Originally Posted by
Rum Dick
This article is amazing.
‘He’s an instrumental god, now please don’t try to antagonise him. [To Joseph] My salute to you, sir, is as many times as you are a hollowed-out instrumental god … My belief is my belief and I don’t want your belief, and I’m just stating what I believe.’
‘I know who I am,’ Joseph said.
‘I don’t want to take it away from you,’ Leon said. ‘You can have it. I don’t want it.’
Leon’s standard response to any claim from the others that went against his delusions was ‘That’s your belief, sir,’ and then to change the subject.
This is identical to religious moderates who don't really believe. Only the especially gullible become fundamentalists. The rest are using religion as a coping mechanism. It's a psychosis that results from corrupted processing < which results from trauma < which results from parents who are insane who traumatise their children with their filthy shame / dementia / emotional insanity / instilled horror / love.
Before and after the time of the anti-psychiatrists, the pro-psychiatrists did everything in their ever increasing ‘scientific’ power to liberate the mad from the bin and bring them back to the world of normality with cold showers, electric shocks, insulin shock, brain cutting and anti-psychotic medication. The libertarians, for their part, simply announced that there was no such thing as madness and therefore the state was not required to oversee and pay for the care of those who were making themselves socially unwelcome (see Thomas Szasz). The so-called mad were to be turned out of the asylums and become part of the general population. If any individual’s behaviour was intolerable to society, they were to be imprisoned, not given sick notes.
The imbeciles got it the wrong way around. The "socially unwelcome" are all mad. Prisons should be turned into (humane) hospitals.
In the book Rokeach acknowledges that his experiment with his children had to stop where the trial of the three Christs started, with signs of distress: ‘Because it is not feasible to study such phenomena with normal people, it seemed reasonable to focus on delusional systems of belief in the hope that, in subjecting them to strain, there would be little to lose and, hopefully, a great deal to gain.’ This is a very magisterial ‘non-deluded’ view of who in the world has or has not little to lose. Evidently, the mad, having no lives worth speaking of, might benefit from interference, but if they didn’t, if indeed their lives were made worse, it hardly mattered, since such lives were already worthless non-lives.
The eternal ethical dilemma. But it would only be a dilemma for those who aren't bright enough to know what they were doing. Or those bright enough to not be dementedly certain like the insane people are who have children and tell them
"Mother knows best."
"And how do you figure that?"
"Because I said so OKAY!? I'm your mother OKAY!? I know what's best for you OKAY!?"
My mother was too idiotic to even keep it together without breaking out into babbling "speaking in tongues" whenever something unpleasant confronted her. I would point this out, when she asserted she knew best and she'd respond with the 'logic' of a backhand. Filthy beasts. How dare they be this stupidly insane. How dare you insane creeps allow them to believe such an idiotic 'opinion' as one that is not logically justified?
They don't know best if they're not capable of making the logical case for why they know best, are they? They cannot make the logical case for anything. They cannot even make the logical case for why they're breeding children in the fucking first place.
But the ethical dilemma I face is:
Do I risk the attempt to wake them up or do I let them sleep in danger? What if the process of waking them up is expected to be too painful, and there is no guarantee they can be woken successfully? You could make "waking them up" a much harder proposition by attempting to wake them up without knowing what you're doing. And when they wake up, what if their reality is so bleak they wish they remained in psychosis?
On the other hand, what if - as is the case for 7.3 billion insane humans - their psychosis has only been adopted as a result of corrupted perception? They might not need what their psychosis-afflicted mind imagines it needs to cope with the reality that is an illusion for everyone.
The above is where I stand, locked into inaction, unwilling to risk the attempt to bring my siblings back to life.
I don't give a fuck about all of you. In that sense, you're all lucky. You're not really sane enough to realise it yet, but I will drag you there because
your snivelling unwillingness to counter or accept Logic is nauseating.
I am studying the above phenomena with normal people. This writer doesn't let on that, as I suspect she is perfectly aware, almost all normal people are insane. This thread (the evidence and logic I have and will post in it) is the interference in your psychosis. But I cannot force to you be sane, and so you will be - provably - insane until you
want to get better. Without the pain that comes from being forced to confront your insane psychosis, you will probably continue to be nauseatingly apathetic about Logic. You'll choose to ignore what you are unwilling to counter or accept.
