'm sorry, I just felt I needed to frame your response, a bit like one frames a painting and puts it on a wall.

Wonderful sentence that came out, as an example of X, "if I had tried to use the things you write to support my own worldview"

Which sentence?

Bruno Loff:
Actually this isn't exactly X, it is a mix of X and Z, maybe it is its own thing let's call it XZ... either way:

I didn't quite understand what Z is.

Bruno Loff:
Now notice how you posted a gigantic quotation from me, while changing it in the slightest way, so that your worldview remains untouched. That is such a beautiful, concise, even pictorical illustration of phenomenon XZ, that I repost here, a bit like one hangs a painting:

You used the 'painting' metaphor already - that's too soon!

In any case, you seem to be assuming that I did not consider your reply at all, and that I just assumed it didn't apply to me and could thus safely ignore it. But no, I actually did consider your reply, enough to recognize that they are all valid arguments, and also enough to realize that I am just not doing those things. It would be like someone saying:

Hypothetical:
Meditation doesn't work. I've been reading these prayer books all day and I learned a whole bunch of Pali words. I send merit to the Buddhas twice a week. I also spend hundreds of hours on meditation forums. I've memorized the stages of insight backwards and forwards and can recite the criteria for each. But I'm not gaining any insight into reality! None of those stages have happened for me! Clearly meditation doesn't work.


Now an accomplished meditator would read that and go, ok, he has a valid critique against what he's been doing: reading prayer books doesn't lead to insight. Learning pali words doesn't lead to insight. Sending merit to Buddhas twice a week doesn't lead to insight. etc. So he is really saying what doesn't work about his own misinterpretation of meditation.

As for your own reply, I did much the same thing, and came to these conslusions (note that I thought of these before my six-words-post, and considered answering to your post that way instead):
Claudiu:
Anyway, here are some things that I'm not doing that it seems that you were:
1) Re-interpreting things in a felicitous light. If I'm anxious then I'm anxious, not felicitous.
2) Labeling doubt as 'silly' and then proceeding to continue doing what I am doing without taking it into account.
3) Re-interpreting reality as perfect. If I'm anxious then reality is certainly not perfect.
4) Always assuming my motivations are sincere. They are often not. I usually recognize when that is.
5) Always assuming my intentions are pure. This is similar to #4.


My six words didn't transform your attack into something else. Your attack already was that something else. I just wanted to make it clear that it was, and in some way it seems you appreciated the elegance with which I did it, hah =P.

Anyway, I thought you were going to reply in another post, but I'm still curious. In what way are you not placing me at a lower level (doing X) when you write comments such as:
Bruno Loff:
I'm sure you'll do your best not to be annoyed emoticon Don't let that rotten core get the best of you emoticon

and:
Bruno Loff:
Indeed it is a very powerful act of magick emoticon How are your purely calorific energies doing? emoticon

Because when you write that, I get the impression of smug self-superiority - that you consider yourself above me - that you are placing me below you.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 6:26 PM as a reply to Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem.
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:
Adam . .:
Claudiu, Bruno seems to have offered you an invitation to a particular line of thought and investigation. You then offered that he do the investigation himself. Between those two events did you with total openness do the investigation?

I've re-read the thread and can't see what you're referring to when you say "Bruno seems to have offered you an invitation to a particular line of thought and investigation." Can you be more specific? I opened the exchange with "Do you think that applies to you here? If not then why not?" and have been following up on that.


I am referring to investigating the mental dynamic Bruno referred to as "X." I think one of the intentions in the post where he talks about "X" was to try and point you towards an investigation of whether you engage in "X."

X I basically understand to be defending and holding on to a worldview because it supports your identity. I think Bruno finds that X is rampant in your posts, my posts, his past thinking, and things he sees on the Actualism Trust Homepage.

I think that this is also what you pointed to with your recommendation to me not to get sucked into any belief systems with the example of Tommy.

Are you sucked into any Actualist beliefs systems specifically ones about Actualism being a different thing than Buddhism? Do you think it is possible that your "I" is using these belief systems to "gain footing?"

I am not even suggesting that Actualism is the same as Buddhism. Nor am I suggesting that they are not 180 degrees opposite. I am also not suggesting that the Buddha or anyone else found total freedom. I am not suggesting there is anything wrong with Actualism or Richard or anything else just offering an inquiry about your own identity's involvement in these issues. Can fear or doubt arise through these lines of investigation?

For me Bruno's suggestion about my engaging in X sparked curiosity and a hope that I could find some fear or identity in examining whether this (behavior and thinking I am doing now) is a ridiculously subtle, tricky form of self-deception that I am engaging in and if "I" am finding a new place to set up shop through this whole "question all beliefs" doctrine. I have yet to find that I am engaging in such but I am striving to be as fearless and vulnerable as possible and continuing to ask.

RE: The "unknowable"
Answer
9/5/13 7:12 PM as a reply to Bruno Loff.
The proof is right in Bruno's replies: (Edited for clarity, the whole thing is in his original posts)

(Actualism) is one gigantic act of "felicitous" reinterpretation.

"Just see that doubt is silly, and be sensible" or "(Doubt) is just you being afraid of your own extinction"

And if the idea of learning to arbitrarily reinterpret reality as perfect, your own motivations as sincere, and your intentions as pure scares you...You are entirely correct in being afraid.



Right there Bruno reveals where he got the whole thing wrong. If you want to debate then star by quoting the AFT where it says that you are to interpret reality as perfect: We can then go into context and interpretation. It certainly doesn't say or imply that one is to learn to reinterpret one's own motivations as being sincere and pure. My gods, man, that is a horribly heinous habit: lol. If you must stop associating with actualism and keep others away just in order to stop said repulsively putrid practice then by all means...In fact, I commend you from ceasing to engage in such harmful activity.

Vineeto does write that doubt is an insidious emotion. But you abandon any emotion, including doubt, through investigation not through sheer will. When you finally see clearly a fact for a fact then any beliefs surrounding the issue drop away and the emotions that hold up those beliefs no longer have anything to hold onto. This then allows you to get back into felicity and innocuity much quicker which leads to wonder and then reflective contemplation and then a PCE. And the PCE shows you that it's possible and desirable to live life without being beholden to your friends, family, co-workers, nation, tribe, etc through sorrow and malice or the finer feelings of love and compassion.


And if you can't get into a PCE then you simply have more investigating to do to get back you to feeling good then happy and then wonderful onto reflective contemplation. And that investigating should be fun because it's interesting.

As for trying to be more right than others, (let's call it X) there are instances (let's call them Y) where one might want to be more right than others, which are not instances of X, and in which I see no problem whatsoever.


I actually see X as a more desirable trait than Y. Wanting to be right will lead to selective listening and selective memory; trying to be right can lead to greater diligence and honest self-critiques.

However, I expect that in reading this, you will think that it is reasonable and that it should not be done. And in doing so you have engaged in phenomenon Z. X and Z exist together, support each other,


Does Z stand for zany?

letter W: coming up with a reason for having done something, easily and on demand. Or letter V: the belief that it is possible to interpret reality without beliefs. Or U: the belief that it is possible to see reality directly, as it actually is.


Shouldn't letter W be changed to R for rationalizations. And V can be changed to O for optimistic experimentation and U can be change to P for the PCE. Just suggestions.