What's new

Your infestation of space-cooties/spirit fleas

RolandRB

Rest in Peace
Now I know this will be a new idea for some and that is, since after centuries of people conversing with spirits in some form, whether they be spirits infesting oneself (for "spirits" read "space-cooties" or "BTs" if you are a Scientologist) then despite all this time, nobody has objectively proved that even one of these spirits/space-cooties/BTs are real and actually exist. Now, could it be that the reason for this lack of objective proof is that they DO NOT EXIST? And if they do not exist, what conclusions do you come to about people who think they converse with spirits?
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
My personal belief is that they are talking to projections that they have created in their minds. I don't say delusions, because I don't think they are. I think they are literally a construct that the person has made that they see as separate from themselves. I think integrating such "beings" as part of yourself, or as a creation of yourself, is healthy. I think that objectifying them, and pretending they have independent existence, could be dangerous for the person experiencing it. Essentially, it's like a form of disassociative identity disorder, IMO.
 

Mystic

Crusader
Now I know this will be a new idea for some and that is, since after centuries of people conversing with spirits in some form, whether they be spirits infesting oneself (for "spirits" read "space-cooties" or "BTs" if you are a Scientologist) then despite all this time, nobody has objectively proved that even one of these spirits/space-cooties/BTs are real and actually exist. Now, could it be that the reason for this lack of objective proof is that they DO NOT EXIST? And if they do not exist, what conclusions do you come to about people who think they converse with spirits?

Well, let's see; we have about 360 million more planetary days left in this period of the manifestation of physicality. I think you'll find out somewhen in that much time.
 

Hatshepsut

Crusader
Building blocks of the universe are a strange substance. Take apart the tiniest molecular structure down to the tiniest bit and there is nothing but space. So what is animating it. Putting the tag of space cooties or BTs on a category of it just adds conjecture to something that has mystified scientists for a long time.
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
it's all topology

the usual model of the general relativistic 'fabric' of the universe is a rubber sheet with bowling balls, but, there are no balls.

Zinj
 

Hatshepsut

Crusader
Building blocks of the universe are a strange substance. Take apart the tiniest molecular structure down to the tiniest bit and there is nothing but space. So what is animating it. Putting the tag of space cooties or BTs on a category of it just adds conjecture to something that has mystified scientists for a long time.

I say this because we are dealing with an animating force when you look into this area. They are supposed to be otherdeterminisms you do not want to stir up and have interferrence with your own determinism . So you innoculate yourself...and clear the area.
Now technically, I think one could take something even a simple as a flower and see it has composite parts. You could say that each section whether it be a leaf or stem or pistil has it's own anima. It has its own purpose and in relation to the other members of its group. What is the cause behind their manifest appearance in reality as we know it. Do they have their own source.
If a hybrid can be engineered ...taking one orchid type and turning it into quite another....then does it follow that the invisible anima behind the original has been modified too.

What I'm kinda beating around the bush about is the Blueprint thing. Everything has a blueprint . So then if we mess with it and change it I guess the non-physical blueprint is changed? I'm not talking about turning a tree into tables and chairs. More like turning a man and a goat into a centaur. So the anima must be malleable and programmable...though maybe not advisable? Thus the ..."what were you before you became that?" question used on BTs when stuck in something.
 
Last edited:

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
Now I know this will be a new idea for some and that is, since after centuries of people conversing with spirits in some form, whether they be spirits infesting oneself (for "spirits" read "space-cooties" or "BTs" if you are a Scientologist) then despite all this time, nobody has objectively proved that even one of these spirits/space-cooties/BTs are real and actually exist. Now, could it be that the reason for this lack of objective proof is that they DO NOT EXIST? And if they do not exist, what conclusions do you come to about people who think they converse with spirits?

I would guess that if one is told to go "earlier similar", on and on, one would finally wind up in False Memory Syndrome. Any delusional thing could come up and thought to be real.
 

airhead

Patron with Honors
Well duh!

You get what you put your attention on, right? Ron tells us that in management policies and directives. :duh:

Well, start looking for cooties, and then bless their little souls when you find them. :happydance:

LRH also says that thetans can "imbue" things with life. (Forgive me for not giving an exact quote as I don't have an LRH library to hand.)