But you cannot counter the logic I argue. You cannot explain the images I show you. They prove what you don't want to accept, so you block them out to enable your insanity to continue.
The three Christs themselves, however, were of the certain opinion that they had something valuable to lose and made truly heroic efforts, each in his own way, to resist, as well as to explain to Rokeach and his team that their lives had considerable meaning for them.
Of course the delusion will protect itself. This does not mean it's acceptable to allow the delusional to live in their delusion. There are huge risks, of course; even more so if you're clueless or deluded about your ability to force them to see reality.
Their delusion might not be of their creation. Do you understand? She does. I think she knows what I know, about reality and illusions and the fact that what you all believe (and what I believed until I was dying at 29, from Love) is insane. Nothing but illusions of (corrupted) perception. Illusions that trick your eyes into seeing what it wants to see, based on your mood (i.e. your emotional insanity). As the realisation hit me at 10am that Aun was not, in fact, coming (hah!) and that we were not, in fact, getting back together; the impact of how horrifically I'd been lying to myself shattered my insane artificially-inflated emotional high to an insane artificially-deflated (terminal, even) emotional low. As I crashed to the ground, I watched reality transform before my eyes. Beautiful people became ugly. People I thought were having spontaneous fun suddenly looked awkward and forced and miserable and everyone was desperately trying to fake having a good time. The DJ went from sounding ethereal to sounding amateur, tacky, stuttered and terrible (mid-track). A girl I vaguely was aware to be "very attractive" (of course I only cared about Aun) suddenly had buck teeth I hadn't noticed, a mid-riff a bit too extended to be so gallantly exposed bare, etc. And the dirt. The filth. I'd been oblivious to all of it. Suddenly I was lying in the filth of a nightclub that probably never really gets cleaned beyond a lazy wipe over / sweep.
And I was bright enough to instantly understand the implications; nothing I believed could be guaranteed or even likely to be real. If everything I'd ever seen or heard or read or _imagined_ was merely a function of my emotional state / mood, then how could I be so stupid to believe anything or anyone had a clue. What if they were all as oblivious as I had been? What if no one realised the reality they believed to be real was nothing more than a perceived illusionary distortion of what was Real? I thought to myself,
"This explains all conflict. All the insanity of the world. If people only see what they are allowed to see, or what their emotions allow them to see - without realising their eyes are lying to their brain - it's no wonder wars are fought because everyone believes their Reality is the correct reality and that everyone else is being unreasonable / irrational / insane."
And just like that, I became sane. I no longer loved Aun. I felt an overwhelming sadness for us both, but there was no pain anymore. No sharp slicing of betrayal. No trauma. I laughed, and jumped to my feet.
The thought had never occurred to me. No one had ever suggested such a thing. The Matrix, maybe. But not very well. Or maybe I need to watch it again.
We were all insane. You are all insane.
I think because the writer is aware that everyone is insane; she just doesn't want anyone screwing around asserting that, for example, Jesus Christ is Sane. I mean seriously, there are Christian psychiatrists treating patients. Show them Numbers chapter 31 and ask them if that's the word of God, and they will say Yes. And you imbeciles, in your delusions, cannot do logic. You're not humane.
All of them, though Leon in particular, had a very clear understanding of what it was to be deluded...and who did and didn’t have the right to interfere in their self-selected delusions.
She almost perfectly understands the dilemma.
Rokeach hoped they couldn’t help but conclude, as they looked from one to the other Christ, that logically they were not therefore who they thought they were, though he says nothing about what assistance was available in the overstretched state mental hospital in the event of their suddenly losing their delusions and having to confront themselves with their lost years as plain Clyde, Joseph and Leon.
This is not necessarily a justification to allow them to be trapped in their delusion. You can put suffering into peace. The deluded are not at peace. They suffer private misery which can never be quantified. I know this for a fact. It's obvious watching someone rant about a politician who lies; they're suffering from the expectation that they'll be told the truth when they're too insane to understand they vote in the most prolific liar every single time. He connects with them. Insults them. Speaks in their insane lingo. They know he's not from Texas but they like the fact he puts on a cowboy hat. They're too insane to be functional. They vote in whomever insults them the best. Then they get butthurt when they get lied to. Then they rationalise because "at least he's better than the other guy".
