REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Survey Discussion: The Good Samaritan

POSTED BY: ANTHONYT
UPDATED: Saturday, May 22, 2010 15:56
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1388
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, May 21, 2010 7:23 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"9) Do you believe that someone should be allowed to remain passive and unhelpful when someone else is in need of aid?"

Hello,

In the final episode of Seinfeld, a group of friends are imprisoned after remaining passive in the face of a crime, and allowing it to unfold without impedence. Apparently, they had stumbled into a hamlet or town where Good Samaritan laws didn't just protect the helpful citizen... Rather, aid was mandated and enforced. This somewhat unsatisfying conclusion to the series was nontheless an interesting commentary on both the apathy of society, and a final lampoon on the lack of empathy shown by the friends themselves throughout the show. Indeed, much of the show's humor revolved around the self-centerdness and superficiality of the crew.

I tend to be a realist, however, and couldn't quite suspend my disbelief. "What sort of place could have such a law? It's rediculous," I said to a friend. Then I moved to Arizona, and learned that there is a similar law here, more limited in scope. Apparently, when you come to a food business in Arizona and ask for a drink of water, it is illegal for them to refuse you. The reason for this is plain enough. This is a desert. If people don't get water when they need it, they'll die. Witholding water is so callous and evil an act that it can't possibly be condoned by civilized persons.

In a real-life recent incident, a homeless man intervened in a robbery, and was stabbed. As he lay dying on the ground, one person after another walked on by, glancing at him and then moving on. For whatever reason, it was about an hour before any aid reached him, and so he died. I found this particularly offensive. Apparently even the victim of the robbery didn't get any help involved until it was too late. I was incredulous. And did all the passerby fail to realize the problem? Or did they just fail to care?

How could they fail to realize the man was dying? How could they fail to care? Maybe there should be a law to combat this sort of apathy.

Now I'll relate a personal experience that changed my life.

I was driving in my car and I spotted an obviously homeless man who had collapsed in the grassy swale at the side of the road. At a glance, I could tell he was unwashed and unkempt. Based on proclivities I'd observed in the local homeless community, I assumed he'd gotten drunk and collapsed from alcoholic excess.

I went to run my errand, and then I drove back home. On the way back, I saw an ambulance and police crew on the scene, carting off what was now a body beyond the reach of aid. The man had not collapsed from drunkenness. He'd been hit by a car, staggered to the side of the road, and collapsed from his injuries.

I might have saved him, if I had assumed less and cared more. I was shaken down to my core. I always assumed I was a good person, but I had done something that I considered evil. Not actively evil, perhaps, but certainly passively so. I vowed to never let something like that happen again.

But of course, I let people die all the time. They die of thirst. Of lack of medicine. Of lack of food. Of lack of shelter.

It was remembering this incident with the hit-and-run victim that made me think public health care might not be such a bad idea. Because I felt I had no less responsibility to anonymous strangers than I did to the people dying at my proverbial feet. How much taxes would it take to make everyone healthy? Fine. Take it. Just get it done. No more blood on my hands.

But is it right to demand such things of others? What about the simple limited scope of forcing them to help people they are directly exposed to?

Is it right to force people to render aid at the point of a gun? All requirements of government are ultimately enforced by force. Either they take your life, your freedom, or your property. And the law officer who takes either of the three will thwart any resistance with a weapon and the threat of using it.

Is Apathy more or less evil than the enforcement against it?

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 9:13 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Damn, I can't find where I previously brought it up.

I can't really comment too much on this because I as I have mentioned a time or two before, my religious beliefs very specifically forbid exactly this type of intervention except in very specific circumstances (and yes, I'll bend that a bit sometimes, only human, yanno) - but the long and short of it is that I am not *permitted* to intervene any time my sole action may prevent the termination of a life that would have otherwise ended at that time.

So if you're someone with no affiliation to me, and at the obvious, imminent end, I CAN NOT help you.

I allow most folk to think that's for legal liability reasons, which law or no law, a civil suit is enough pain in the ass most people buy it, but my reasons are religious, ok ?

That's not to say I wouldn't, say.. shove you out of the path of an oncoming bus, cause, well, you MIGHT not actually die even if it hits you, but where there's any ambiguity, I am required by my beliefs to err on the side of non-intervention.

This raised a bit of a problem in army basic over the idea of first aid and CPR, and caused the rest of the platoon some consternation until they assigned the radio to my "buddy" (who I despised) since the radio guy was kind of important to my own, personal survival, and therefore I *HAVE* to save his ass, and my beliefs allow that.

That said, imma hafta bow out of this one unless someone specifically asks for further clarification, but suffice it to say I obviously believe in the right to not intervene since my personal religious beliefs require exactly that.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 9:23 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I'd love to hear more about this, Frem, if you ever want to tell. I dimly remember another discussion on this, but I don't remember ever gaining an understanding of it.

You can message me private, point me in the right direction, or start a new thread. Or say, No thanks, which is okay, too.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 9:33 AM

FREMDFIRMA



new thread, I think, to avoid sidetracking this one, but in the meantime here's a small bit of stuff.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=43032#775095
I gotta head back downtown, so it'll be a whil though.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 11:35 AM

AGENTROUKA


Wow.

There aren't many times I wildly disagree with you (even if I don't often comment) but this sent scared chills down my spine.


What if someone begs you for help? Would you still stand by? If someone was unknowingly about to swallow poison? A child?


I'm trying to reconcile this with the human quality of compassion you so often refer to as a basis for human society (or am I imagining that?) because to me that compassion is the key motivator in aid and intervention...

I'm honestly appalled by this. Maybe irrationally so, I don't know. But it just seems so, so cold and Darwinian and disconnected.

I mean.. why are you helping people with anything if you won't respond to their request for aid in case of threanened death? Why draw the line there?


