Your wish is my command (well, maybe)

Turning to you for inspiration;

What would you like to see me cover on this blog? Yes, I have a set of categories and you may have seen what I typically cover on my blog. But for a moment, forget all past posts. What would you like to see?

Propose a subject by leaving a comment on this blog post. I may be inspired to go with the flow 🙂

Thinking

74 thoughts on “Your wish is my command (well, maybe)

  1. Let’s talk about ESP, reading minds…be able to see things from afar, real psychics, mediums…that type of thing…

  2. Dear Gier,
    I would like to heare some down to earth report from your real life with your family.
    And, some news on the project in India.

    Love,
    Per

  3. A couple of ideas:

    Based on what you believe about Beings as causative agents , what is the best way to run a society? Is it the libertarian small government way or not. What system brings out the best in individuals and leads to the most harmonious society?

    Also, do think artificial intelligence and technological advancement in general will likely make people more materialistic and less spiritual? What are the chances of a ‘Bladerunner’ future for us to come back to?

    Btw this is a great blog, always interesting posts 🙂

  4. 1. A list of top websites and books, etc. that you would recommend (a) to be or become well informed on important subjects, as well as (b) the most interesting subjects in the world today.
    2. What you know about continued research on Scientology (such as Ken Ogger’s, for example), and again which sites, books, etc. you would recommend. Also, any recommended sources of information about Scientology in any aspect (there is SO much on the Internet and so many books too).
    3. Any part of the materials of Scientology, your choice. Discussions always give a better understanding than study alone, from my experience.
    (Writing the above requests, I thought of the key question, “Would you want OTHERS to have similar gains to your own?” Your blog posts and threads actually go beyond the purpose of that question – in the direction of making it happen. :-))

    1. Great ideas Marildi,

      I do like looking to the future as in #2 – for myself, I look ahead to bigger & better things – more expansion & awareness and knowledge or opinions on the path(s) leading there. My thrust has been the top of the old grade chart from the 60’s/70’s and working towards that. This has also encompassed all of my dynamics and the dynamics of others.

      I also agree with #3 – I have personally experienced many cognitions & shifting in my little universe as a result of the discussions we have had on this blog.

      1. Dennis, thanks for the ack. I was thinking further that #1 above would be particularly helpful for those of us who spent too many years disproportionately involved in Scientology, convinced that it was the only subject of any real importance (groan, grimace). Ex-SO especially; come out into the “real world” and have so much to catch up on, including as just one starter how to operate a computer and use the internet – even a friggin cell phone! You get the idea.

        I got the impression that you yourself have been on either org or mission staff and that’s a similar situation of dwindling dynamics, just not as extreme as the SO. Anyway, Geir offers good stable datums – to get all those who’ve left and are leaving going again (and the numbers seem to be growing). Not that this category is the only one to benefit by a stable terminal – just until personal stability is achieved.

        1. Thanks Marildi,

          Yes, I was on Mission & Org staff for a number of years. My years were in the tech division as a fully hatted Examiner, Pro Word Clearer, Pro Course Sup, & D of T. I was also Ethics trained (Ethics Specialist) and, believe it or not an ordained Minister (in those days the Minister’s Course was mandatory for anyone auditing). Aside from that I was on Way to Happiness, WISE Charter Committee, OT Committee, Say No to Drugs, working a day/night job, multiple trips to St. Hill, raising a family, etc, etc.

          Yes, dynamics did dwindle – I tried to be active across the boards and with increasing demands, some areas suffered.

          After years of that, I am tired – oddly enough when I was active I could go all night or on very little sleep – purpose was #1. But now I need to unwind and get the rest of my life in order.

          Having a forum like this to me is the next best thing to talking to all of you in person.

          Btw, if any of you happen to be in Canada (live or for a visit), my wife & I would love to have any of you as guests – we live outside of Victoria on Vancouver Island.

          1. Wow, Dennis, you really gave it your all. That’s the kind of purpose Scientology once inspired, isn’t it?

            And it seems you’re still that same generous, trouper of a guy. Thanks so much for the open invitation to all of us. 🙂

  5. Intelligent people feel troubled when others around them are doing things that are harming them (those others). Intelligent people like people around them to be intelligent too.

    The idea of domination over others (cause over others) is abhorrent to an intelligent person. Buddha wanted everybody to be enlightened. The only thing to be overcome is ignorance.