They're morons because him and the other guy/s work for the same guys: Power. You don't see Power, but Power isn't subtle. It bends "the guys" and their will to its way.
six-americans-obama-and-holder-charged-under-the-espionage-act-and-one-bonus-whistleblower
Though rare, U.S. presidents have attempted to use the World War I-era Espionage Act to silence Americans from leaking information to the media for decades. It is a charge that is as controversial, as it is grave. This is the law the Nixon administration infamously invoked when attempting to bar the media from continuing to publish the classified Pentagon Papers—the second largest leak of classified information to the press in the U.S., after Wikileaks. Nixon of course, was unsuccessful, and his shattered reputation never recovered.
But guess what? The Nixon Administration is small potatoes compared to the present. When it comes to wielding the “incomprehensible†Espionage Act to stop disclosures of classified information, one presidential administration has the rest beat by a mile: The Obama Administration. This Administration far outnumbers every previous one in prosecuting leaks of classified information to the media. The Department of Justice under Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder has used it more than all prior administrations combined.
Here are six cases where the Obama Administration charged an American with the Espionage Act—and one very similar case where a whistleblower underwent a criminal investigation for leaking information to the press. After perusing these, be sure to check out POGO’s Adam Zagorin’s piece for further analysis on Obama’s use of this contentious law.
This is not Obama & Holder, you imbeciles. This is Power forcing them to do their job. That's not the job they lied to you about wanting. They wanted to work for Power.
In fact, all three men resolved the logical trap set for them by sinuously changing the nature of the problem. The others were deluded, dead or lesser kinds of god. A kind of positive stability emerged, they associated with each other, sang together, read to each other and, apart from occasional bust-ups usually triggered by the researchers, generally refused to be drawn on the matter of who exactly was or wasn’t the one true Christ.
Exactly like religious moderates. Unwilling to backup their lies.
Leon, lucid as ever, knew exactly who the three men were and expressed his anger: ‘When psychology is used to agitate, it’s not sound psychology any more. You’re not helping the person. You’re agitating. When you agitate you belittle your intelligence.’ Joseph, too, made himself clear: ‘I look forward to quietness. We can win over negativism. By “we†I mean the five of us having the meeting. It’s not going to do us any good. Then the meetings might be dissolved.’
Jesus Christ. The opinions of those who refute logic are not valid. They want to live in peace until they are manipulated into killing each other in wars of attrition. This girl's continued deference to the potential 'validity' of their illogical position is infuriating. It's her only logical fault, but it ruins the article.
The illogical do NOT have the right to hold their invalid opinions. You do not have the right to assert that I am insane when you are insane and unwilling to counter my evidence and logical assertions. You provide no evidence, make no logical assertions; all you do is assert that you are sane when not one of you is sane and in this thread there is the PROOF you do not want to counter or accept. You just want to avoid it.
What you feel you want isn't fucking valid. Your delusion isn't yours, it was given to you by those who enslave billions with their 'entertainment'. You're owned by the Walt Disney Corporation, who operate at the pleasure of Power.
Next the men were asked if it was all right for the researchers and the staff in the hospital publicly to refer to Rex as Dung, Joseph as Mr God, and Clyde as Mr Christ. All three joined forces (a psychologist’s triumph in itself) against Rokeach. ‘Now, don’t be funny,’ Clyde said. ‘You must understand, it’s too heavy for an individual to participate in these meetings over here, to go into that God business,’ Joseph said. ‘It’s indirect agitation. There’s a confliction … It’s frictional psychology,’ Leon said. From which Rokeach deduced that ‘a psychotic is a psychotic only to the extent that he has to be.’
Almost a logical deduction. I'm just brighter than all these people.
The correct logical deduction is that "a psychotic is a psychotic only to the extent that his psychosis IMAGINES it has to be." He's no longer in control. His processing has become corrupted by the perceived requirement to surrender to a coping mechanism. It's a logical fail to continue to assume the psychosis is under (rational) control. It will just process events as well or as poorly as it is capable of; and that is going to be corrupted processing or poorly, by definition. Working with corrupted intel, the delusional coping mechanism cannot be expected to have a clue about what the human mind it is controlling is capable of. Trauma makes the traumatised hysterical, which creates traumatic situations, which makes the traumatised even more traumatised, which makes them more hysterical and so on; until the traumatised (i.e. delusional) mind simply shuts down.
