Thanks for the video. There is no limit to the quackery and deceit, and it is ancient.
But that was not my point.
Yea Psychology has techniques, ways, and methods, not technologies, not drugs and medicines, that is in the domain of psychiatry.
But all of them are suppressed, or hidden texts in strange places in some journals that have nothing to do with psychology, that is, that is not their original purpose.
In high positions, in high places that can cost a psychologist large sums of money and a lot of time, just to reach those people who keep this knowledgeâŚetc.
Psychiatrists are basically doctors. In direct cooperation with the pharmaceutical industry.
Established by the Rockefeller family.
Etc⌠treating symptoms with chemistry, that is, with chemical formulas.
Not eradicating the source of any disease.
Because it is not profitable.
We all know that.
At least most of you, the most people on this forum.
And yet we all go to the doctor, right�
And at the slightest cold⌠we use drugs from the pharmacy, right?
Why is that so?
There is no such thing as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Think about it.
About the terminology.
Doctoral, medical, pharmacological.
TraumaâŚ
Syndrome, set of symptomsâŚetc
Psychiatric terminology⌠nothing moreâŚ
And finally, I will try to be as concise and precise as possible.
In the SFRY, under socialism, communism, psychology was treated, labeled as a âbourgeois scienceâ of fat capitalist pigs.
And it was a taboo subject and science.
Departments and later institutes of psychology were barely established
And that through rebellions. Rebellions so that graduated psychologists could be employed at all.
They had to become members of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia.
That passed.
The collapse of the SFRY.
Capitalism is coming, parliamentary democracy.
The Church begins its rise. The Orthodox Church in Macedonia that is.
They get their property back, the material.
They become extremely rich priests, rulers, bishops, hierarchs and I donât know what patriarchsâŚetc.
A seeming return, to spirituality, spirituality⌠but only seemingly.
Meanwhile, they are getting rich on the backs of believersâŚwho i donât know what âŚthey leave in the church for health, happinessâŚmaterial goods and money,as donations etcâŚfor a blessing from the churchâŚand the priesthoodâŚ
And suddenly psychologists are a problem for them again this time.
They perceive them as competition for their enrichment.
And the demonization of psychology as a science, and of psychologists in general, begins,again.
Only this time, those psychologists are âservants of the devilâ, âSatanistsâ âŚetc. and this continues to this day.
This time, in order to be a psychologist according to their standards, one must also be an Orthodox Christian.
All this while they, in cooperation with every leftist or rightist government, acquire fabulous material wealth.
A link between the church and the state, lucrative and mutually materially beneficial.
Plus, they now have mandatory price lists, or tariffs, for weddings, funerals, etc. Plus a guaranteed state pension for all priestsâŚ
Mafia.
The DSM-5 is mostly made up. Now, I am not saying people donât have problems/hangups/disturbances. That is the human conditions. The labelling of them are mostly made up.
Iâm going to use the Hindu terminology. I am not Hindu and like Joseph Campbell, Iâm interested in comparative mythology/Spirituality. Aka, when things that look totally different arenât actually very different. Just that for those who have not read that literature and I start showing how it shows up in biblical text, people can loose their minds because all of sudden their dogmatic reading of scripture is being challenged. Ainât gonna be me. Not here. Even us awakened/alternative news people have an inner normie.
In this case, the Hinduâs are more direct. Probably Buddhist too. Christian literature itâs a bit more occulted.
The Samskaraâs are your unconscious material that creates any type of mental disturbances. Psychological imprints. Engrams/Abberations. Your hangups. Carl Jung was the modern day individual who brought this stuff out to the collective consciousness without all the weird HIndu names.
And then came guys like Ron L Hubbard. Now, I read ALL their documents of their procedures that I guess today you spend millions of dollars to get audited. There was nothing really evil in those documents. With the advancement of clearing methods through an organization called ACEP, Association of Comprehensive Energy Psychology, Hubbards methods are antiquated. LIke using an abacus when we have super computers. And he was hanging out in California at the time when there were these psychic schools like in Berkley, giving classes to people on how to use clairvoyant methods to clear these impressions. Which is over the keel of most people. And various erasure methods.
1960sâ1970s Foundations:
- Dr. George Goodheart (chiropractor) developed Applied Kinesiology, linking muscle testing to health and emotions.
- Dr. John Diamond advanced âBehavioral Kinesiology,â applying it specifically to emotional problems.