    Thus, there is a need for a grass-roots technology that will fight ignorance. KHTK is a vey simple and modest attempt in that direction.

    It would be intelligent to discuss what we insist on taking for granted… Let’s look for inconsistencies in those areas.

    .

    1. Personally, I don’t feel troubled – I feel inspired to do something about it.

      On the other hand, there are so many things I see day to day that I could stick my nose into that it would take an enormous amount of time. I pick & choose what I do.

      You mention: ” The idea of domination over others (cause over others) is abhorrent to an intelligent person. ”

      ‘Cause over others’ does not necessarily mean ‘domination’ – it depends on the intention of Cause and the willingness and agreement of the recipient.
      This is similar to ‘control’ – there’s good & bad in both.

      1. The bottom line is we have to bring everybody up before we can ourselves keep on going up. Call it inspiration or concern… this is the bottom line.

        .

      1. She claims that she is a minority in the world of neuroscience regarding free will. She doesn’t believe in it while most of her colleagues do in spite of many studies and demonstrations of brain activity and choice in relation to time.

        Her like-minded colleagues say in response things like, “I act AS IF I have free will otherwise I would go mad and life would have no meaning.”

        She cries “bullshit” to that (not actually using THAT term).

        She contends that if you give up on free will as true that life just goes on like it always does. She believes it is liberating in a way and that if society gave up on free will in our justice system, that things would actually improve. We would get over the “blame” problem and be a lot more pragmatic and effective.

        We act like we always do because we evolved to act that way socially to survive.

        I’m with Susan. I’ll believe in Free Will when I see evidence of it. Otherwise, for me, free will is just another name for “ego delusion” or the belief in a self.

        It’s WEIRD, the more I accept that idea into my life, the more natural and down to earth I become. The more I realize I am but a meat wad, the more “Buddha like” I become.

        Still no forehead zit though. Need me a forehead zit.

        1. The idea of “free will’ never made sense to me because it seems to be a western concept. I never came across it during my formative years. To me the following makes more sense.

          (1) The fundamental capability of life is to visualize. One may visualize whatever one wants.

          (2) One is bound by visualizations that one is holding on to. There is a spectrum of visualization. The physical universe is really a very solid visualization.

          (3) One does not have to hold on to what one has visualized in the past. As one become aware of inconsistencies, one become more and more able to let go of past visualizations.

          .

          1. “fundamental capability” “whatever one wants” “able to let go”
            That’s plenty enough free will for me, Vin. 😉

    1. Katageek (and anyone interested in studies that clearly indicate there exists a non-physical reality), I just watched this video describing neuroscience experiments that come to a very different conclusion that the ones cited by Susan Blackmore, which she infers prove there is no such thing as free will. Go to the last part at about 2:00:00.

      1. p.s. Correction: Go a little earlier that 2:00:00. Start at about 1:58:40, where he says “We start moving our physical system before we ever get the physical response to move our physical system.”

  6. Thank you Geir for the opportunity to offer some ideas for discussion!

    What actually happens for you during an “aha!”? If they are seen as valuable, what is it about them that are seen to be valuable? Since most people have experienced these, it could be fruitful to find out WHAT EXACTLY they experienced on a first-hand basis as best as can be expressed / described. Also under what circumstances did the “aha” come about?

    Assuming that life forms are attuned to particular frequencies, can life forms attuned to dense frequencies perceive less dense frequencies? Can the attunement be adjusted to extend the perception capabilities?

    Why do so many proponents of self-realization / spiritual enlightenment experiences / development caution against passing judgment? In Scn this is expressed in the auditor’s code as admonishments against evaluation and invalidation. Why so important?

    Assuming that “consciousness” is a “generator” of reality, and assuming that reality is generated by attention, which could be directed attention (intention) deliberately or otherwise, is it possible that the only active principles come down to attention and non-attention, with simultaneous or subsequent value judgments?

    Is it possible that many would-be seekers of expanded awareness do successfully expand their awareness, and find themselves in receipt of collective awareness concepts / memory / emotion, etc. and misidentify these as failure to progress (because it seems like they have now dropped into a band of insanity – witness the vicious actions of criminality / war / poverty, etc.) when actually tremendous progress has been made. Does “aha!” functionality apply to this arena equally for any participant in this situation? What would be the impact of “aha” on that arena?