And that, boys and girls, is how you imprint (shut down) a human mind. It's all about fear fear fear. Stick stick stick. Then love. The carrot. And you can then do no wrong in the mind of the imprinted / deluded. Aun is amazing at doing this, I imagine purely instinctively. She'll smash your face on the ground so quick and so hard, you cannot cope; everything was perfect, almost too good to be true, you'll realise you are in Love. And Aun will look at you with such tender pity, you can literally feel yourSelf throwing your Self up. Handing over control. She destroys. Then she can do whatever she wants with you, which - hilariously - is usually nothing because Aun only wants what she cannot have. This drives the Insane insane. I already knew I was insane. I threw ethics out the window and played.
I had to have her. I couldn't live without her. Just this one time. You only need to hurt her once, then you can live happily ever after. Hurt her for Love this one time. It made perfect (non)sense. Because I insanely
wanted, I simply made nonsense > sensical in my insane emotionally traumatised mind. Cue year of horror.
Not even the initial 'conscious' decision to refute the traumatic 'reality' which starts the domino effect of delusions is based on accurate information. You do it because you cannot cope with the horror of your (perceived) reality. From that point on, once you lie to yourself once, you're no longer capable of processing anything correctly. If you're unwilling to either counter the pure logic I'm writing or accept it,
that's the proof of the strength of this logical argument I'm making right now.
It might help if you view "delusion" as a string of dominoes lined up one after another. No one is suffering from a _single_ delusion. The world is not the black and white place idiots attempt to paint it as. You are not suffering from a single delusion. Everyone is deluded about everything. Catholic polite lies? Diplomatic lying for peace? White lies? Lies for social cohesion? This is how the corruption is triggered. Your filthy exploited mother telling you it's impolite to hurt her feelings, or telling you something perfectly innocuous you did was shameful (like being a toddler taking a shit in front of your parents). This is how the insanity is triggered. It's religious, in every way.
I suspect I would still have lingering delusions but until I'm told Truth, I have to slowly right each fallen domino myself. Each delusion might seem like a conscious decision to deny the 'reality' or reality you perceived (for whatever incorrect reason) to be impossible to cope with. But there is no horror a healthy human mind cannot cope with. Because the reality is as horrifying as anything you can imagine, and I can cope with it so you can as well; or at least, I don't give a fuck if you cannot. Hah. Fuck you snivelling wretches. Asserting that you're sane when you are unwilling to make a single logical argument for or against anything?
How dare you.
But from the very first 'conscious' decision to enter into a 'preferred' denial (when the Truth [or what you perceived to be true] was too horrifying for you to accept), all the other 'conscious' decisions will have been polluted by that initial rejection of Truth / Reality. Traumatise a child into dabbling in denial and it will be a long way back to Sanity (the longer they are insane, the longer the journey back - each of the delusions
perceived incorrectly as necessary will need to be unravelled [each domino needs to be righted]).
I remember some of my 'conscious' denials at perceived realities I judged too horrifying to cope with. I consciously started dabbling in delusions to cope with a world that censors my posts when I asked on forums why 12 year olds I'd just passed were (explicitly) soliciting passersby to engage in prostitution; ostensibly enjoying* the horrified reactions they were inducing from some men (like myself) who passed. They shot to me like a magnet as if they
knew something about me that I didn't. The trauma was insane. I almost couldn't breathe, I was so horrified. But it wasn't real. It was just imagined. I was insane because I was forgetting something very hilarious, in hindsight. I was not attracted to 12 year olds. Whoops. Easy thing to overlook. The homophobic go years failing to realise they're not attracted to men. They won't know, of course; until they are no longer terrified that they
might be gay.
But pedophiles-in-denial would also be horrified. That's why they shot to me. My horror was like a magnet for these tiny little girls. It was horrifying.
The rest of you fucking narcissists don't care. Hah. You're not attracted to them, so you'll pass them by without generating a strong emotional reaction. Pretending not to notice, etc. Hah. You fucking narcissistic creeps. All you care about is your moronic Selves. But you're not doing a very good job of caring for your Self, as provably by logic. If you only care about yourSelf, and couldn't care less about those around you, you're not going to be intelligently Selfish. You're going to be miserably Self-less.
* I now also realise (of course) that they were / are not enjoying themselves. That's their coping mechanism. I don't know if you imbeciles read my brilliant stories but I wrote one about staring a child prostitute down in a Ratchada entertainment parlour. Playing chicken before I blinked away as the pedophiles laughed at how hilarious my non-funny joke was. Her defiance is the coping mechanism to her helpless plight. The 12 year olds' lewdness was their coping mechanism to being forced into sexual exploitation.