1980s â Thought Field Therapy (TFT):
Clinical psychologist Dr. Roger Callahan created TFT after working with a patient named âMaryâ who had a severe water phobia. By tapping on specific meridian points in a precise sequence (algorithms), he helped her overcome the fear rapidly. This breakthrough combined Eastern meridian concepts with Western psychology. Callahan patented and taught TFT
1990s â Birth of EFT:
Gary Craig, a Stanford-trained engineer, personal performance coach, and ordained minister, studied under Callahan. In the early-to-mid 1990s, he simplified TFT by reducing the complex tapping sequences to a single, universal routine (tapping on about 8â9 points). He named it Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) and made it freely available through his website (emofree.com), manuals, and videos starting around 1995.
And since then, there has been an untold number of techniques that tap into the energy systems, easy enough that a 5 year old (with some training) could do it.
The literature and evidence based, clinical studies evidence is ENORMOUS.
Association for Comprehensive Energy Psychology
I am trained in every modality that they ever trained people in. I did a deep dive like 20 years ago and helped people with all sorts of trauma, phobiaâs, depression so on.
Despite rigorous clinical studies, the average person never even heard of it because all the establishment psychological associations rejects them. Iâm surprised we donât have more missing alternative psychologists to go along with the missing NASA.
The best part is itâs available in plain site.
I havenât done this subject justice. But I gotta do my work. Itâs enough. Most people hate this topic. Any mention of human psychology drives some people nutty.
Now, I think it was Mr. Farrell, and I only have a vague recollection of Mr. Farrell or another writer talking about the Philosopherâs Stone. Stating, itâs inside of us. It is our ability to turn lead into gold (a state of consciousness) That all enlightened men, spiritual giants teach in someway, that these impressions have to be cleared.
In the Christian literature, The Dark Night of the Soul by St. John of the Cross and some of the other Desert Fathers went thru this process and documented it. But nobody thinks about it as spiritual psychology. Everyone who goes thru a hard time in live calls it the Dark Night of the Soul. Thatâs not what he was teaching. If it happens to you, youâll know it.
not worth it, even the 20.
Quick dialectal
I am not hell bent on anything that I am aware of.
> Appeal to Motive
I have no axe to grind with the man. I directly addressed his claims with evidence based research and provided many resources. Thatâs not personal unless people take it that way.
His effect on people is a non-sequitor. Does his math calculate and do the people who consume the information cross check the information with other sources? People have effect on other people. Thatâs the draw of social media. Appeal your ideaâs to others.
My experience is people who are only recently disconnected from the matrix, in adulthood, go through a period of rejecting any type of mainstream theory and get polarized to any postulate that is opposite their original indoctrination and will repeat things without giving it much thought themselves. One manâs experience.
Sanskaraâs. Instead of listing a bunch of broad dictionary definitions what about locating the exact passages in their scriptures and look at the word in context to itâs meaning?
Dictionary Fallacy, Appeal to Dictionary. Appeal to Authority
> This fallacy occurs when someone treats a dictionary definition as the sole, authoritative, or âproperâ meaning of a word, dismissing or rejecting other valid usages â especially technical, philosophical, contextual, or specialized meanings â simply because they arenât listed (or arenât primary) in the dictionary.It insists: "My way (the general dictionary sense) is the only correct way, regardless of context or established usage in the relevant field.
Can we change the rule set from one should consult first to one should examine the facts himself from the primary sources?
Patanjaliâs Yoga Sutras. Tons of references.
The dictionary definitions you shared do not fully encompass all usages of saášskÄra. They primarily capture the more common, everyday, ritual, or general Sanskrit senses â but they under-represent or only briefly touch on the technical philosophical meanings developed in specific schools.
âNo memory is possible without the help of saášskÄra⌠An experience in the sense plane sinks down into the depths of the subconscious⌠and there becomes a saášskÄra or impression.â
No dirth of modern texts whose use of the word is as I described easily found.
not worth even the 20, feels like talking to a train, could not even manage whatâs your point. sorry, my bad.
Sophistry=logic chopping. Post dictionaries. then post more dictionaries and call it something different.
So what do you think?
Do all your arguments tell others what to do rather than showing your claims?
I got the ad hominem style in your first post. Thatâs a tell.
Withdrawal from the dialectic noted. Common practice.
Thrasymachus bursts into the conversation accusing Socrates of playing rhetorical games.
As Socrates dismantles his position (justice as âthe advantage of the strongerâ), Thrasymachus becomes increasingly uncomfortable.
At the end, he gives up serious engagement. He sarcastically tells Socrates to âfeast awayâ on the argument like a banquet at the festival of Bendis, and from then on he mostly agrees reluctantly while pouting (heâs described as a âsore loserâ by later commentators).
âbut I can assure you that Any of the great saints in any of the traditions. Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, the Ancient Mystery schools around the time of Jesus, didnât use those methodsâŚâ
Wanted to add. Remembered in the car. This Thing has taken me down twice in my life. Once when I was a bridesmaid and the Thing wafted by and I felt faint.