Sorry if it sounds like I'm ranting. I don't mean to.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 11:42 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Refer to some folks responses concerning the teenager that was gangraped..

All you really need to know about them.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 12:32 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I've known Frem on these forums for a little while, and I've never known him to be wildly irrational. I've also never known him to lack empathy (despite his own occasional arguments to the contrary.)

He's a good bloke. There's a reason for what he believes. I'll wait to hear it. I expect it'll be a learning experience, though I doubt I'll be a convert.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 12:45 PM

AGENTROUKA


Anthony,

I've sort of known Frem for a while myself (mostly through reading, but sometimes in discussions) and this is why I am having a very hard time reconciling this response of his with the things he says that I usually agree with.


It's not that I can't rationally follow what he suggests in the other thread, at all. But it still fails to compute how this is at all applicable in reality, where compassion should surely take over. It jars my image of Frem quite severely to imagine this, and not in a good way.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 12:49 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

much of the show's humor revolved around the self-centerdness and superficiality of the crew.
That's the main reason I never watched Seinfeld. I caught glimpses of it as I channel surfed, and it offended me...not just what you mentioned, but the MEANNESS of it. Sitcoms seem to focus on meanness these days; I have no use for them.

As to helping someone, there again I'm not too bright. I'd try, no matter who, no matter what. I've given people pushing their bicycles a ride to their home, and jumped out of my car to help push another's car off the road, etc....gawd knows I could have ended up raped or robbed or something, but I prefer to take the chance, stupidly no doubt.

I tend to just accept whatever Frem says and have few feelings about it. He's a unique person with a unique background and unique attitudes; I accept him as such. I respect him and like him; we diverge on this, but I guess it's partly because of MY religion that I can't NOT help. It's not actually specific to the buddhist religion, but implied in my view, and far more than that, before I even took up buddhism, it's just who I am. I accept it.

I'm so sorry you carry that, Anthony. You truly couldn't have known, and as for the passers by, they couldn't know either. Unfortunately in modern times we're so used to seeing homeless in every kind of incapacitation, we tend not to even "see" it sometimes. It's a shame. But you're obviously not the only person who went by without helping, so it just means you're human, right?


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 1:30 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"But you're obviously not the only person who went by without helping, so it just means you're human, right?"

Hello,

Yes, but I can be a better human. I've decided to try to be, and to try to set an example for others. Kind of a combination cautionary tale and (hopefully) inspiration for change.

I'd actually like to be more like you describe yourself, Niki. We could use a dab more idiotic helpfulness in this land. And more citizen neighborhood watch programs to make that idiotic helpfulness a touch less idiotic. I was originally resistant to the idea of a neighborhood watch because I saw it as a 'nosiness enforcement agency' but I think it can be directed properly to its true purpose of looking Out for one another instead of looking At one another. A distinction I hope to make clear as I lend myself to the effort.

Seinfeld was a zoo of human folly. I think it can be funny if you remember that it's not highlighting a suggested lifestyle, but rather poking fun at the worst parts of ourselves. I never watched the show and thought, 'Yes, that's it. I must remember not to date a girl with large hands!' But rather I'd think, 'That's rediculous, and I've been that way once or twice myself. That means I've been rediculous.'

Of course, I think the fewer human faults you claim, the less reason you'd find to laugh at the show.

I often remember the Martian view of humor, from Stranger in a Strange land. The protagonist (raised on Mars) spent a while trying to figure out why people find certain things funny. Finally, in a Eureka moment, he said, "Oh. Humans laugh because they don't want to cry." Frequently enough, I think that's the case.

I do have a view on mandating Good Samaritanism. I don't think we should. But I do think we should employ healthy helpings of 'Good Example' and 'Peer Pressure' to encourage Good Samaritanism in our communities.

On the other hand, I'm schitzophrenic. If I could press a magic button and overturn the 'free water' law in Arizona, I wouldn't do it. The thought of some poor thirsty fellow begging a McDonalds clerk for a cup of water and being refused... That bugs me. It bugs me enough to make me a hypocrite about my beliefs. Sometimes I wish I could divorce myself from my emotions so that I could make more logical decisions.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 2:37 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Well, since it's gonna go in this direction anyways, this thread'll have to do.

It has to do with the some concepts that are difficult to express to a westerner, but I shall try.

I'll start with the easy one first - the concept that knowledge of the the future, via divination or specific information, pins it on you, it locks you into that "stream" or "current", by making the "walls" around it higher, which is why such divination is forbidden to us.

Not that it would be of much use to us anyway because Tricksters, by their very nature bend the odds, and as most divination is based on allowing something random to take form WITHOUT picking at it, the mere presence of a Trickster and their "ambition to win" or even in many cases, greed - is going to bend your divination all up till it's useless anyways, which goes double and triple for cards or dice, since Tricksters are natural gamblers and callidetic (able to bend odds to their favor).

The belief system, now, takes that a large step forward, as mentioned the power to break the chains of destiny and forge them anew, this is based around the mild predestinations that people are born with, not a railroad but rather a path of least resistance, a set pattern of events which if left unhindred by chaos events, will define the course and eventual ending of their line of existence.

We believe in the power to alter those, but it comes at a cost, in order to subvert fate and destiny in regard to ourselves, and the simplified form of this is that for the most part, able to avoid our own "set time" to die, we HAVE to give something back, it's a zero-sum thing, you cannot take and not give or you upset every bloody thing and cause carnage, chaos and destruction to yourself and others.

And what is given back, is the power to alter any line not in direct contact with your own, even the very thought of it gives me the wiggies, kind of like how desecrating a church would to a staunch, devout christian, you see ?

And yes, I cheat - not just cause of the obvious reasons, but also that cheating is PART of Tricksterism, if you can get away with it, contrive a manner of doing so that does no extra harm, then it's a noble thing to test the boundries, exploit the loopholes, and subvert the letter of of a thing while staying true to the spirit of it.