But I would post on forums asking questions, nothing more. Just asking people how they felt. Trying to understand the insanity. I'd be like "I'm not asserting anything, I'm just asking what the deal is. What's the general position on sex with children? Are we cool with that now?"
I would get abused and then Censored. Hah.
And you fucks have the nerve to assert that your insanity should be tolerated. You're not even willing to answer questions on what you do or not believe is tolerable. You're nauseating. But that is what happens to delusional and insane people who are psychotic only to the extent that their corrupted psychosis IMAGINES they need to be.
Leon’s initial refusal to accept letters from Madame Yeti Woman excited Rokeach into wondering whether he didn’t, after all, really believe in his delusions. Do the deluded take on their persona more consciously than it seemed, as a shield against having to cope in the regular world? Are the mad really mad? Did Leon only want them to think he believed what he said? Leon at first firmly rejected the fleshing out of his fantasy, became extremely depressed and said he didn’t like the idea of people imposing on his beliefs. But gradually, unable to resist the temptation in spite of his deep suspicions, he came to accept her as a real presence.
Meshes perfectly with my assertions above. He is semi-aware that his psychosis is imagined, but he (incorrectly) believes he needs it and so his mind (controlled by the psychosis) gradually adjusts to the presence of the non-existent person.
It is excruciating to read of his capitulation, as he accepts the existence of and is ready to interact with someone else in his isolated world. In a meeting where Leon is given a letter with a dollar bill, Rokeach notes a breakthrough for the study:
Suddenly I realised that he was really doing something I had not expected to witness. He was struggling to hold back his tears. With this much effort he would surely succeed. But he did not … Does the letter make you happy or sad? ‘I feel somewhat glad’ … Are you crying? ‘No, my eyes are smarting because of some condition.’ You say you feel somewhat happy? ‘Yes, sir, it’s a pleasant feeling to have someone think of you. But there’s still a tugging against her and I don’t care for it.’ Do you want to disobey her? ‘No, no! I don’t! That’s the point! I don’t care for the temptation against her.’
This is amazing. He's literally telling the Truth. He doesn't care for the tug of Reality. He wants to believe in the Fantasy he has started to believe in.
Leon at last announced that all his former wives were dead, that he had discovered his ‘femaleity’, married himself and been pregnant with twins who bled to death before birth.
I’m looking forward to living alone. My love is for infinity and when the human element comes in it’s distasteful … I’ve found out whenever I receive something, there’s always strings attached and God bless I don’t want that.
Oh boy. Can you not recognise the hints of brutal emotional manipulation, and the exploitation of betrayal there? He's going to live alone because he cannot rely on anyone else. His love is infinite but the love of others is finite. When humans love it's distasteful. There is always strings attached (exploitation). He doesn't want that (to be manipulated).
A girl really worked him over with that Love.
But his entire psychosis is built on an initial lie (Love - the worst of all lies because the best sociopaths tell it to themselves). Aun was so good at convincing herself she loved whomever she was with (can you _theorise_ a trauma that might have made this coping mechanism develop?), for all intents and purposes, she loved whomever she was with. Had two people she loved been in the same room at the same time, she would have a nervous breakdown or a total shutdown of some kind. But as long as she could flit from one to another (between her six or more lovers), she would not be lying when she said she loved you. Of course she would be lying. She just wouldn't know it. If she was with you, you were the only thing that could matter. If she wasn't with you, you were...a distraction, a hassle, something to be dealt with discreetly.
If I am correct, and I almost certainly am, Leon only felt brutally betrayed because he believed in a lie that is Love. It's not real. It's just an emotional insanity. A trick used by parents to emotionally manipulate their children (as motivation, children are raised by creeps to be obsessed with pleasing the objects of their affection - that's one way to never please anyone except a creep who wants other to suffer to please them like your filthy exploited mother wanted you to suffer to please her); lovers to emotionally manipulate each other, states to emotionally manipulate citizens (nationalism, patriotism, racism), friends to emotionally manipulate each other (blind loyalty, unconditional support); it's used by religion, communities, societies, social groups, sporting teams, political parties - all to exploit the individual, ostensibly for the greater good but usually for the benefit of some creepy hierarchy or oligarch. The Royal Thai Army generals have been using the Thai King in this way for decades before Thaksin came along and re-imaged the imprinted peasant vassals, turning them into the Red Shirts with fires and violence and all the same tricks Moses used to turn the children of the Chosen People (who he had to wander around the desert for 40 years to kill off) into the sociopathic fighting force that you can appreciate quite vividly in action in Numbers ch. 31.
