Prior Post Profile:
> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
> From: ondinegreen@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Injection-Info: s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=125.238.169.77;
> posting-account =GBlmYAoAAAC8sW2cJIlN7DiqlM6aza1B
> Lines: 189
> Message-ID:
<23e59ae7-35ae-45f0-8638-5e56a68e1b56@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 06:26:55 +0000 (UTC)
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 125.238.169.77
> Newsgroups: alt.ucp
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Path:
news.motzarella.org!motzarella.org!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!hwmnpeer03.ams!news.highwinds-media.com!feeder.news-service.com!postnews.google.com!s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> Subject: Ondine's Research #2: From where will new
UCPeons come?
> Hi UCPeons:
Hi!
> When KP developed the process, he began by trying to get other
> refugees from a certain mind-control cult interested in it. I was
> whiling away a dull afternoon at earth by flicking through Google
> Groups archives from the turn of the millennium, watching KP's running
> battles with notable weirdos such as the Animal Minds Man, etc.
Scientology produced SO MANY *HEXTREMELY* NOTABLE weirdos!
> What really struck me is that ex-$cienos were probably precisely the
> WRONG crowd to attempt to market UCP to. Sure, they were open to the
> idea of a process that could increase sanity. Unfortunately, actually
> doing UCP would banish their compulsive pretence identities, inherited
> from Scientology, of being Enlightened, or alternatively on the path
> to developing Awesome Superpowers. Worse, some of them, having lost
> their infallible guru "LRH", would end up taking on the pretence
> identity of Infallible Guru themselves. Damn, some of those people got
> SUPER ANGRY when you indicated that you didn't take that seriously.
Yessence! All those saint georgettes
charged out to slay the evil dragon ...
ME ... before they decided to vanish.
All those spectacular disagreements
focused a LOT of attention on UCP.
At one point when I released a
new version of the UCPlot ...
===========================
1,600 PEOPLE DOWNLOADED IT!
===========================
I wish we had that interest now!
We had LOTS of people thinking
about UCP, and many even DID it!
They could SEE that SOMETHING
was going on, and were curious...
All those people ru****ng in to
defend the honor of helLRH ...
Sacrificed themselves on the altar of
public embarassment and humiliation ...
And soon retired to oblivion, or
moderated private email lists:
essentially the same thing.
But they attracted LOTS of attention
with their karma-krazy immolations!
I destroyed alt.clearning.technology
as a forum for scientologists ...
by humiliating them very publicly,
with their own stupid frothings.
Now it's a forum for homer's roboposter.
Unfortunately, my health and finances
collapsed shortly after that surge,
so I was unable to amplify my efforts,
as my life slid into a huge tail-spin.
> One of the things which I believe is indicated by my experience (with
> myself, and observations of others) that compulsive pretence
> identities are the most obvious sign of not being sane.
Sure!
You can't be below death
without drowning in them.
> I think I
> mentioned that in my own experience I had several of them "nested" (so
> if one of them cracked another would step up to take its place). And
> someone in that state would quite frankly rather kill you and eat you
> than let you wreck their favourite pretence identity. As I see it,
> probably best to leave someone determined to have a pretence identity
> alone until they come to YOU for help getting rid of it - you'll get
> far less insane hostility thrown at you that way.
Yes ... I love it when people are searching.
> I am not sure whether I was the first serious UCPeon who was never a
> $cientologist, but honestly, I think we have a better bet of getting
> more people to do the practice (and thus more people to have an
> intelligent conversation with) if we figure out how to get to a target
> market who have no interest and never had in the ramblings of Fatboy
> Hubbard.
Yessence! That's 99.99% of us!
That doesn't free you of
compulsive identities!
> I do want to avoid the general market of "self-help" and "pop-
> psych" books, because these tend to be bought by a very small subset
> of the population - generally people who want to train themselves into
> efficient predators to defeat their enemies and manipulate their
> bosses in the cor****ate world.
I prefer to INCLUDE the market of
self-help and pop-psych SEEKERS!
At least they are looking! ...
Even if it's only for the perfect
valence and justifications!
> I want people from ALL nations, all
> walks of life, and all socio-economic strata interested in the
> practice. We need to think about how this can be done.
I want that too!
Those that are seeking SOMETHING
seem to be the elite of the herd.
If you avoid them, you're left
with just the passive cud-chewers.
.... and a few totally blissed-out!
> One of the great things about UCP is that you don't need to believe in
> the theory, or ANY theory, to make the practice work for you.
