quote:

---

Originally posted by marie


(But why anyone would ever take this sort of diamond quartz silliness seriously...that remains a fundamental mystery.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by shakti

quote:

---

Originally posted by marie


(But why anyone would ever take this sort of diamond quartz silliness seriously...that remains a fundamental mystery.)

---

Extreme subjectivity can approach objective truth.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by shakti

quote:

---

Originally posted by marie


(But why anyone would ever take this sort of diamond quartz silliness seriously...that remains a fundamental mystery.)

---

Extreme subjectivity can approach objective truth.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by shakti

Extreme subjectivity can approach objective truth.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ptypes

quote:

---

Originally posted by shakti

quote:

---

Originally posted by marie


(But why anyone would ever take this sort of diamond quartz silliness seriously...that remains a fundamental mystery.)

---

Extreme subjectivity can approach objective truth.

---

But look at the use to which it is being put. The whole approach lacks humanity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by marie

Oh please. I've never claimed to be spiritually enlightened nor have I ever denied being motivated by ego. (last time I checked neither had carlos or Dave Kelly.) I have repeatedly denied being healthy. So, trying to paint me as someone who parades as a spiritual guru seems kind of silly to me. But maybe you see me that way and that's truth enough for someone who is not interested in the way things actually are....

---

quote:

---

Your insults do not strike me as deep and penetrating. I am not impressed by the size of your balls either.

---

quote:

---

But if you think that you have looked into my essence and seen a little girl who is trying to impress the sky father...well, so be it.

---

quote:

---

I can't be bothered any more with this nonsense.

---

• Obsessive-compulsives, or anger points, move against people.
• Hysterics, or image points, move toward people.
• Paranoids, or fear points, move away from people.

quote:

---

Originally posted by halber mensch

since i started working i've realized that you could offend people by doing nothing

and somehow the judgment is rendered that you are something other than human ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by shakti

Nice work, Dee, that fabulous three wing it's sure got some swing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the_eye

Gee. And I thought I was insane..
What I don't like about 5w4s: they're tetchy, overbearing creatures, when they're not overprotective with others (as 5s) they're tyrannical and insane. Sensitive to anything that might affect them, can become fatigued with life (like 4s so do 5s seemingly); have an appetite for violence and power but don't admit it as they often preach fair-mindedness and righteousness (like 1s), that might not respect themselves in return. Sometimes strong, weak and sensitive at other times (during which their sensitivity makes them hate suffering). Lucky to them in healthier cases they're energetic and original or claim to be like that.


'mich interessiert kein Gleichgewicht/ mir scheint die Sonne ins Gesicht'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ptypes

quote:

---

Originally posted by shakti

quote:

---

Originally posted by marie


(But why anyone would ever take this sort of diamond quartz silliness seriously...that remains a fundamental mystery.)

---

Extreme subjectivity can approach objective truth.

---

But look at the use to which it is being put. The whole approach lacks humanity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dfgray44
as long as the person can match me in terms of intriguing ideas and creative psychological impressions. Again, no one here seems capable.

---

quote:

---

I'm stating a more honest opinion than others are willing to. The intent is actually to dialogue. I'm interested in the extremes of psychological nudity which only come about from sparring and picking at wounds in deeper levels. No one here has the balls to go there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Art_Skidmore

.....the food stains on their clothes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by marie

I've never claimed to be spiritually enlightened...

That's my point.


...nor have I ever denied being motivated by ego.

In order for someone to 'never deny' they'd need to mostly be always concealing...


(last time I checked neither had carlos or Dave Kelly.)

Again, your literalistic focus on 'the external' is striking. I'm rarely describing surface things.


I have repeatedly denied being healthy.

Again, the 'negative' approach. The need to deny comes from imagining that others might think that you think you're healthy. Why would others think that in the first place?

I'll answer for you: It's because something (which you're only partly aware of) comes through in your affect.


So, trying to paint me as someone who parades as a spiritual guru seems kind of silly to me.

I'm saying the complete reverse. You parade as a "just me" to such a degree that the polar opposite surely looms large.


But maybe you see me that way and that's truth enough for someone who is not interested in the way things actually are but in his own diamond quartz vision.

If you didn't get the 'diamond quartz' thing, you could have asked me what it meant. Instead, since you didn't know my meaning, you have a need to belittle it. The continuation of the belittlement exposes the bogasity of your "just me" affect.

What would be the intent of using a phrase that means nothing at all?


Your insults do not strike me as deep and penetrating.

It's interesting that you see my comments purely as insults. I'm describing typical complexes, the type of which affect many people. And I would assign equally 'bad' complexes to myself.


I am not impressed by the size of your balls either.

Impressing was the least of my interests. Finding equal or larger balls in someone else would be interesting to me. They've shown up occasionally.