    There’s a saying phrased in various ways in philosophy/science etc. that goes something like this: “absolutes are unattainable,” “there is no such thing as absolute truth,” etc. As I see it, both of these statements are expressions of absolutes. This suggests that there are absolutes. Perhaps absolutes are simply not things. Perhaps absolutes power or bring meaning to things. Perhaps absolutes are what permit the experience of a veritable sea of electrons as some kind of cohesive or recognizable experience.

    1. Maria, I can’t resist telling you my “aha” about evaluation. For me it’s simply this – you take the cause point away from the person you evaluate for! Whether it’s invalidating OR validating them, or telling them what to think – you make them EFFECT. And you get PROTEST! Expressed or unexpressed, or below awareness.

      It doesn’t always happen, but it can. Why it does or doesn’t, seems to have something to do with having or not having their agreement. It’s a subtle thing, a thing of finesse, and I haven’t pinned it down exactly. We should!

      Thanks for (kind of) asking. 🙂

      (Hope it’s okay that I’m jumping the gun a bit.)

    2. Exactly so! It probably is not both ways. “Unknowable” is another example of a term created from a mishmash of inconsistency containing both absolute and non-absolute and neither and both.

  7. p.s. I’ve been considering your idea of meeting up, Geir. Two ideas on this – meet up somewhere in British Coumbia or perhaps somewhere in Europe next year? Right now, I have commitments that pretty much take up all of my time, so it would have to be sometime in 2012, probably at the end of spring.

    1. British Columbia??

      That’s where I am too!

      Nice to have another independent thinker nearby! 🙂

      1. Hi Dennis,

        I do spend time in B.C. from time to time – I travel a lot with my work. My two vacation destinations are possibly somewhere in Europe or in B.C. next year. The Canadian Rockies are truly awesome. Where in B.C. are you situated?

        1. We live just outside on Victoria on Vancouver Island.

          Yes, the Rockies ARE awesome! We have camped thru them many times.

          If you’re ever out our way, do drop us a line!
          red-sky@shaw.ca

  8. “A living thing has to make up its mind that it can be harmed by something before it can be harmed by it. You have to carry with you the seeds of your own destruction before you can be hurt by anything. You have to make up your mind that you can be hurt by an automobile before you can be hurt by an automobile. You have to give your consent to be destroyed, even to get a cut finger.” Excerpted from the lecture Responsibility—How to Create a Third Dynamic by L. Ron Hubbard delivered on 31 December 1957.

    I suggest that this quotation is at the heart of the dilemma faced by individuals seeking absolute truth. You see something “bad” happening and determine that something must be done about it. The elements that come into play are: a) seeing something in the first place b) seeing it as something that can affect you at all c) valuing it as good/bad or harmful/not harmful – whatever dichotomy / reality you choose as meaning d) acting on it as a reality, which further reinforces the reality. My association with several groups “devoted” to spiritual transcendence has been that there is tremendous attention given to reality, sometimes even more that in groups that are not so devoted. i.e. righteousness, doing the right thing, being holy, and so on, which grant tremendous reality to the power to harm. As an example, all this supposed harm done by group members to the group, the emphasis on manifesting things, all this insistence on being perfectly good and so on. All of these speak to an insistence that consensus reality is the only possible reality and of course if you consent to that, then that is your reality and you are still on the tread mill.

  9. I will let the suggestions roll for another day or so without me commenting. I like the free flow of ideas here. I will touch and feel each one and see what happens.

  10. 1. Valid/other ways of knowing besides logic and science.

    2. Anything Maria suggested in her posts above. 🙂

  11. Douglas Adams said “42” is the ultimate answer.

    The Tao Te Ching in Chapter 42 has a creation story of the Tao and number.

    OMG! Is This the Ultimate Question Manifesting Itself? Discuss!

    Tao Te Ching
    Chapter 42

    The Tao begot one.
    One begot two.
    Two begot three.
    And three begot the ten thousand things.

    The ten thousand things carry yin and embrace yang.
    They achieve harmony by combining these forces.

    Men hate to be “orphaned,” “widowed,” or “worthless,”
    But this is how kings and lords describe themselves.

    For one gains by losing
    And loses by gaining.

    What others teach, I also teach; that is:
    “A violent man will die a violent death!”
    This will be the essence of my teaching.