Second time around 12/13 maybe while in the choir pews and it came down the aisle from the altar where I became very scared when it took me out of my body⌠Think about that.
Unless weâre referring to a theoretical function that the capstone has independent of the Great Pyramid⌠I doubt thereâs any merit to this particular part. The machine was decommissioned. All the many parts that âcould not be destroyedâ were removed and hidden. My GUESS is just off planet on the orbiting moon someone parked next to us. The Arc of the Covenant, which likely rested in the granite sarcophagus in the Kings Chamber, was an integral part of the machine and no longer resides there, nor does the water system beneath the pyramid still exist in the form required to charge the system.
As it sits now, she still has some of her ability to focus a charge (see below) but without all of its missing pieces, including the limestone casing stones and the Demon of the Ekur (who stopped paying the rent years ago), sheâs not going to be doing any magic tricks and only remains as a large semi-functioning capacitor. The capstone IS an important part but not all-important.
Referenced:
1859 incident involving the Anglo-German inventor Carl Wilhelm Siemens atop the Great Pyramid of Giza. During his climb, Siemens experienced atmospheric static electricity, feeling prickling sensations and hearing a ringing noise before using an improvised Leyden jar to generate sparks.
âFrightened by the sparks, which they mistook for magic that could damage the pyramid, his guides told him to leave. When a guide attempted to seize Siemensâs]hand, he lowered the bottle and shocked the man on the nose, briefly knocking him to the ground before the guide fled down the pyramidâ
The electric outlet on your wall is live. And anybody that wets their fingers and sticks their fingers in the outlet will attest to it. But until you connect it to some device, nothing lights up. No milk shakes from the blender. Even when you plug the blender in. Notta. A switch needs to be turned on. Yet, lots of electricity already flowing from the outlet into the blender.
People flock in droves to holy sites where they experience these energies. Sedonia, Mt. Shasta, Arunachala in India and tons more. Many people can experience the energies. Some people are dead and donât feel anything.
There are portals in places that nobody has mapped other than locals might know. I know a couple in New York State in Mohwak territory. Itâs not subtle. The Mohwaks called it sacred land. The earth is a living, breathing entity with an energy grid. I canât prove it to a dead person, but anybody that has stood on those portals, knows something is there.
They also sell these copper pyramids small table top versions in miniature ratioâs of Giza. Copper in itself is a conductor. If you put an energy bearing stone underneath it, even dead people can feel the energy coming out of the top. I see new age healers have these human size copper pyramids that they put their clients under do to whatever it is supposed to do. Fix your DNA, take away your grey hair? Not sure.
So yes, we have a conductor of energy on an energy portal, but we donât have the light switch.
Something tells me the people that ran it, didnât leave it in operative condition so when Joe from Kentucky visited it, he could flip the switch. OR maybe worse, let the activity under the earth trigger it into operation involuntarily based on seismic activity or the other energy measures (I forgot) some people track it (wasnât mentioned in any of the articles posted suggesting the grid was activated).
Sherlock Holmes once solved a crime based on the dog that didnât bark.
This is a non-sequitor. Something that people usually think to themselves but never say out loud. I donât know why? Well actually I do. People loathe any form of intellectual confrontation because their brains equate it with a personal attack.
In a short amount of time, Iâve encountered people that want an opinion but when that opinion is challenged, they go into âI donât want to play any more modeâ The other guy, one time visitor, went into, I am not going to reply to anything if people donât answer my question the way I want it answered.
Or the other one time visitor that attempted to provide commentary on an entire field that has been around since Babylon, but never read anything on the subject. Whoooa. When did that become ok? And why doesnât anybody else see it?
Sorry folks. Thatâs called adolescent mind set. Those arenât the people that are going to pierce the deep mysteries of the world.
There is another word for it. Itâs called triggered and is a character flaw usually attributed to the woke mindset.
When did engaging in a dialectic become intertwined with personal attack? Has our political culture spread into our intellectual pursuits and communities online and off?
Thereâs a big difference between having a dialectic with someone and engaging in rhetoric. In fact a dialectic is a concept that excludes subjective elements such as emotional appeal and rhetoric. During a dialectic each participant seeks to argue their chosen corner to the best of their ability, seeking to divest their words from logical fallacies and common cognitive distortions and their partners in the dialectic do the same.
The moment I spot multiple logical fallacies in the first sentence of someones post, I get the same electic shock as a monkey climbing Giza. I know itâs not going to go well even with the best intentions. They skipped an entire year at the School of Iâm Enlightened.