Well.... DUH!

I think I "created" every little bit of myself that I supposedly sent off into the wild blue yonder.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
These threads that ridicule and deride others' realities are wearing a bit thin, don't you think?

Why such effort is expended is beyond me, unless it serves some particular personal agenda.

What's up wid dat? :confused2:
 

Happy Aberree

Patron with Honors
These threads that ridicule and deride others' realities are wearing a bit thin, don't you think?

Why such effort is expended is beyond me, unless it serves some particular personal agenda.

What's up wid dat? :confused2:

Have to agree with Panda on that.

We have a very wide range of realities on this site and it would pay to tread lighter sometimes.

"
Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light,
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams."
--Yeats

HAB
 

Hatshepsut

Crusader
Second Coming?

Today was less invalidative than most though. I cringed to go into this thread. Phhewww! It's getting better all the time.
 

RolandRB

Rest in Peace
These threads that ridicule and deride others' realities are wearing a bit thin, don't you think?

Why such effort is expended is beyond me, unless it serves some particular personal agenda.

What's up wid dat? :confused2:

"Invalidation" being a bad thing is something you picked up from L. Ron Hubbard who was pushing this idea to stop people questioning his own dubious belief system that he was selling to others. I think you would be better off using the scientific method.
 

Feral

Rogue male
"Invalidation" being a bad thing is something you picked up from L. Ron Hubbard who was pushing this idea to stop people questioning his own dubious belief system that he was selling to others. I think you would be better off using the scientific method.

He didn't say any thing about 'invalidation', he was talking about ridiculing and deriding others beliefs wearing a bit thin.

I agree, it's tiresome. I don't mean the conversation, it's the derisive attitude.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
"Invalidation" being a bad thing is something you picked up from L. Ron Hubbard who was pushing this idea to stop people questioning his own dubious belief system that he was selling to others. I think you would be better off using the scientific method.
I didn't use the word "invalidation" nor any Hubbardian concept at all in my post. You must have imagined it.

My post was simply an observation about this type of thread. In my opinion this ill-informed approach only serves to further the existing impression amongst current scn'ists that some critics are idiots.

It's just an observation.

Here's another one; it is my observation that when one can't grasp or understand another's reality, one tends to be of the opinion that the other is either lying or stupid (including stupidity's supposed sub-categories; demented, deluded, hallucinating, hypnotised, brainwashed etc etc).

Why not simply allow others to have their own realities?
 

RolandRB

Rest in Peace
I didn't use the word "invalidation" nor any Hubbardian concept at all in my post. You must have imagined it.

My post was simply an observation about this type of thread. In my opinion this ill-informed approach only serves to further the existing impression amongst current scn'ists that some critics are idiots.

It's just an observation.

Here's another one; it is my observation that when one can't grasp or understand another's reality, one tends to be of the opinion that the other is either lying or stupid (including stupidity's supposed sub-categories; demented, deluded, hallucinating, hypnotised, brainwashed etc etc).

Why not simply allow others to have their own realities?

Because they are not realities in many cases. They are delusions instead. And if a person is to recover from the cult then they should discard their delusions and bit by bit, grasp reality.
 

EP - Ethics Particle

Gold Meritorious Patron
FREEDOM FOR THE MIND

Because they are not realities in many cases. They are delusions instead. And if a person is to recover from the cult then they should discard their delusions and bit by bit, grasp reality.

High walls and huge the body may confine,
And iron gates obstruct the prisoner's gaze,
And massive bolts may baffle his design,
And vigilant keepers watch his devious ways:
Yet scorns the immortal mind this base control!
No chains can bind it, and no cell enclose:
Swifter than light, it flies from pole to pole,
And, in a flash, from earth to heaven it goes!
It leaps from mount to mount - from vale to vale
It wanders, plucking honeyed fruits and flowers;
It visits home, to hear the fireside tale,
Or in sweet converse pass the joyous hours.
'Tis up before the sun, roaming afar,
And, in its watches, wearies every star!


WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON

And, BTW - thank you for the yeats, HA! :thumbsup: :happydance:
 
Top