  12. 1. If you could step back in time to advise young Geir just as he was ‘entering’ Scientology, what advice would you offer? (Stop? Go? Caution?)

    2. Many years ago a long-time Scientologist, writing as, “The Pilot,” offered his considerations about what is and isn’t ‘true’ about Scientology. (http://www.freezoneamerica.org/pilot/sscio/01a.html) I’d very much like to see something similar from you.

  13. Possible discussion topic: The phrase “free will,” is so ambiguous as to be meaningless. So is the word “free.” So is the word “will.” I submit that these are words that are only useful in context and are otherwise bait for red herrings.

    1. Great point!

      Context, frame of reference, order of magnitude, stable datum, point of departure, orientation, reality level, awareness level: View-Point…

      Makes you wonder how much apparent “communication” is on parallel planes. Humbling. 🙂

  14. A few suggestions:

    1) The future for Scientology, Corporate Scientology, alternative philosophies and their effects on the universe at large.

    2) Phenomena – what you have experienced whether related to your Scientology gains or other philosophies or something that ‘just happened’.

    3) Other ‘paths’ and any experiences

    4) What’s after OT Vlll ?

    5) Ethics/Justice Tech/Codes – what went wrong?

    6) Our individual Histories in Scientology & our plans for the future.

    7) What got you into Scientology ? What were your aspirations? Did auditing & training meet those expectations?

  15. Is the world we see the only one?

    Are there unseen beings lurking around us?

    Is the “urge to survive” the basic motivation of life?

    What is mathematics? Why is mathematics important?

    What is communication and what improvement might take its place?

    What would two beings occupying the same space at the same time be like? What would “that” be like if you added more beings?

    If increasing ARC reduces space-time to an ultimate point or sameness, and if the wave-function collapses to coalesce matter and thus solidity(?), then are these two “different” activities the same activity?

    Does the personal computer mimic the human mind?

    Is difference between “biology vs. physics” and what is it?

    What does the being mimic?

    What does it mean for a being to be free?

    Is the “Game of Living on Earth” a good game?
    . . . Various spiritual practices, processes, and disciplines aim at unraveling this “game,” — Is this result of this a good thing or a bad thing or what kind of thing?

    What is the goal of religion?

    What is the goal of mankind? Aside from our immediate comfort, is it important for mankind to continue?

    1. “If increasing ARC reduces space-time to an ultimate point or sameness, and if the wave-function collapses to coalesce matter and thus solidity(?), then are these two “different” activities the same activity?”

      Or maybe this question: Is the ability to “postulate particles in space” another way of saying that a being is capable of collapsing a wavefunction thus creating coalesced matter, i.e. particles in space?

      In the reverse: Does the coalesced matter (the particles of a postulate or consideration) when as-ised go back to wavefunction? (That would seem to align with the tech of NED which says that “postulate off [as-ised] = erasure.” The final NED command is: “Did you make a postulate at the time of that incident?”)

        1. Marildi, thank you for effort to relate ARC with KHTK. I want to make the following statements:

          (1) In my opinion the key product of Scientology is the ability to spot inconsistencies and resolve them.

          (2) The ability in “1” then leads to the skill of thinking for oneself.

          (3) The skill in “2” then leads to a freedom where inconsistencies and outpoints do not hold one back.

          I am all for knowledge. Scientology is a part of knowledge. Knowledge is not a part of Scientology.

          Any Scientologist who thinks that KHTK is some “other tech” has not really understood Scientology. All gains in Scientology comes from LOOKING. Without LOOKING there cannot be any gain. Therefore, KHTK underlies Scientology, Psychology, or any activity that produces gains. KHTK may be used to run most Scientology processes directly without the dependence on some external device, such as, e-meter. Any overrun in Scientology will always be found to proceed from a violation of KHTK principles.

          KHTK examines the subject of LOOKING on a scientific basis. It is an open subject not owned by anybody. It is out there to be examined, cross-checked, commented upon, and experimented with just like any other scientific topic. Further scientific papers may be written on KHTK by other researchers.

          The basic intention underlying KHTK is to generate a grass roots movement that is helping people become more themselves and free.

          .

          1. Thanks, Vin. I fully agree with: “I am all for knowledge. Scientology is a part of knowledge. Knowledge is not a part of Scientology.”