Itâs a dying art on the internet, where rhetoric exchanges filled with personal grudges, name calling and biases are the norm.A good exercise in a dialectic is to pick a subject, argue your corner as hard as you can, do the same, and then after each other adopt each otherâs positions and argue those as hard as you can. If thereâs more positions and more people participating then you can end up arguing a range of positions, and everyone comes closer to the truth, and understands more about the subject at the end of the session.
That is the point of a dialectic. You donât engage in one to âwin.ââIt is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.â â Aristotle.
Most people today are only used to rhetoric arguments, and only defend their own point of view, but thatâs not all they can do, although itâs true that peopleâs ability to argue effectively can depend on empathy and exercising their imagination as well as drawing from similar or parallel experiences.
âIt is the mark of the mind untrained to take its own processes as valid for all men, and its own judgments for absolute truth.â â Aleister Crowley.Thereâs also the ever present error factor: âAll models are wrong, some are useful.â â George Box.
Itâs true that I wish the internet was more like a philosophy classroom. Not everyone is allowed in a philosophy classroom. People who basically donât care about the rules of the dialectic but feel entitled to participate are disruptive, and so are evicted.
In my day, philosophy students were carefully screened, not only to weed out the ones who couldnât cut the mustard, but also because philosophy can send pre-disposed people insane.
There is a youtube channel where an indendent journalist used the Socratic methodology on Bernie Sanders and an entire host of politicians and they go absolutely nuts. They have NOT A CLUE whatâs happening because they are caught in webs of cognitive dissonance.
People throwing themselves into rhetoric discussion each day as some type of psychological drainage system are already insane. It seems to me that many people donât have a proper understanding of how much they hurt themselves through the things they say and do.
When did society get to the point that we have totally ignored this ancient knowledge in deriving truth?
How did we get to the point where we engage in subjects with 15 lines? Twitter/Facebook.
The masses get their news from quick blurps and scrolling. They arenât going to read a 500 page book by Carol Quiqley. And most of the subjects Joseph deals with arenât kindergarten subjects.
I know alot of people, and so do you, that canât accept many the subjects that Joseph has written about. They have some kind of black screen that prevents them from accepting alien narratives of any kind. Soo, there is no need to even engage them on that level. It would actually be cruel.
How did our society get to this point? Where engaging authentically, writing full sentences, defending your point of view on economics, geopolitics, culture just flew out the window?
I know I am not dreaming it. I even read somebody else on the internet say it. Must be true
I recommend picking a subject, feeding it to Claude or Grok and going at it. Man vs computer. I have on multiple times interacted with AI using Socratic method. And unlike man, the computer will actually admit defeat and cross reference every logical fallacy in existence and then acknowledge itâs error. Man, not so much. Claude and Grok have no feelings so they wonât get triggered if you disagree with it and tell it, boy, you stupid.
Years ago when first I stumbled upon the Giza website, I was taken aback by the intelligent responses displayed in the threads on various subjects, none of which were in the political realm. At the time and I still am, I was engaged because of an interest in the history of ideas. Much of the discussion dealt with ideas and sources my limited exposure had not encountered. Blake Cosmosâ hilarious, erudite contributions to video chat questions is a case in point. The idea of a cosmic war and the possibility of all was not as it seemed, captured my innate suspicion I had harbored all my life. Over time the dialectical discussions on subjects and ideas parlayed into rhetorical comments regarding current events with little mention of the history of ideas. Currently Scarmoge, Dr. Farrell and you are about all thatâs left of the unique contributions on ideas I once found so intriguing. This is not to dish anyoneâs contribution, including my own limited ability, to making the Giza Death Star one of the most unique and thought provoking websites available on the Internet.
Oh, and Iâve read Carroll Quigleyâs Tragedy and Hope book cover to cover. A hard back copy is on my book self.
Thank you for validating my observation. I appreciate it. I can tell by your measured responses and content of your replies, you are one of the wise ones. Itâs not that difficult to read each other
I too have been reading Joseph website many years and I too observed the consistent intelligent responses by a small dedicated group under Josephâs blogs. It was obvious that those commenting were well read on many subjects. There is one gentleman I have noted is missing but saw he made a brief comment on something else. So glad he is alive and following. I imagine a hard core devotee might choose to disconnect in light of less informed comments.
This is not a Giza Death Star forum issue, itâs a universal issue. Communication and leadership. Iâve noticed everywhere for years. Even most people canât hold a fairly simple conversation, call and reply. Canât define it as a community if people do not act as a community. Actually take interest in what others are saying and reply to comments. Canât do it? Wonât do it? My wife says we mostly talk online to hear ourselves. She might have a point.
Getting tired of code switching. Should be a collective endeavor to say, hey something wrong with that opinion and people donât loose their minds.