But of course, my variation on that is especially extreme, since in the case of rescuees, much of the time I use my own line as a "thrown rope" to provide the excuse to intervene, wrapping my line around theirs ON PURPOSE and then jumping in with both feet - others of this belief are firmly convinced that all the physical damage I have racked up is karmatic payback on some scale, taking some small part of the damage unto myself that would have landed on them save for my intervention, a kind of "sin tax" for cheating the system so boldly, so blatantly.

Children are a special case anyway, because their pattern, their "line", isn't fully formed yet, it's weaker and more tenetive, heavily influenced by the adults around them and tends to not be readily apparent for anything more than the immediate future, so there's less incentive and consequences there, the pattern isn't set, which opens the door - but in the cases where it is set, where their fate, sans intervention, is abundantly clear, I do wrap my own line around theirs and bind it, but only if they allow this, if they reject it, I *MUST* let it be.

And yes, that eats at me, but to deny someone that kind of choice, that's what I have fought against, all my life - I cannot become that, wreck all, to save one, I just can't, ok ?

Nor is it to say in a crisis situation I might not try the same stunt, which would probably come across VERY strange when I am visibly restraining myself from reaching out, shouting "TELL ME YOUR NAME!" so that I have some way of starting a bind so that I *can* get away with it, which has only happened once, mind you.

That's as close an explaination as I can manage at the current time, and I happen to be kind of uncomfortable talkin about it cause of the misperceptions it does tend to raise - the last time I tried fully explaining it to folk I got called a death cultist cause the concepts didn't get across to em no matter how I tried.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 3:07 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I guess the short of it is, you feel there's a kharmic negative impact for throwing proverbial logs across other people's tracks, and you can only justify the act if you are sharing tracks with them. (Because then you are deciding something for yourself, and not on behalf of another.)

Is that right?

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 3:36 PM

FREMDFIRMA



You win the kewpie doll.

And I am *SO* stealing that capsule explaination for next time someone asks me!

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 3:55 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

My wife says I have a talent for boiling things down, once I wrap my thick skull around them. The challenge being to spoon-feed me the information to begin with, because I'm not as smart as my parents like to think.

I think your religion is nuts, Frem, but I also find the explanation reassuring. It means you are trying to be good. If I believed what you believe, I guess I'd have to do what you do.

But I don't, so I can't. In my complicated view of things, that makes my Apathy evil, and yours, while at times willful and active (active apathy? Go figure!) almost noble.

It's like those fancy billboards that show different pictures depending on where you stand. The whole world changes based on point of view.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 21, 2010 9:43 PM

AGENTROUKA


Thank you for explaining again, Frem. I gathered as much from the other thread you started on the subject and it's not that I don't understand what you believe. It makes a theoretic sort of sense. (Though I find that if you have to cheat your own belief system rather than make an honest choice within it.. how is that free?) I just still find it deeply disturbing and very arbitrary. If a certain fate is envisioning someone dying of oven cleaner poisoning and puts you in the path of that, how are you not part of that fate?

I don't know why, but the thought of someone standing by and thinking karmic thoughts while I need help fills me with the same horror as someone hurting me and thinking karmic thoughts. Both scenarios give me the image of a person deliberately ignoring me as a human being and reducing me to a pawn in their philosophical/religious landscape. There's a sense of ultimate power in insisting that someone enter the realm of your religious tenets ("bind our lines") before offering them help.


This reminds me why I love the separation of religion and state. I don't believe in the freedom from emergency aid, I find. I really don't.

I guess you learn something new every day. Anyway, have a nice weekend, you all.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 5:39 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I agree with Agent, for the most part, and would like to know what philosophy/religion you practice. It's a concept I've not heard of previously. It goes against everything I believe, but of course it's your right to believe as you do. But how does that reconcile with your work regarding children and your championing their cause? It seems a dichotomy to me, so I'd like to understand how you work within the contradiction.

Yes, Anthony, I found it interesting that you said "I do think we should employ healthy helpings of 'Good Example' and 'Peer Pressure' to encourage Good Samaritanism in our communities." The "good example" thing is one of the buddhis philosophies; we can't make people do anything, we can only be responsible for ourselves and hopefully, by doing so, encourage others to do the same. That doesn't come into my thinking in reaching out to help, it just happens to mesh.

As for Seinfeld, I'm aware of most of my own faults, I believe, and those of society and humans. I never got any pleasure out of watching same on TV, so I guess that's part of why it never appealed. I much preferred the sitcoms of old, which showed less meanness between people. There was still a lot of humor about human foibles, it just wasn't as nasty.

For somewhat the same reason, I've never enjoyed those "America's Favorite Videos" type shows. When someone falls down or otherwise does something stupid that hurts them, my reaction is to cringe, not to laugh, so there's no pleasure in watching it.

And yes, you have to laugh or you'd cry is a LOT of the reason I laugh at human foibles; so many of them I share, but would like to be better, that seeing them in others makes me laugh for the same reason. Just not the deliberate or painful ones, I guess.

The use of the word "karma" in this context doesn't seem right to me. Karma is what happens to a person as a result of their own INTENTIONS, not as a result of what the world brings to them. The world can bring them things which result from bad actions/intentions, that IS their karma, but we're responsible for OUR karma, so standing by and letting someone suffer does US more harm than it stands by any belief in the other person's karma, if you know what I mean.

In that I also agree with Agent; standing by in order to let someone else's karma harm them is, to me, a representation of our OWN karma, a judgment that "this is what the world brought them, so they deserve it" or something, when our own karma (if we're trying to be a better person) would rightfully come back to bite US if we knew we could help and didn't.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 5:47 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I will say this much...

If I ever served as part of a 'unit' with Frem, the very first thing I'd do is borrow some money from him.