            “Look” is undoubtedly the main principle in Scientology but I wouldn’t say that all the gains come from Looking. We shouldn’t forget there are also objective processes, TRs, study tech, data analysis, etc. Actually, auditor training gives tremendous personal gains, because of the sheer discipline required and the intense drilling of communication with another Being (how awesome is that?).

            Nevertheless, your focus on Look is probably the best single thing you could have extracted from Scn or wherever – or if you came to it yourself. Ironically, it may be TOO simple for some people – but I’m sure it will hit the reality/agreement level of many. I’m glad that you’re “consistently” promoting it. 🙂

          2. Wow, very interesting. I hadn’t actually thought it through that far. I’ve been thinking that KHTK/Looking was only intended to address aberrated considerations – meaning, those not consistent with the basic considerations of this universe. Are you saying that once the aberrated/inconsistent ones were handled, the basic considerations that make up the universe (such things as the principles of communication, for example) would naturally and inevitably be laid open to view?

            And the other thing I’m wondering about has to do with what LRH said about the traps in this universe – that even a full OT could be trapped again if he didn’t know the anatomy of those traps and how to undo them, through training.

            What say you?

          3. There is no limit to looking. When one layer is as-ised through looking, then the next layer presents itself to be as-ised through looking and so on, until all layers are as-ised, and one has total knowing capability to visualize as one wishes. Right now our visualizations are within the scope of the considerations we are holding on to unconsciously by taking them for granted. The straight considerations are just another level of trap when they are being taken for granted.

            The most basic training is looking per KHTK. That underlies all other training. Training that makes one blindly accept what one doesn’t understand is simply a level of implant. Beliefs that are not understood but held as truth are part of implants. All these things are inconsistencies.

            An OT will only be trapped when he is prevented from looking, or when he decides not to look. A “training” can be implanting if looking is not made a part of it.

            .

    2. All you have is what you have visualized in the past, and what you visualize now. The way forward is simply to look for inconsistencies and sort them out fully. That is better than just speculating.

      This is knowing how to know.

      .

      1. Better = more fruitful in terms of knowing.

        Knowing is having more consistency among data, and not accumulating more data.

        .

  16. Do we live IN a world at all? . . . or is our experience of “the world out there” the totality of ourselves?

    What is integrity? . . . Does the fractal construct of MEST apply to integrity? . . . How so?

    How do “orders of magnitude” apply to parallel universes? . . . Do you think that it would be possible for “parallel universes” to be not parallel at all but to be “serial” and separated from us by orders of magnitude alone?

    What are parallel universes? Where would we find them? Can we locate them from the context and framework of this universe?

    Would extant physics apply to a parallel universe? . . . or Would a parallel universe be a MEST universe? If they were different, what would be different? If they were the same as MEST, then how are they remaining undetectable?

    Would a parallel universe arise from the same resource of wave-function as this universe?

    If all that we know and can that we can see were the result of a single “big” being as many religions report, then could there be other “big” beings out there and not participating in our universe but having a go at their own? Would it ever be possible for these universes, created separately by “separate” beings come into communication?

    Would it be fair to state that the “ego of God” as described in various religions is a reflection of our own “ego” and what could this statement imply?

  17. Is it the nature of mankind to be hopeful? . . . or despairing?
    and if it is the nature of mankind to be hopeful, then what is it that we are hoping for?

  18. – How to personally recover from cult influence and how to help others recover

    – Goal setting and purpose finding. How do you know it is your goal and how to stay on track despite distractions. How to channel dispersed energy towards your goal. When you have 1000 goals – what to pick? Not just Greatest good. What about pleasure, happiness, desire, fun?

    – Recommended reading or exercises for personal/spiritual improvement

    – Successful actions in waking people up spiritually. Not only beings trapped in the implant factory but people in general. 

    – How to undo the side effects of reversed auditing? Is that possible with auditing outside the madhouse? Or with TRs? Or just living life the way one intends to? Sorry to call it a madhouse but when its purpose today is “How to save the world without looking” I find that somewhat insane. 

    – Honest auditing wins from the independent field. Are these wins more permanent or are they fading away in days or weeks?

    – Real life OT phenomena, ESP experiences and other spiritual inspirations

    – More craziness! 🙂 

  19. I would like to extend my appreciation to the many contributors and ideas on this blog post. There should be lots of inspiration for future blog posts here 🙂

    Let’s see what happens.

Have your say

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s