Syzygy
Timekeeper
Stand for nothing, and you'll fall for anything. That is to paraphrase an
author unknown, since the gist of the sentence is of uncertain origin by
a source unproven even in a 1997 court case. Why not open a can of
worms with controversy?
Nowadays, everyone has his own belief system. Introductions are,
therefore, indoctrinations in nonsense. That the egotistical beliefs
of your everyday would-be-deity are, by definition, too self-glorifying
to be holy warrants irreverence. Still, I try to decipher from the self-
instructions of lost souls a manner of communicating that respectfully
doesn’t automatically negate the notion of common sense. After all,
much as folks are systemically misled today, the best anyone can do
is try to stay sufficiently informed to effectively think for himself.
It is when people are tricked into believing in the wizardry of magicians
that charlatans can command them by presuming to tell them what to
think, do, say and believe. With such a false prophet, occultism was born.
A cult might as well be satanic, in that its head has the devil’s delusion of
grandeur to flatter himself capable of supplanting God.
Cases like those in Waco or Jonestown tend to immediately come to mind
when the subject of cults is mentioned. Often those uninvolved judge the
victims stupid. That is why I choose to next mention "the 20th century’s
most successful literary trickster: Carlos Castaneda"*--
The dark legacy of Carlos Castaneda BY ROBERT MARSHALL.
Dubbed the “Godfather of the New Age” by Time magazine, he made a
fortune by duping people (including some TTI members) into believing his
fiction was true. For the record, which is documented in the article above,
he did not succeed in cheating death. He did, consequent to his becoming
terminally ill with cancer of the liver, con his closest followers out of the
remainder of their lives.
This thread, however, isn’t to take off from where religious debates have
all but been abandoned here. My interest is in the essence of mankind,
insofar as how we are to share understanding particularly in the absence
of traditional beliefs, onetime norms and mores. More precisely, short of
our having had similar upbringings, how do we conveniently reach a
consensus as to what is right or wrong, good or bad, ...&c.?
How much of any man is innate? Do you think we can agree about what
qualities are worth cultivating in men?-- e.g. what makes mankind kind?
And, unless you believe miracles possible, how can we agree on matters
pertaining to the human potential?
*Theme song.
author unknown, since the gist of the sentence is of uncertain origin by
a source unproven even in a 1997 court case. Why not open a can of
worms with controversy?
Nowadays, everyone has his own belief system. Introductions are,
therefore, indoctrinations in nonsense. That the egotistical beliefs
of your everyday would-be-deity are, by definition, too self-glorifying
to be holy warrants irreverence. Still, I try to decipher from the self-
instructions of lost souls a manner of communicating that respectfully
doesn’t automatically negate the notion of common sense. After all,
much as folks are systemically misled today, the best anyone can do
is try to stay sufficiently informed to effectively think for himself.
It is when people are tricked into believing in the wizardry of magicians
that charlatans can command them by presuming to tell them what to
think, do, say and believe. With such a false prophet, occultism was born.
A cult might as well be satanic, in that its head has the devil’s delusion of
grandeur to flatter himself capable of supplanting God.
Cases like those in Waco or Jonestown tend to immediately come to mind
when the subject of cults is mentioned. Often those uninvolved judge the
victims stupid. That is why I choose to next mention "the 20th century’s
most successful literary trickster: Carlos Castaneda"*--
The dark legacy of Carlos Castaneda BY ROBERT MARSHALL.
Dubbed the “Godfather of the New Age” by Time magazine, he made a
fortune by duping people (including some TTI members) into believing his
fiction was true. For the record, which is documented in the article above,
he did not succeed in cheating death. He did, consequent to his becoming
terminally ill with cancer of the liver, con his closest followers out of the
remainder of their lives.
This thread, however, isn’t to take off from where religious debates have
all but been abandoned here. My interest is in the essence of mankind,
insofar as how we are to share understanding particularly in the absence
of traditional beliefs, onetime norms and mores. More precisely, short of
our having had similar upbringings, how do we conveniently reach a
consensus as to what is right or wrong, good or bad, ...&c.?
How much of any man is innate? Do you think we can agree about what
qualities are worth cultivating in men?-- e.g. what makes mankind kind?
And, unless you believe miracles possible, how can we agree on matters
pertaining to the human potential?
*Theme song.