But if you think that you have looked into my essence and seen a little girl who is trying to impress the sky father...well, so be it. I can't be bothered any more with this nonsense.

I understand. Your message is that you're "separate and above" most of the complexes that loom large in the Subconscious of the commoners. That's how I often feel.

Your other message (unconsciously delivered) is that you have perfect self-awareness. I see you, much as I see others (on a good day), as an ever-spinning diamond quartz. At the center, a heart pulsing and animating the interplay of light moving between multiple interpolating antechambers within these lonely prism walls.

It's impossible to follow all the light. Even less likely is to be aware of the equal amount of shadow produced by the light.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dfgray44

In order for someone to 'never deny' they'd need to mostly be always concealing...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dfgray44
I'm stating a more honest opinion than others are willing to.

If people are here, it's because they seek some truth. They might not be able to be completely honest with themselves, but then who is.

The intent is actually to dialogue.

Is it ? Do you think that spewing labyrinthical posts at people is the proper way to entice dialogue ? Or is it an unconscious tactic to keep people at bay. [Tactic 1 : high IQ won't come down his high horse and make himself understandable to the plebe].
If/when people do respond to you, you slam them with a second layer of terminal velocity grayism : "my dear so and so, your shadow is popping at the flank and engulfing you in thick dark smoke so much so that you cannot comprehend what I am speaking of". [Tactic 2 : condescending arrogance].
If they are capable of engaging you intellectually, and if they provide a valid response, you [Tactic 3 : stubbornly deny without disproving their point] or [Tactic 4 : go on a tangent and elude].

I'm interested in the extremes of psychological nudity which only come about from sparring and picking at wounds in deeper levels. No one here has the balls to go there.

Extremes are not necessarily more true, or more valid, or more significant, than averages. Your fascination with psychological extremes is your hobby. Shadows and archetypes are fine psychological concepts that help shed light on one's elusive corners of the psyche. But they're not EVERYTHING, and they're not that complex, actually... they're not as complex as you make them sound. I think you like to complexify, because you're fascinated with your own capacity to visualize : you create paintings in your mind, and then you tell a person that her psyche is just like your painting.

I'd welcome being put under a similarly warped microscope as long as the person can match me in terms of intriguing ideas and creative psychological impressions. Again, no one here seems capable.

Why would you prefer the microscope to be warped ?

And yes, self-aggrandizement is one of my motives. Too bad. Deal with it.

Do you like routine ?

Let me help you: I'm bad for self-aggrandizing; you're good for not self-aggrandizing. Next.

I don't think that is the point. I think that by doing that (self-aggrandizing), you push people away, not because you're bad, but because you're either a true narcissist, or a compensatory narcissist, and either way, people are not really interested in becoming your narcissistic supply. You objectify people, then tell them that they're too small for you and not worthy of your attention. Next.

The huge and hilarious lie that marie and carlos perpetrate is the idea that they don't have galaxy-sized egos. This applies equally to Grand Master ptypes...and plenty others.

We all have egos and we're all here to 'shine' or produce an effect or make ourselves feel good. But I think we're also here to grow, meaning, take in other people's opinions and learn from them. And what I see you do is NOT acknowledging other people's opinions, most of the time. Usually, you're completely impermeable, which I must assume, is a voluntary counter-reaction to the 9 capacity for absortion.

An interesting aspect of psycho-spiritual work (and investigation) is that you actually do become bigger. And as you do, you begin turn to sideways so as not to catch a glimpse of your shadow which would bring your new bigness into full consciousness. This 'growth' continually lays fresh conundrums on your path.

I think what you're describing is a specific talented 9-going-to-3 issue, where your newly found ego starts becoming a problem in itself. I don't think this scenario is the same for everybody. As I age, I don't feel like I'm bigger than before, but rather that my concern with individuality is shrinking.

The difference between us and psychopaths is that we all have a good/bad motif running in the background. True health borrows from the psychopath's detachment from this same feature, did ye but know....

That was my question about spirituality and 'indifference'. But the 'indifference' stage is just a step, I believe, it is not the ultimate destination.

Your 'sensible sobriety' is a spiritual cage. [It's also an intellectual cage.]

We all live in a cage. Yours is padded with a douanier Rousseau theme print.


********* / *

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skunk

quote:

---

Originally posted by dfgray44
as long as the person can match me in terms of intriguing ideas and creative psychological impressions. Again, no one here seems capable.

---

df, this is the heart of where you and I differ I think. I feel that you apply a purely creative approach in places where it perhaps lacks leverage.

That's a fair criticism.


I don't want to be as pompous as to talk about "Truth" and all that, but I'm more concerned with what is than with what sounds "intriguing".