Of course, this is all about exploitation. The patron and his patronising drilling away at capacity for critical thought. No questions allowed. No complaints allowed. I would question my mother and she would horrify me with a response as insane as "Don't you love me?"
How could she imagine that I even could love her at all? And she wanted Unconditional Love so that I never questioned her? My mother was insane. I knew that when I was five years old. It took me another quarter of a century to realise every mother has always been insane. Exploit women, let them handle the emotional development of 100% of Humanity. What could possibly go wrong?
Love is always about exploitation. The stupid do it because they don't know any better. The brilliant do it because they don't know any better. Well John le Carre knew better. And that means now I know better. Not sure who else knows better but the Red Shirts should have known Thaksin would kill them if desperate enough. He was willing to start a Civil War. It's astounding that he kept the body count so low during the May riots in 2010 when he was out-manoeuvred by Abhisit who understood the play. Abhisit was accused by the media of not connecting with the stupidly patronised like Thaksin can. Thaksin connects with their mysticism. He makes them stupid. He lies to them all the time. He's the patron. They're the stupidly patronised. Now some of them are dead but the real horror is the poor bastards left alive.
7.3 billion vassals dying for love.
But love is a feeling. Love is an illusion. Love is a Confidence Trick. Leon wasn't actually betrayed (or at least, he was not betrayed when he believed he had been), because the initial mutual Love / Trust / Unconditional Loyalty (love for infinity) he felt was irrational and non-existent. Stalkers must be made to understand they never had what they believe they've lost. They become delusional and go over the edge of Insanity into Insanity as a result of the trauma they experience at the loss of an imagined feeling that does not exist except in the mind of the emotionally manipulated children of exploited women.
"Love is all there is to betray. Betrayal is only possible if you love."
- le Carre
In an epilogue written some months after the experiment ended, Rokeach updated the reader: "...to say that a particular psychiatric condition is incurable or irreversible is to say more about the state of our ignorance than about the state of the patient. This study closes with the hope that at least a small portion of ignorance has here been dispelled."
I've taken it further. If you disagree, you HAVE to make a logical case for why you FEEL that way. You cannot say "I disagree". You do not have a right to hold an opinion you cannot justify using logic.
Rokeach reread the book with regret. There were, he says, four people with delusional beliefs, not three. He failed to take himself into account, and the three Christs, not cured themselves, had cured him of his ‘God-like delusion that I could change them by omnipotently and omnisciently arranging and rearranging their daily lives’.
Amazing. He got it right in the epilogue and wrong years later when he reread his own book. He became infected with the very psychosis he had done a fine job of very nearly curing.
But he failed. So? Just because
he failed doesn't make the premise itself a "God-like delusion". What ludicrously transparent arrogance. It's obvious Insanity. His delusion is so obvious it's hilarious. He failed so it's a "God-like delusion". He's the most intelligent man that will ever live, is he? What a joke. This is outrageous delusional behaviour similar to the psychosis suffered by his patients. This is a coping mechanism much like the coping mechanisms his patients adopted. Can you not see it?
He believed he could cure them.
He was not intelligent enough and, as a result, he failed to achieve what he set out to do; causing some pain and suffering trying to reverse the imaginations of those who imagined their realities to be so traumatic, they embraced fantasies.
He correctly defends his failed experiment by saying he made some progress and that it's merely ignorance preventing the insane from becoming sane again.
Years later, perhaps wracked with guilt or remorse for the pain he inflicted, he suddenly asserts that no man can succeed. Nor should they try. He no longer has a God-delusion. He knows he was wrong. His failure means no one should try. No one should play God. As if he's the best of mortals? That's the coping mechanism right there. The insanity is ironic, and not just because God is the reason they're all insanely imagining to be forms of God.
All four of them.