Just to be on the safe side.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 5:51 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


By the way, I enjoyed your reference to Stranger. It's always been one of my favorite books, and what it "groks" about human foibles and religion, etc., made me smile, so seldom was it even recognized, much less taken to the obvious conclusions Heinlen did.

As I've said before, I always considered him too mysogynistic and militaristic for my taste, but I thoroughly enjoyed all his books (several times in some cases). I know others have disagreed with those two, it's just the impression I got from his books, once I felt I saw a pattern.

Hee, hee, hee; I also giggled at your solution to Frem's philosophy...but would you owing him money be enough for him to intervene to keep you alive, that's the question. Frem?


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 5:57 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

I've sort of known Frem for a while myself (mostly through reading, but sometimes in discussions) and this is why I am having a very hard time reconciling this response of his with the things he says that I usually agree with.


It's not that I can't rationally follow what he suggests in the other thread, at all. But it still fails to compute how this is at all applicable in reality, where compassion should surely take over. It jars my image of Frem quite severely to imagine this, and not in a good way.



It's certainly a strange conflict, but you have to remember one thing. Frem himself was once hit by a car (or something) and very nearly died in a hospital, and had to fight for his life when his doctors were prepared to give up on him.

I suspect Frem has a very deep awareness of when someone may be too far gone to help, simply through experience, that may coincide with actual medical care not being able to help them. Perhaps he also doesn't intervene when a death could fall under the category of "natural causes."

Under these conditions, there's nothing too disturbing about his beliefs, or even too much conflict over what he does.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:05 AM

BYTEMITE


Answering the thread question: I don't believe in fate. So I do what I can to help when I see someone who might be in trouble or injured...

Of course, I fail miserably, every time, because I don't know what I'm DOING. Maybe there are worse things than not intervening, such as intervening and only making things worse. ._.

For that reason, yeah, people have the right to make a choice whether to be involved. Whether it's because they don't realize what's happening, as happened with you Anthony, what happened there was unintentional, or fear for self, I can't judge them. There's nothing wrong with someone choosing to live, if the situation they have to consider getting involved in is THAT BAD.

But I actually think many of the people who don't get involved don't get involved because they don't know what to do. I'm just stupid enough to try anyway.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:16 AM

AGENTROUKA


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
It's certainly a strange conflict, but you have to remember one thing. Frem himself was once hit by a car (or something) and very nearly died in a hospital, and had to fight for his life when his doctors were prepared to give up on him.

I suspect Frem has a very deep awareness of when someone may be too far gone to help, simply through experience, that may coincide with actual medical care not being able to help them. Perhaps he also doesn't intervene when a death could fall under the category of "natural causes."

Under these conditions, there's nothing too disturbing about his beliefs, or even too much conflict over what he does.



I still find it disturbing under those conditions.

More importantly, though, those are not the conditions. He phrased it along the lines of "if I am the only thing standing between a person and their death". That's not the same as "if they are beyond help anyway". That's an entirely different thing altogether.

And what are "natural causes", really? Is not drowning a natural cause of death? Dying from battle injury would be a natural cause of death as opposed to what, being impaled by art?

I sound more aggressive than I mean to, I'm sure. I merely felt it very necessary to express how much this stance of his disturbs me and how difficult I find it to reconcile it with the other messages he sends about society and human beings. It doesn't affect my good opinion of those other messages.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:21 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I don't think someone needs to believe exactly as I do in order to be an ally, or even a friend.

Frem, I don't compare you the least with evil dictators, but I wish to make a point and extremes are easiest.

If Hitler got the trains running on time, I'd happily borrow his train scheduling techniques and ignore any abhorrent parts of his philosophy.

Frem is often right about many things. Sharing his religious views is something divorced from accepting his logic on any other topics. It's even something divorced from liking him as a person.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:32 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Originally posted by AgentRouka:

I still find it disturbing under those conditions.



Hmm. I don't understand why, so perhaps this is somewhere where our logic diverges.

If you know enough to know that someone is beyond help, as a doctor might do, I don't find them horrifying if they choose not to help for that reason.

I personally don't know enough, ever.

Quote:

More importantly, though, those are not the conditions. He phrased it along the lines of "if I am the only thing standing between a person and their death". That's not the same as "if they are beyond help anyway". That's an entirely different thing altogether.


Apparently I don't understand his beliefs well, so I withhold judgment.

Quote:

And what are "natural causes", really? Is not drowning a natural cause of death? Dying from battle injury would be a natural cause of death as opposed to what, being impaled by art?


I would define natural causes as when a hospital would put down "natural causes" in their autopsy report, which only occurs under certain conditions. Drowning has it's own category, and injuries usually have a cause of death by blood loss, internal bleeding, shock and etc.

Of course, I have no idea how Frem might define it.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:33 AM

AGENTROUKA


That's well said, Anthony.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:38 AM

AGENTROUKA


Byte,

I mostly find it disturbing in terms of making that judgment to begin with. Even with medical experience that's probably difficult. Mostly, though, this point is not really applicable. If it's certain that somene is at death's door, minutes away or what, it's not really withholding aid because there is no aid to give. It's the conscious choice to withhold aid that freaks me out.


But you are right, there is really no sense in theorizing about Frem's believes without delving much further into the. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 6:53 AM

BYTEMITE


I could understand that. I myself am skeptical when someone says that someone IS beyond help, even a doctor, but their choice in that situation is not something I can judge.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 7:24 AM

HKCAVALIER


Perhaps I can bridge this gap in understanding just a little.

Consider the addict. Addicts have a tendency to "hit bottom," to reach the "terminal" stage in their "disease" in spite of everything we do. If you work with addicts, eventually you find yourself in a very, I'll say, Fremmish circumstance. You get to the point where you realize that there is simply nothing you can do to help this person survive. At some point, your "helping" the addict is only prolonging their agony. We call it enabling: in the terminal stage, improving the addict's life condition really just increases her access to her drug of choice, doesn't really help her out of the abyss of addiction, does not in the long run decrease her suffering at all. The only person who can do that is the addict herself.