Yessence!
> As I
> keep saying, I don't use the tone scales any more, but I can certainly
> see progress and progressive sanity enhancement in myself.
Way Cool!
> One of the
> reason I don't have anything in common with $cienos, crypto-$cienos,
> neo-$cienos or post-$cienos is that I am a philosophical materialist
> and I do NOT believe that humanity is a spiritual being.
I tend to the opinion that
humanity is MANY spiritual
beings, separated by NOT-MEs!
> (I am firmly
> agnostic on the possibility of psi-powers et al - I'm interested in
> any firm evidence.)
FIRM evidence is what happens to YOU.
I survived a 6-month telepathic link with DJ,
punctuated with intermittent telephone calls
from him, AND his friends calling me to get
the latest news. One of them understood
completely: he used to be telepathically
linked to DJ too ... and now used my link
for his own updates. DJ's friends took my
telepathic data along with the telephonic.
DJ's son believed my telepathic data
that DJ was still alive ... when his
captors were telling him DJ was dead.
I've never met DJ in person: the closest
I ever got was about 200+ feet. And I've
been cut off from him for 25 years. He's
still the closest friend I've ever had.
I was linked to Manuela for a couple
of days once. That's why she's my
closest friend here on usenet.
That's how real telepathy is to me.
How can you have good
*** WITHOUT telepathy?
> Here's an extract from a blog post whose attitude
> I endorse:
> ***
>
> What is sanity?
>
> Sanity is defined as the ability of an individual or group
> consciousness to understand:
>
> - the rules of operation of material reality (both inorganic matter
> and life);
> - the rules of operation of social consciousness;
> - the rules of operation of individual consciousness;
> - the relation****ps between each sphere - what concrete actions by
> individuals and groups can bring about desired changes in social and
> physical material reality.
>
> For an individual consciousness, being "more sane" means "having a
> greater understanding of the rules of these three spheres, and thus
> being more able to affect change in individual, social and material
> reality in accordance with desire, in pro****tion to how many options
> for individual action are allowed by current social and material
> cir***stances."
The tone scale/UCPlot seems to me
to measure that pretty darn well.
> (Yes, after writing this I realised that my definition of "sanity"
> seems to be an expanded version of Crowley's definition of "magick".
> How bizarre, how bizarre.)
Flubbard was a devotee of crowley,
and recognizing similarities and
differences seems good to me.
Nobody is ALL bad!
> What can prevent an individual from being able to affect social and
> material reality?
> - real social or material impediments (lack of options for individual
> action)
> - a lack of correct understanding of the rules of the social or
> material world - this can be solved by study and experiment.
> - problems in the individual consciousness which cause the rational
> centres of the mind to not be able to comprehend aspects of reality or
> the correct relation****p between them. This is the domain of
> psychology.
>
> In turn, these may be "hardware" or "software" problems - caused by
> physical or chemical imbalances in the body, or by assumptions and
> habits held in the subconscious mind and thus not amenable to rational
> analysis under normal cir***stances, or by a combination of the two.
Weird assumptions can surely
provoke chemical imbalances!
> (It could even be possible that humans are "hardwired" to not be able
> to properly understand reality, but I'm not going to believe that
> unless I see evidence for it.)
Bodies ARE hardwired in many ways.
Beings CAN identify with bodies.
> Sanity (defined as "correct perception of material reality")
Oooops!
What about PERSONAL REALITY?
Are YOU a material?
NOT I!
> is distinguished from happiness. Unhappiness and other negative emotions
> are the natural and healthy reactions of a consciousness deprived
> wholly or partially of control over its cir***stances of life - i.e.
> everyone everywhere at some time. Some crazy people are happy as hell,
> but we don't want to be crazy because it would mean total
> powerlessness. You couldn't be 100% sane and miserable all the time,
> because if you were 100% sane you would know predictably what could be
> done to make you happier, even tem****arily (something that would
> tem****arily restore your sense of being able to make things happen in
> your world).
>
> Roughly: sanity = a correct perception of where an individual or group
> has power and where they do not. Happiness = perception of relative
> power. Unhappiness = perception of relative powerlessness. (This is a
> generalisation. Sorry, masochists. DOn't write me any nasty letters.)
Can I politely disagree?
> Increasing sanity will therefore not directly increase happiness - it
> might decrease it, in the short term, as comfortable illusions are
> dispelled.
Happiness and discomfort may not be opposites.