I'm a fucking genius. But if I failed, curing them would _not_ become a "God-like delusion". How dare he assert such a ludicrous thing. If I failed, all it would take would be a more brilliant man than the two of us. If you cannot see the Insanity of his 2nd position v the Sanity of my and his 1st position, I don't think I could cure you (for example)! But someone more brilliant than I certainly could. We are but fractions of the geniuses we should be -and would be - were it not for religion. God is a delusion Humanity must overcome.
When we cure mankind of the god delusions, we will not be gods. We will merely be humane again. We can do it. Maybe no one alive can do it. But Humanity can overcome so long as religion's lies and emotional insanity doesn't turn the planet into nuclear wasteland first.
What has been imagined can be unimagined or reimagined over. If you cannot understand the logical proof intrinsic in that statement, you're a fool.
He came to realise that he had no right to play God and interfere, and was increasingly uncomfortable about the ethics of his experiment.
Hah. Because he failed, he has no right to play God. Why is it "playing at God" if he got it wrong? This is ridiculous delusional insanity. Because he failed, he believes the experiment was unethical. How so? Because he caused the delusional to suffer discomfort at clashing with Reality? That doesn't necessarily make the experiment unethical. A brighter mind might very logically hope to succeed for only very little risk.
___________
It's all about Risk v Reward. My problem with attempting to bring my siblings back to life is I don't really think I am bright enough to succeed without unacceptable trauma, or succeed at all. The light has gone out in their eyes. They've shut down. I know it's possible to turn the lights back on; I just don't like the Risk v Reward breakdown were I to attempt it. There are all kinds of complications because I Love them still. And there is the issue of the whore that killed them by making them think they should please her, being presently Loved by them). It's such a sick trap by Religion. How do you kill the vicious demonic Christians slaughtering you in the name of God when they've all got children who Love them? What if their children who Love them are on the battlefield with them like in the Bible and that pedophile CS Lewis' creepy Chronicles of Narnia / Lion, Witch & the Wardrobe?
I made a tentative effort with Jessie, and ran into resistance. She has a hate / love relationship with her mother. And that worries me because I never had that. I just hated the vile woman's sleazy infernal interference in my Survival.
Then if I did succeed in turning the lights back on in the eyes of the Dead Who Do Not Die When Religion Kills Them, the secondary problem presents itself. Living in a horrifying world with all you snivelling little rats and your unfathomable insanity and terrifying certainty that you are correct and sane when you're not willing to even make the case. That's batshit insane. I was never that insane. I'd make the case for anything and sure I'd rant and rave and chuck the dummy when I could not (as I did when confronted with the fact my favourite lecturer was gay, for example)...but then I would always come home to Sanity. I wouldn't just shrug like a moronic vassal and Inshallah the unresolved issue/s.
You're all a bunch of twits. You're unwilling to counter or accept Logic, and on top of that you feel it's acceptable to proffer your unjustified gut 'opinions' without making any logical arguments whatsoever. How look it's just the way you feel. So your 'opinion' isn't valid.
"We all have a right to our opinions."
That's what those who exploit you have made you - idiotically - feel. You're insane. You have a right to your opinion
only if you are prepared to logically make the case for why you feel that way. If you are unprepared to do that, or are incapable of doing that, you're insane. And you're an imbecilic kind of insane if you cannot understand those feelings you feel (but cannot justify) are not your own. They were given to you by someone else. Imposed upon you by someone else.
You're all imprinted with your mother's exploitation. She was imprinted with the exploitation of 3500 years of religion's (pretend) hatred of women. I instinctively knew my emotions had always fucked me when I was relying on them more than ever to help me keep it together, and so I ripped out the root-kits as easily as contempt for a weed you find in your landscaped yard.
“Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. ‘And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.â€
(1 Cor. 14:34-35).
“Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.â€
(1 Tim. 2:11-12).
Leviticus 20:18 (King James Version)
18 And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness...both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
Leviticus 12 (King James Version)
1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days...
4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.
5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.
6 And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled...she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon...for a sin offering...unto the priest:
7 Who shall offer it before the Lord, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.
Twice as filthy. Women are unclean. Women who give birth are unclean. Women who give birth to women are twice as unclean. Women must bring a lamb & pigeon to the priest to say sorry for having a child. The priest gets holy for eating the burnt offerings.
This is the Law.
No logic. No arguments. No ration. No reason. No sanity. That's religion in a nutshell for you. Just random hatred. Just misogyny. I might be the first person to work out that it's all
fake hatred of women. Or at least, it's hatred of humans 'hidden' under the guise of misogyny. Men are imbeciles for falling for the con.