Eventually, if you love addicts, you find yourself in the place where you let them go, withhold your aid from them, watch them destroy themselves because it's really the kindest thing you can do for everyone involved. Ultimately, on a psycho-spiritual level, the addict needs to take this thing as far as she wills, and either choose life or choose death on her own terms.

Now it's a truism in the West that no one knows what happens after you die. Even your most devout Christians and Muslims have to acknowledge this, if they are honest in their faith (I know, I know, a lot of the most devout folk are specifically dishonest in their faith--cognitive dissonance ftw!).

This cast-in-iron "truth" simply isn't true if you wander out into the non-western world. Shamans and witches deal with death at the center of their practice, deal with "the dead" on a routine basis. I don't need to tell you this freaks Westerners OUT. It is such a deeply foreign concept, foreign experience, foreign cosmology to them. The Western mind tends to react with horror, incredulity, and even contempt. Tough getting much of a dialogue across that divide.

For some reason in the West, reincarnation was booted out of the intellectual and perceptual tool kit long ago. At the Council of Nicea any reincarnational implications in Biblical texts were removed, shoved down the memory hole. One life/infinite Heaven or Hell, was the arbitrary and (to my mind) deeply inhumane cosmology settled upon by the Church Fathers. Way to create a race of terrified control freaks: you have some 80 years (at most!) to get your shit together before Big Daddy decides what you're gonna do UNTIL THE END OF TIME. Ouch.

Given such a background, of course the Western mind is horrified by Frem's apparent indifference. The Judeo-Christian legacy makes us psychologically addicts of life. We need it, cling to it, we lash out at anyone who questions it. And Frem doesn't want to mindlessly feed that addiction.

But if you grant folk like the Dalai Lama and Mahatma Gandhi credence, just for the sake of argument, death is not necessarily all it's cracked up to be and maybe, just maybe other people's comings and goings from this mortal coil can be seen as something more along the lines of their own business. If you let it sink in a little deeper, you might imagine how the going of a person might be every bit as sacred and beautiful a moment as the coming. Tough, I know. Just look where the Western mind faced with such an idea goes: "What? Death a beautiful thing? What are you sick? A ghoul? A serial killer???" Again, hard to get any meaningful dialogue up and running in that kind of intellectual climate.

Now, I do think Frem kinda states things in as unhelpful a way as possible when he says something like:
Quote:

...my religious beliefs very specifically forbid exactly this type of intervention except in very specific circumstances (and yes, I'll bend that a bit sometimes, only human, yanno) - but the long and short of it is that I am not *permitted* to intervene any time my sole action may prevent the termination of a life that would have otherwise ended at that time.
And then gets around to saying that the "very specific circumstances" he's talking about are largely within his own power to create if he so chooses. So, y'all can relax: if Frem likes ya, he's gonna save yer ass, not out of obligation or compulsive do-goodery, but out of his very specific love for you and his recognition that if he does such a thing on your behalf he will be bound to you for the rest of his days. In that context, wouldn't you agree that such things oughta be his choice? Alls he's sayin' is that that kind of commitment--a commitment he sees consequent upon saving a life--is not something you just rush into indiscriminately or at the behest of your CO.

Does that help?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 7:35 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

For some reason in the West, reincarnation was booted out of the intellectual and perceptual tool kit long ago. At the Council of Nicea any reincarnational implications in Biblical texts were removed, shoved down the memory hole. One life/infinite Heaven or Hell, was the arbitrary and (to my mind) deeply inhumane cosmology settled upon by the Church Fathers. Way to create a race of terrified control freaks: you have some 80 years (at most!) to get your shit together before Big Daddy decides what you're gonna do UNTIL THE END OF TIME. Ouch.
You forget; Catholics can get absolved on their deathbeds. This doesn't change things for the fear of most followers of religions, but it's rationalization for others.

I didn't know reincarnation was ever part of Christian religion; thank you for educating me! Buddhism of course does believe in it--it's a complex theory and I haven't decided where I stand on it yet, but I definitely reject the idea of heaven and hell! That's power, fear and control, to me.

I'm not sure your explanation solves the quandry we have over Frem's philosophy, as he stated it. And I have to disagree about the Western mind. I'm born and bred California, yet I feel the way I do because I believe it's RIGHT, and has nothing to do with heaven and hell. I suspect that might be true for others, from what they've written.


"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 10:16 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
You forget; Catholics can get absolved on their deathbeds. This doesn't change things for the fear of most followers of religions, but it's rationalization for others.

Niki,

I'm talking about psychological reality. How is the possibility of absolution at death supposed to comfort a Catholic as she lives her life, day to day? It's not the kind of easy cop-out, "Oops, sorry, God--guess I messed up a time or two there" that we non-Catholics imagine. Contrition is not something you want to fake or take lightly and it's not something that you're likely to be able to pull off at a moment's notice, particularly in a moment of extreme stress like, y'know, the moment of your death--PARTICULARLY if you've lived a life steeped in sin and denying God. I promise you, the Catholic wants some time to get it right, so she doesn't screw it up.

Deathbed conversions are the stuff of literature and, sure, point somewhere in the direction of the infinite mercy of the Divine and the power of the human spirit to overcome terrible afflictions of the heart, but it's not a get-out-of-jail-free card for believers.

Rationalization has no place in a serious discussion of spiritual reality. It is the essence of bad-faith. And sure, plenty of people live in bad-faith, but, again, I'm trying my darnedest here to stay focused on reality.