My creative/metaphoric urge comes partly from a belief that I'm speaking more truth if I were using poetic terms to describe inner realities. Would you want your psyche and inner world to be described by a Leonard Cohen song or by the prose of a "psychological accountant" like ptypes? And which would be more accurate?

For me, poetry has considerably more leverage than 'science' when attempting an overview of the human condition or of a specific condition within an individual. Mystery is a central element of the psyche, and only poetry honors and allows the mysterious connections amongst the tangle of various inner elements.

My reflex, right or wrong, is to use 'intrigue' as a barometer for Truth. [Am I allowed to say, at this juncture, that I have E7 in the Thinking section of my trifix?]


I believe that subjective creativity is a means to understanding - that moments of deep subjectivity approach objectivity - but shy of such moments, I think the place of creativity has to be more clearly understood.

I would argue for perpetual subjective creativity. I think we'd agree, at bare minimum, that there is not enough of it, and certainly not enough of it applied to psychology and spirituality. Where we might differ is that I'm sure we'd have more 'widespread truth' if there were many more poetic scientists around.


I disagreed with pTypes when he said you're an "intellectual investigator". I think you're a creative improviser....

I agree, 100%. I'm not a thinker, and am primarily interested in perpetual kaleidoscopic improvisation.


And while your complaint that no one seems capable of matching you in your methods may be correct, in the matter of actual effectiveness, it may be a case of comparing apples and oranges; some of us just prefer different methods.

Since the thread is about "disliking 5w4s", I thought I'd bring in some actual dislike...just on a whim...crazy me. I, for one, appreciate my honesty.

My contention is that it's an actual error to "prefer different methods" if it means completely writing off the creative approach, which seems to be the case with at least a few folks in the 5w4 camp.


I also get the feeling that your probing at certain people is the result of frustration because you see them as getting in your way - both of your 'self-aggrandizing' agenda and your conviction in your method. But I don't think you really hit the mark here - because you have been getting frustrated.

Yes, hence my use of such words as "sacrosanct" and the like. I'm unconsciously exposing my own permeability as it contrasts with the 5's "wall".

quote:

---

I'm stating a more honest opinion than others are willing to. The intent is actually to dialogue. I'm interested in the extremes of psychological nudity which only come about from sparring and picking at wounds in deeper levels. No one here has the balls to go there.

---

I don't read you much (for the reasons that I mentioned in the first paragraph) but you do seem prepared to self-reveal. Trouble is, you paradoxically maintain a distance with your creative edifices that gives the impression that you're playing....and sometimes just head-f/cking.

Yes, an accurate inner image would be the silhouette of a skinny man, off in the distance, about 200 feet away, wearing a ludicrous hat and doing a self-satisfied dance.


But what I don't really sense is empathy. Now...I could be wrong, but I get the feeling that it generally seems to be the sexuals who hold you at arms length(?) whereas others (including myself) don't have a problem with you.

Mine is an evil born of receptivity and empathy, which I pervert due to my considerable repressed rage. In defense of my empathy, if a certain person catches my fancy, I'd suggest that I "listen" more intently than many others to what's being said. Again though, they'd need to catch my fancy.


I wonder if the sexuals are more sensitive to your 'two steps forward, one step back' approach; I think of sexuals as all-or-nothing, with issues of trust and empathy at the core of their decision to engage. And you sometimes convey a certain frivolousness that I suspect inclines them to pass you over.

That's an excellent insight.


My sense is that you will never win them over, irrespective of 'self-aggrandizing' agendas and you might have to delineate the group you want to reach a little more tightly.

My self-aggrandizing here is a distraction in relation to life-long projects that are in the works, though I'm always searching for more 'interesting' material and the style I sometimes enlist here can pull that out of the scenery, or separate the wheat from the chaff.


I personally do think that you want to connect, and to that end I sometimes get the feeling that you see the board as a universal...

My sense is of the board filling my needs, even as I apparently "contribute".

(rather than the collection of sometimes spikily juxtaposed individuals that it is) but your brand of sp/sx remains just that: self-preservational -- and I wonder if that's why the sexuals keep a distance.

Again, your insight on the sexuals makes a lot of sense. My rage often leads to an impulse to play inside of intimate spaces, instead of revering them. Some sexuals will, then, be aptly (and reflexively) avoidant of me.

Also, you're right about my wanting to connect (in varying degrees), but one element of my real-life style of interpersonal bonding is a kind of harsh psychological-swordplay-with-a-smile....which comes off a little awkwardly on a message board.


PS - I think your recent comments about sp/sx were very insightful.

Thanks.


PS- I'd actually prefer for my voice to have been only one of several who were expressing their honest dislike (though it's not accurate to say that I dislike 5w4s as a group). And at this point would prefer not to have the conversation stay on myself....believe it or not.

---