> However, it will increase an individual's ability to evoke
> positive emotions and dispel negative ones, by restoring the correct
> mental connections between emotions and the events that evoke them,
> and snapping incorrect connections between emotions and thoughts,
> concepts, people and objections, which become "self-sustaining". For
> example: something bad happened to you and you have an incorrect idea
> of why. You build habits of behaviour to try to avoid that ever
> happening again, but these are based on an incorrect assumption and
> thus don't work. Also, the pain is so bad that even remembering it
> hurts so you can't even look at the bad thing in order to correct your
> assumptions.
OK.
> The process therefore runs:
What process?
> Perception of the correct rules of consciousness and matter +
> perception of the correct relation****p between emotion and action or
> outside events => increased ability to take effective action to affect
> consciousness and matter => increased ability to invoke positive
> emotion and dispel negative emotion (and to take effective corrective
> action in the case of external events reducing personal power and thus
> inflicting negative emotion.)
In my opinion, whoever you are quoting
here .... knows far less that you do!
> In brief, my essential problem with "self-help" therapy is that it
> embodies pre-existing social norms that the individual is finally and
> totally responsible for their personal reality, which I see as
> oppressive and an ideological tool of those who hold power (and of
> bullies, who all survive on the principle that their victims have the
> responsibility for their actions). Institutional psychology, on the
> other hand, seems to embody the idea that "sanity" means adapting
> smoothly to existing reality rather than an increased ability to
> affect it in accordance with desire - also an ideological tool of that
> which holds power.
He has an essential problem,
that I don't even recognize.
> ***
>
> So, to go full circle to the subject of this post: there will one day
> be a new, updated, ****ny, professional-looking, eye-catching,
> attractive, informative and fun UCP website.
Way Cool!
I've had that fantasy
for about five years now:
since I last worked on my site.
I got it transferred to a new server
as the beginning of the year. This
week I got my email working properly.
Progress!
> I am happy to help build
> it (note I said "help" - I don't have the skills, the time or the
> energy to do it all myself).
Who does?
> It will contain all the essential
> information on how to do UCP (as written by KP and others) and also
> present further musings by other UCPeons on possible theories which
> explain the beneficial effects of the process, as well as other
> philosophical or sociological speculations, again by KP, myself and
> others.
Way Cool!
> It will encourage and help UCPeons to network, and here's another
> point.
> In the old days (he may have changed his mind) KP talked about
> building a "Bodhisattva community".
I'd still LOVE to have friends/family
who knew what I was talking about, and
weren't trying to sign me up for faith
in jesus, helLRH, or some OTHER cause.
I'm looking for a tribe/community/family
that I would fit into better than I have.
Still looking!
> I'm not enthused about the
> concept, because just because people are sane doesn't mean they're
> going to agree with each other on what to actually do!
Yes, of course!
The more semi-sane people there are,
the more options and choices hexist.
> But we do need
> to continue testing the process and swapping speculation and
> information on it - for our benefit and for the benefit of people
> who're coming up the ladder.
My ideal scene is LOTS of people
all over the chart DOING ucp and
POSTING their results for all to see.
People need to see
those at their own level
.... taking the next step.
That makes gains real to them.
> Also, I need to translate the Robot Witness into something platform-
> independent.
That would be way cool!
Browser-based was a
try in that direction.
> Alex's suggestion of a PHP website is an excellent one -
> if it could automatically create a session log and offer to save it to
> your hard drive, then it would have replicated all the functionality
> of the current Robot Witness. This would also have to be a centerpiece
> of the new website -
Way Cool!
> as well as (perhaps) a revival of the idea of
> people who advertise their services as Witnesses.
I don't disagree with that:
I haven't ever refused pay
for witnessing, but I see
it mostly as a distraction
from the fact that YOU CAN
DO UCP BY YOURSELF JUST FINE!
If you think you can't:
THAT'S your limiting belief.
Where COULD you be?
> Past that... I dunno. KP, if I were to write a book or a pamphlet on
> UCP, how much money would I have to give you?
???? You can write whatever you want!
All donations are cheerfully accepted!
If you reprint my articles for sale,
I'd like a cut of the income stream.
> It might be good to have
> hard-copy materials.
Yes.
> So, UCPeons, I leave it up to you.
I'm doing what I can :-)
> We do need to find a new market for
> the practice. How can you help?
>
> best,
> ondine
I don't see it as "finding a market."
I see it as sharing truth with seekers.
Thanks for writing!
O
--- )
\
..
|