Quote:

I didn't know reincarnation was ever part of Christian religion; thank you for educating me! Buddhism of course does believe in it--it's a complex theory and I haven't decided where I stand on it yet, but I definitely reject the idea of heaven and hell! That's power, fear and control, to me.
It's hard for me to imagine a person accepting reincarnation without perceiving its reality first. I would go so far as to say it was wrong to do so. It's either a real phenomenon you experience or it's just a crazy notion. I think a lot of what people call their spiritual beliefs simply don't matter because they don't affect their actual lives. I'd say political beliefs often are just as meaningless. Just look at all the poor tea partiers selling their political souls to the corporate rich! If we do not seek to integrate our beliefs with our sensory experience, we can believe black is white and up is down; ignorance is strength and freedom slavery.

One of the funky things I've found about the Western mind in contrast to the non-western: in spiritual terms, Westerners routinely do things half-assed and call it good. Put another way, Westerners love the distinction between the Ideal and the Practical and love love love to torture ourselves in the space between. Western culture is in love with the Unreachable Ideal. And we measure ourselves against this Unreachable Ideal and inevitably find ourselves wanting in the extreme. This is very Christian: the material world is base, ugly, dirty, evil, wrong and the spiritual realm is all good, beautiful, perfect.

I think there's a spiritual schizophrenia at the heart of Western thought. "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!" Westerners will believe, and believe intensely in the Bible up to a point, but beyond that point, they won't go. I believe in God the Creator, but a 6,000 year old earth? No way. I'll believe in Heaven and Hell, but I'll kinda ignore it while I'm at this party. I believe Christ's teachings, but some people are just evil (Fundy Christians, even though they claim to believe the whole Bible from top to bottom, have sacrificed their psychological selves to do it--our psychological selves are where all the reasoning happens).

It's deeply, deeply embedded in the Christian consciousness--and reflected in the catastrophically low self-esteem that afflicts people here in the West--that we will never measure up to our ideals. I find this to be a very Western preoccupation. Savages like me and Frem (and Frem may wish to correct me here) don't wrestle with that particular angel (at least not much, or any more). I don't worry about living up to my ideals. I simply do, or know the reason why. And when I make a mistake, I own up to it and correct myself. I don't think this makes me a super hero. I don't think this makes me special. Doesn't mean I'm never deluded or think I'm right when really I'm wrong. I do, however, think it places me outside of the predominant flow of Western thought.

My experience tells me that anyone can be true to their ideals--we just need to work hard to know ourselves and to be honest with ourselves about what those ideals actually are.

I remember an exchange you and Chrisisall had a few months back. You were both busy wishing ill upon, I think, Dick Cheney, and you, I believe, made the queasy acknowledgement that this lack of compassion for your enemy made you bad Buddhists. Do you recall that? It struck me--here I am remembering it all these months later--and it bothered me. You and Chrisisall are what I would generally term "the good guys" and the two of you are kinda trampling on your own highest values--values, coincidentally, I would say I share, though I don't call myself a Buddhist. It struck me that Dick Cheney was and is precisely the person upon whom the both o' yous need to be practicing your loving-kindness and compassion. The both o' yous! But in that exchange, you guys, to my mind, exemplified exactly what I'm talking about: the weird complacency of sensible Westerners when faced with the incompatibility of who they see when they look in the mirror and their ideals.
You know what I'm saying? I don't mean to harsh on you and Chris at all. Just trying to take our conversation here seriously.

Quote:

I'm not sure your explanation solves the quandry we have over Frem's philosophy, as he stated it. And I have to disagree about the Western mind. I'm born and bred California, yet I feel the way I do because I believe it's RIGHT, and has nothing to do with heaven and hell. I suspect that might be true for others, from what they've written.
Whatever your beliefs, they have a provenance. Existentialism, a philosophy that acknowledges no God, no Heaven, nor Hell, nonetheless is a distinctly Western philosophy created IN REACTION to the Western/Christian tradition of thought. The very name of this thread "Survey Discussion: The Good Samaritan" proclaims the Christian context of the conversation.

From a shamanistic standpoint, Frem's values are immediately understandable. From a Western/Christian standpoint, they are perverse if not flat out crazy. It's not easy to bridge the gap in words, but it does us no good at all to pretend that the gap isn't there.

Thanks for listening.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 11:28 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Hoo boy, this is likely to get into even less comfy discussing turf, but in for a pennie, in for a pound - at least y'all didn't run me off as a blood drinkin death cultist, so that's a plus.

Imma answer some bits and then try to explain a bit of the background and positive qualities - do remember these are kinda stripped and simplified so that they don't require me to pound out eighteen pages of stuff which would then in turn have to be explained concept by concept, and then the way they link, and then how it comes together, WHY this way and not that way, etc.
(For example, TRY explaining the Abhidhamma Pitaka to a westerner!)

Hittin these in order...

AGENTR
It makes a theoretic sort of sense. (Though I find that if you have to cheat your own belief system rather than make an honest choice within it.. how is that free?) I just still find it deeply disturbing and very arbitrary.

Tricksterism doesn't really *make* a lot of sense to most people, since it requires a mindset so completely, radically different than the norm that most of em come off as flat out bonkers.

But your exact comment there reminds me that works BOTH ways, because that is *my* exact reaction to the american legal and social structure, and if you turn your head sideways and squint a bit when looking at it, with THAT thought firmly in mind, you can sort of maybe understand, just a little.

This reminds me why I love the separation of religion and state. I don't believe in the freedom from emergency aid, I find. I really don't.

I too am quite fond of that separation, although I really hadn't thought a lot about it - if there *were* a law mandating emergency aid, I might be able to reconcile that as protecting my own "line" from dead ending, but I'd be terribly hostile about it, kinda like if you forced a Baptist at gunpoint to participate in a Catholic mass, yes ?


Niki
I agree with Agent, for the most part, and would like to know what philosophy/religion you practice. It's a concept I've not heard of previously. It goes against everything I believe, but of course it's your right to believe as you do.