The best Rokeach can manage is the acknowledgment that psychosis ‘may sometimes represent the best terms a person can come to with life’.
The best Vincent can manage is the acknowledgment that psychosis will always represent the best terms a person's psychosis can come to with life. Why would anyone imagine
what the psychosis believes is necessary could possibly be synonymous with
what the person's mind can handle?
The person has been lied to his entire life in this world of Catholic / religious emotional exploitation. Every single person the person has ever met has lied to him, often without even realising it. His psychosis is his coping mechanism for a world he doesn't understand.
Horror you cannot understand will always seem more horrifying that horror you understand completely.
The key, as always, will lie in Helping People Who Have Been Lied To for their entire lives, understand the Truth.
John 8:32 (King James Version)
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
I don't know what that verse is doing in the most evil book ever written but I know I've never met a Christian who believed in Truth.
In 1964, having spent some time myself in a psychiatric hospital, I read The Three Christs, and soon after came on Laing’s early books, which confirmed what I had seen in it. It has made me very wary of reading ‘case histories’, written about the disturbed by those who believe themselves to know better. It also seemed to me, aged 16, that The Three Christs of Ypsilanti contained everything there was to know about the world. That’s not the case of course, but if resources were short, I’d still be inclined to salvage this book as a way of explaining the terror of the human condition, and the astonishing fact that people battle for their rights and dignity in the face of that terror, in order to establish their place in the world, whatever they decide it has to be.
She's a genius. In another world where I was emotionally insane, I imagine I would be in Love with her. Those who
believe they know better should be forced to make the logical case for why they believe such a thing, and then when they cannot, they should be Rested In Peace. No slaps on the wrist. No tolerance. You do not have the right to believe something you are unprepared to justify with logical arguments that cannot be refuted. The instant they are refuted, you must counter or accept the superior logic.
What is with this demented vassal world of morons who have their 'opinions' proved idiotic, and then they'll just keep on believing their lies anyway? I believe they're lying about their Faith. Their faith is a Confidence Trick.
I am not emotionless. There are a lot of people who need to die because they don't believe they know better.
Those responsible for the terror of the human condition are not interested in improving humanity. They're interested in retaining control at the expense of humanity. The human condition is horrifyingly debased by their malicious design. They're afraid their victims might learn from those who know better and they're not going to just permit their victims to unimagine what they have spent 3500 years of screaming to ensure.
There are 7.3 billion people on this planet. Almost all are either insane, or in the process of being screamed insane. Every human child is born sane. It is not a coincidence that their sanity is terrified away. It's not a coincidence we live in a world of terror.
We need to get rid of Love. We need to get rid of Trust. These are provably insane concepts used only for exploitation. We need to get rid of Religion and that will take care of 95% of the corrupted emotions which they've used to root-kit every single one of you. Then we'll get rid of the Lies. We'll 'knock' down the Illusionary lines of demarcated borders drawn by Westphalia and used by blood-thirsty sociopathic 'sovereigns' who write Laws to work in tandem with Religion's Laws in order to fight endless wars which are the inevitable product of domestic terror campaigns. Westphalia sociopaths got their power by Confidence Tricking vassals into killing and dying for their 'protectors'. Hundreds of millions of innocents have been butchered in wars since the illusionary lie that is the 'sovereign' nation-state was established. Billions of innocents have been enslaved by the Holy Roman Empire giving away land and humans it did not own to the genocidal maniacs who called themselves 'sovereigns' and told humans that Humanity wanted to kill them.
"You should all be terrified. But stick with me, vassals. Your Sovereign will protect you. First, some Laws. Next, some taxes. Now, some battles. With any luck, a War."
We need to pull down the walls that protect humans from Humanity. We need to consign over 3000 dialects to the dustbin of religious History. We won't have to relearn how to be humane, we just need to stop Loving the children of Humanity insane. Humans will then be able to have fun in peace without fear of offending the imagined feelings of the emotionally-insane.
Religion has been disturbing the peace with their emotional corruption in their Evil semi-Orwellian Books of 95% Hate 5% Bait for thousands of years.
We have got to get on top of the Racketeering.
We will only ever need to fear Fear.
We will only ever need Protection from Those Who Would Make Us Afraid.
Linear Mode