Are you familiar with Vajrayana Sorcery ?
Well, the extension most folk are familiar with, if they are at all, is of course Buddist, which is why some of my core beliefs might come across that way, but Vajrayana is just a name given to one of the (many) enlightened paths, which existed at least in concept and potential before even mankind.

The cult of Kali had more than one branch, and of course now everyone thinks of the Thuggee and Phansigars, which was the more masculine/yang aspect, but there always was another, more spiritual side which flowed naturally into the practice of Vajrayana, but still that's as simplistic as calling Baptists and Amish "christian" and thinking they're the same thing.

Instead of "diamond spear", think "diamond shield" and you're closer, like a jungian shadow version of Vajrayana, mirror imaged - which is probably why it would come especially jarring to you, no doubt, simply because of the dichotomy of it's familiarity and diametric opposition at the same time.

So, if you HAD to put a common name to it - The Vajrayana of Shadows.

"But how does that reconcile with your work regarding children and your championing their cause? It seems a dichotomy to me, so I'd like to understand how you work within the contradiction."

Well, you look at the reapers - Kali, Morrigan, Valkyries, Samedi, just as a few examples, and yet most westerners view them as fearful things, terrors of the night and shadow, right ?
(Although I must admit, I've always loved Blue Oyster Cult's alt-perspective)
How to explain this, hmm - ok, like the way a shark cleans up the sea, the reapers clean the world, and consider their depiction in respect to what they are doing, to the aged, as a kind old friend, to the wicked as a figure of final vengance and terror, to the terminally ill as blessed relief, etc.

When is the only time one is pictured as saddened ?
Collecting a child, of course, because it is an upset to the natural order of things, something that even the pyschopomps (usually depicted as birds) affiliated with them find profoundly disturbing, as an interruption in the cycle of life is a chaos event, sending ripples across the stream of life, disturbing other currents, flows and lines.

Oh hell, I dunno if that quite explains it, ok, different tack, same direction - think of it as extreme blasphemy, like a christian breaking the commandments, or a jain going on a killing spree, it's of somewhat greyish morality to wrap your line around someone elses to rescue them...

So what kind of abject horror do you think I feel when I see someone wrapping their line around someone elses to STRANGLE it, even unto death ?
*shudder*
I really hope that makes sense, anyhow, I tried.

And yes, that's why I don't use the word Karma, it's a different concept that doesn't apply here although to most westerners it prolly looks all the same, sure - and I *do* share your opinion of sadism-as-entertainment, that bein one thing that really put me off watching television.


Anthony
If I ever served as part of a 'unit' with Frem, the very first thing I'd do is borrow some money from him.

Oh you clever, CLEVER bastard... and I mean that in a reverent awe kind of way, cause I *never* thought someone would ever put that particular 2+2 together and realize why I never let folk I care about pay me back, always having some excuse about it - and that is has nothing to do with keeping them "owing" me (as I hold up as the pretense when called on it.) and every damned thing to do with having an "out" to come to their aid!

There *is* much of a Trickster in you indeed, I suspected as much.
(in answer to your question, Niki, hell yes. *laugh*)


HKCavalier
Very astute, very - although admittedly I was trying pretty hard to dodge out of admitting the very thing you stated at the end of your first post in exacting detail cause I thought it sounded too harsh.

Coming from you, though, it doesn't, does it ?

Screwed that one up good, didn't I ?

Western culture is in love with the Unreachable Ideal. And we measure ourselves against this Unreachable Ideal and inevitably find ourselves wanting in the extreme. This is very Christian: the material world is base, ugly, dirty, evil, wrong and the spiritual realm is all good, beautiful, perfect.

That's a big part of it too, as mentioned in my ad-hoc "sermon" I posted the link to, how they'll trudge what they have into the mud, reaching for pie in the sky, uncaring of the damage they do to HERE, to NOW, neglecting their obligation to the world they live in at the moment.

It's deeply, deeply embedded in the Christian consciousness--and reflected in the catastrophically low self-esteem that afflicts people here in the West--that we will never measure up to our ideals. I find this to be a very Western preoccupation. Savages like me and Frem (and Frem may wish to correct me here) don't wrestle with that particular angel (at least not much, or any more). I don't worry about living up to my ideals. I simply do, or know the reason why. And when I make a mistake, I own up to it and correct myself. I don't think this makes me a super hero. I don't think this makes me special. Doesn't mean I'm never deluded or think I'm right when really I'm wrong. I do, however, think it places me outside of the predominant flow of Western thought.

I dunno, I have seen plenty of westerners willing to cop to their own flaws and mistakes, I make no secret of mine in part cause how the hell are youth supposed to learn from their elders mistakes if the elders never own up to any ?

Believe me, my sister has *NO* moral high ground to come down on the behavior of my nieces in certain respects, and when bluntly informed of why (by me, who she will not DARE to contravene), the reaction of said neices was comical at best, cause she had them under the impression she was this perfect little put upon angel... yeah, riiiight - I also pointed out that she had little cause to bitch about the middle kid bein on the phone all the time, as much as she was at that age.

She's still kinda pissed at me about that, but if your kids see you as HUMAN, why should they think less of you, especially when they realize you are fallible and holding up to an unreachable standard is idiotic.

Hell, Wendy calls me "Captain Caveman" when I seem bent on clobbering someone when the situation doesn't merit it, and I will at least take it under advisement, you know ?

From a shamanistic standpoint, Frem's values are immediately understandable. From a Western/Christian standpoint, they are perverse if not flat out crazy. It's not easy to bridge the gap in words, but it does us no good at all to pretend that the gap isn't there.

Yah, appreciated - although imma try to get some of this stuff across, enough of it, anyhows - beats pounding partisan horses into drums.

-Frem

PS. I got more to say, specifically about odds-bending and the metaphysical aspects (which touches on your comments, Byte), but writing this took a huuuge chunk of time, and I have stuff to handle.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 11:52 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Eventually, if you love addicts, you find yourself in the place where you let them go, withhold your aid from them, watch them destroy themselves because it's really the kindest thing you can do for everyone involved. Ultimately, on a psycho-spiritual level, the addict needs to take this thing as far as she wills, and either choose life or choose death on her own terms.



Lemme note the concurrence here.
Quote:

There is no light without the shadow, and so too, do the trappings of the mothers represent this, from the Valkryies bloody spear, to Morrigaines crows and even Kalis famed necklace, the trappings of death and destruction are always with us to remind us that the clock is ever ticking, that the future we wish to buy must be purchased now, if at all, and punishment delayed, is punishment denied, and yet the true sin is for men to cast upon the gods responsibility for their own failure to act, to neglect the world that is their own, eyes fixated on the heavens while they trod their own children in the dust unseeing and uncaring, their own wicknedness unknown to them in their ignorance because they will not see, and when shown, will not acknowledge and what then for them but the swing of the reapers blade and the world better by just that much - a gift to them to lessen their sin and prevent its spread to the innocent and unwitting, unwanted and yet cast down onto them all the same, to where they would blindly repeat it in spited fury at a world where no hope for them exists.

Not just "let them go", but actively encouraged to push them over.

I know that might sound a bit cruel, but is it any crueler than shutting off the machines keeping a terminal patient going while the medical establishment withholds pain relief on the pretense of concern about addiction and their entire "life" is reduced to screaming in pain and begging for death ?

I've seen that, personally and recently, so it's pretty clear to me where mercy lies in such a case.

That said, that whole aspect, and the last line of HKCavs comment is especially telling, as an echo of one of my favorite stock phrases.

CHOOSE LIFE.

-Frem

And I really, really gotta get my ass back downtown.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 22, 2010 3:56 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Ok, now, picture the flow of whatever the hell you wanna call it - time, fate, destiny, whatever...

As a river or stream.

Now, within this stream are flows, eddies, currents, and the occasional course change or bit of (chaos) debris.

Also within are peoples lines, flowing, interacting, crossing over others, merging and splitting, all the time in a complex dance with a kind of rythym and patterns to it.

And it's more than a little ironic that occasionally science picks up on one of those patterns and does research on it, like, say, divorce rates in an economic slump, the flow of society crossing at angle to the current of a bunch of lines and many diverging as a result, just as a quick example.

Now, there's an art to the reading of those things, the way a shaman can tell you a storm is coming by the taste and smell of the air, the humidity on his skin, behavior of the animals and a thousand other things he has no name for, but he *knows*, you understand ?
And a good one, he can even give you an idea of where, when and what the intensity might be, barring some unforseen event changing the pattern in between then and now.

How you think I make some of the predictions I do, really ?

Now, everyone, consciously or subconsciously, affects the flow around their line, their wants, their desires, and with varying degrees of skill and influence - kind of like how natural leaders suck in the lines close to them, and not always with a positive effect (Jim Jones, et. al.) but prettymuch everyone has a slight "pull" to work with, and most of em, because it's kind of vague and unfocused, has little effect on things.

Now, take someone who can read this, and consider that they comprehend how it works enough to deliberately screw with it, but the real world isn't hollywood, it DOES NOT WORK LIKE that, the individual human is but a drop of water in an ocean, ok ?

However, that said, there is the ability to manipulate, to pull, whatever word you want to apply to this thing, but of course the further "away" a current, flow or line is from yours, the less "grip" you have on it, and brute force is a bad, bad, BAD idea, cause of what you might call a pinball-tilt effect, kind of like when you rock the cabinet too hard and the machine goes into tilt...

Well, when you try to apply too much force, too quickly, you risk provoking a chaos event - best description of that... picture your fairly orderly, at least in a natural way, stream there...

And drop a BIG FREGMEKKIN ROCK IN IT, right there, bam, splash - what happens to the currents, flows and lines now ?
Why, all hell breaks loose, everything goes screwy, bad juju, whatever you wanna call it, but nothing good.

And that is *why* we are not permitted to screw around with any line that does not intersect with our own, cause once it's touching ours we can get a solid "grip" on it and then apply the pull delicately, with precision, working WITH, instead of against, the natural order of things.

It's also a zero sum thing, give and take, so for every positive there's a negative, and so doing stuff like that for your benefit, or the benefit of someone else, there's the negative, which if say, the person who you are acting to benefit, was "pulled" in that direction by the malicious action of someone else, you can deflect most of the negative onto them to balance it out, especially if their line is still connected to the person you are acting to benefit, you see ?
Your line -> their line -> aggressors line, that's just one jump off, but their line *HAS* to be connected to yours for that to work, without causing all manner of disaster.

Out of time, and will get back to this later.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
White Woman Gets Murdered, Race Baiters Most Affected
Thu, November 28, 2024 07:40 - 20 posts
Alex Jones makes himself look an even bigger Dickhead than Piers Morgan on live TV (and that takes some doing, I can tell you).
Thu, November 28, 2024 07:29 - 81 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 28, 2024 07:11 - 7514 posts
Hollywood exposes themselves as the phony whores they are
Thu, November 28, 2024 07:02 - 46 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, November 28, 2024 06:03 - 4846 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, November 28, 2024 05:58 - 4776 posts
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Thu, November 28, 2024 03:56 - 44 posts
Thread of Trump Appointments / Other Changes of Scenery...
Thu, November 28, 2024 03:51 - 48 posts
Where Will The American Exodus Go?
Thu, November 28, 2024 03:25 - 1 posts
What's wrong with conspiracy theories
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:06 - 21 posts
Ellen Page is a Dude Now
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:05 - 238 posts
Bald F*ck MAGICALLY "Fixes" Del Rio Migrant Invasion... By Releasing All Of Them Into The U.S.
Wed, November 27, 2024 17:03 - 41 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL