Access Denied

You do not have permissions to access this page.

Latest Posts Comments Articles
    • Jedi and "Drugs" (Last post by Adder)
    • A good way to throw out the BS in discussing different natures of suffering addiction (by definition all addictions should be suffering IMO else they are better called something else) I find is to split the concept of it into two parts and associate a percentage breakup. Being physiological (chemical reinforcement as reward) and psychological (habit reinforcement as reward). Noting not all chemical reinforcement has to be 'drugs', as sex, music and exercise for example produce chemicals in the brain which are analogous or identical to some drugs. Now something like listening to music 'will' have a chemical component, its just that it is not introduced as a drug to the body but rather perhaps used like a drug by listening to particular music - and with sufficient habit reinforcement can probably program the reward system of the brain to have an effect like that suffered by drug users with addictions. So for music I'd put the breakup at 5/95 and for heroine at 95/5 for example LOL, but we all know some things are way more addictive then others, and those figures do not represent the experience of a person, just the 'moment' or potential or perhaps power of the isolated activity..... so you could probably work up a formula about how the continued use and reinforcement by reward would create a dependency, and I think its the dependency which defines something as an addiction. So I guess its important to understand the potential for dependency as lose of control, lose of self and maybe even understand how to counter-act it when it occurs - before risking it. In my regrettable days of silly things I was told to read a lot of writings by people who'd been down those roads and I'm glad I did because being forewarned is being forearmed. The difference between the habit and chemical is that the chemical heavy dependency will likely end up killing you, while a habit just makes you really unhappy, at least in my experience, but hey, being really unhappy can kill a person too :S So to measure it perhaps its variables are habit reinforcement, chemical reinforcement, exposure to reinforcement and the two bundles of indirect experiences which relate to the activity, both positive and negative, which go to the intensity of overall reinforcement and likelihood of continued or cessation of future reinforcement. :side: :whistle:
    • Mayweather vs Paquiao (Last post by V-Tog)
    • I'm not usually remotely interested in boxing. I've never been able to understand the appeal in watching two men hit each other in the head to the point of seems rather out of place (barbaric, even) in this day and age. But, yesterday, I was channel-hopping late in the evening, and I happened upon the feature-length documentary 'Manny' (narrated by Liam Neeson (Qui Gon Jinn), released Jan 2015) and it was really pretty fascinating. I rather suspect that it glossed over many of his less 'ethical' behaviors and made him out to be more of a saint that he perhaps actually is, but nevertheless, it really helped me to connect with the idea that there is always more to something (i.e. boxing) than necessarily meets the eye. People tell me that football (soccer) is an overrated game played by overpaid primadonnas and, as an avid football fan, I tell them that that the reason I like it is because it's about the stories that are woven over time. It's about the human experiences of winning and losing, of joy and despair, of living in the moment, of overcoming hardship and struggles to achieve feats that inspire people around the world... Which is all very well, but I can be quite selective sometimes. I've never really stopped to think that that the same applies to those sports that I personally don't like or don't agree with. But the documentary was...really rather moving. It showed exactly all these things and suddenly forced me to adjust my perception of boxers... I'm really glad that I watched it, because Manny Pacquiao's story has really made quite an impact on me. It's well worth watching, if anyone wants to get hold of it. It doesn't seem to be available for free on YouTube, I'm afraid, but here's a trailer: So, now I need to watch a similar film about Mayweather, because my impression of him is really...not very good at all.
    • From time to time a poem (Last post by elizabeth)
    • A heartbeat, To shatter lives, And tear apart the web we weave, So delicately entwined to hold our lives, Balanced eternally above the deepest pit, That yearns to taste each fallen fear, Alone you stand within the storm, Trembling beneath the swollen clouds, Bare feet upon the bittersweet sharpness of the broken earth, And hands outstretched without purpose, Time stops The silence speaks in rhythm's of emotion, While violence rages on, For the moment cannot bear to witness, That which explodes into being, Too much, too bright, This fragile form we shape in shifting sands To wash away and become nothing more than Endless echo's that throw themselves, Upon the uncaring witness To our final step, To our lovers dance
    • Kabbalah Course Discussion Group (Last post by Mareeka)
    • Lesson 4: This lesson starts with the question: Do you live in reality or a dream? Kabbalists gives an explanation. Science gives an explanation. First the lesson looked at science Newtonian approach. He said: there is me and there is reality I perceive with my 5 senses Other people are born they perceive the world with their 5 senses and that is the way reality is It is as I see it. I am as I see it. I do not change. I am constant. Moving on to Einstein in 1900s. He said: wait a minute. I change because I can see the world differently This is his theory of relativity. The way I see the world is subjective. Why did he say that? Because even though we see common things, the way we feel, the sensations we experience are different. So here, reality is still constant. I change. Moving on to 1930s Quantum Physics. Wait a minute . . . If I look subjectively at life and see things are changing through my perception then it is really not possible for reality to be as it is. It cannot be constant. So here, reality changes. I change. Kabala <2000 years ago Places reality here and the individual here and gives each one a great big question mark. This is the point of heart. (My note: same questions . . who am I?, what is meaning/purpose of life? What is the Kabala explanation of reality? Take our sense of sight for example. We see a wide world before us wondrously filled, but in fact; we see all that only in our own interior. There is kind of a photographic machine in our hind brain which portrays everything that appears to us and nothing outside of us. For that there is a kind of polished mirror in our brain that inverts everything seen there so we will see it outside our brain in front of our face. Yet, what we see outside us is not a real thing. So it is said that I have to change in order for reality to change. Kli: egoism is used for a higher order of reality. Not to scrap the old for a new . . but to add a new to be built on. . .to grow spiritually. How do we know when we have risen a degree? What could not be seen before is now seen. Through bestowal, light is attracted and effects an equalness of form (which is a matter of quality) Light is opposite egoism. There are 2 forces in reality Attribute of bestowal Attribute of reception In this lesson a lot of time is giving about how bestowal is different than giving. Giving to want something in return and giving to give to the Force/Creator/Creation. Being in the Force/Light above this layer of creation and being able to work with 2 layers simultaneously. The ego will keep growing but the positive Force is above it. The Kabala is about staying above the growing ego. My note: I am reminded of ego, yet humility and 2 forces as one symbol (yin/yang symbol). And the same time . . . I am also seeing the triangle invert itself, empty out and disappear.
    • what about gaia ? (Last post by Connor L.)
    • You know... sometimes I think Jediism is a weird subset of Chaos Magick... *wanders off*
    • Nature - Animals (Last post by Mareeka)
    • herbivore dinosaur
    • Making of a Jedi Warrior (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • this conversation took place on the Wall; Locksley: The most desirable outcome of any street fight is that it never happens. OB1Shinobi: i appreciate the sentiment for peace - imo the most desirable outcome of any kind of fight is that one acts according to ones principles and does not lose ones mindfulness to fear or to bad temper PaintedWarrior: Sometimes there is a need for violence to achieve Peace. However, this can only be achieved when the defender can realise when the line has been reached to sufficiency, and does not cross the line and become the aggressor. Locksley Choosing to defend is a worthy cause, but a risky one, especially in the complex world we live in today. At what point is that line crossed? How will the defender know when he has crossed it? Will his superiors tell him? Will he tell himself? Defense can be altered to mean "strike first", but is striking first really defense? Is it sticking to the letter of the law, versus the spirit of the law? Perhaps someone should create a thread to discuss this - it's interesting ----- so the basic issue is "when is it appropriate to fight?" and "what are the boundaries?" im going on the following presuppositions 1) there is a part of our psyches which has developed specifically to be a hunter and a fighter. the process of this development began whenever life began / in other words there is a part of us that is very, very old 2) most people have no form of prey except for other humans; as a result we turn this part of ourselves against our own species in various ways 3) it is not appropriate - generally speaking - to hunt other humans as prey 4) it is not appropriate to allow other humans to make us into prey 5) the dominance impulse and the predatory impulse can be separated as topics; certain things can be easily seen to fall into instances of ego battles or "pissing contests" on the one hand, and into deliberate predatory attacks on the other 6) the easiest way to understand the difference between them is that someone in predator mode is basically determined to impose their will upon their target, whatever that may be, without any sort of compromise being an option whereas ego battles are actually more about NOT LOSING when youre dealing with someone in predator mode there are only a few ways the situation can go they get what they want they curb their predatory impulse they lose one of those things is going to happen exactly how any of them happen is situational starting with ego imo it is not necessary to "lose in order to win" in an ego situation make it clear that you are not going to be dominated or pushed around but do it in a way that allows the other person to save face and not look bad and you will be fine people defending their egos dont really want to fight - that is the defining characteristic of an ego confrontation they dont want to be pushed around and they dont want to look like a weakling or a coward, and thats pretty much the extent of their psychological commitment predators dont want to fight either but the predator is convinced he has a definitive advantage (and as a general rule he does) even if that is simply that he is sure that he can beat you if it comes to a fight someone who really wants to fight is rare - most dont want the risk of a real fight, they just want to win, or to get something specific anyone who is looking to take something from you - whether its your pride or your wallet/purse or your life - is considered a predator the boundaries of how to respond to a predator are going to depend on what they want and what methods they use to get it imo the first thing to do when you feel like a situation is dangerous, regardless of what that is, is to breath sounds funny maybe - but everything begins with the breath, and how you breath is going to determine the way your system responds to the stress of the moment and that is a physiological fact, so BREATH the next thing to do is to analyse these rules apply to any situation that represents danger when this means dealing with a person, look at them, judge them, appraise what state they are in and what they really want, not by what they say but by what you see a big thing that people do when they get afraid is they cant bring themselves to really look at what theyre afraid of no matter what the situation is, you have much more to fear from being too afraid to look closely at whats going on you have to keep your mind in a state of ACTivity instead of REACTivity, and that starts with breath and then analysis if you decide to fight against a predator my suggestion is that rather than seeing it as "fighting back" or "standing up for yourself" you view it as you being the predator and making them into a prey species in most cases the situation wouldnt be happening if you had a fair chance to "win" so you need to get your head in the gear of how to really just straight out end their ability to hurt you in a quick and decisive way if its ok to run away and you belive that you can outrun them then go for it if you get the chance as far as the bounds of what level of force is appropriate, my advice is that you should allow ego battlers a way out without losing face and youll be fine you should treat predators as being dangerous if all they want is to humiliate you then you may be able to get them out of predator mode by making it very clear that you will be more trouble than its worth to them if you have the ability to show them that you are a predator yourself then possibly you can get them to switch from predator brain to ego brain, or from the "im dangerous" feeling to the "im in danger" feeling things that know they are in legitimate danger would rather compromise a truce than battle it out if they want something material then its usually the smart thing to just give them what they want imo its just as ok to give a mugger your wallet or a bully your pride as it is to put him into a coma; whichever you think is appropriate and you think you can do some people are sad enough that i would rather give them my wallet than hurt them some are mean enough that i would feel better knowing they were in a coma some i wouldnt have a choice about either way because theyre just out of my league youve got to make the determination of how to respond based on the person and the moment what i hope all of us will always be able to do when we deal with people under any circumstance is to make our decisions based on what we calculate as being appropriate to the moment, rather than on the impulses of fear or rage if you can keep to that principle then you should be ok most places have "self defense" laws which allow you to protect yourself so long as you dont chase someone down and hurt them or attack them from behind (if you shoot someone in the back as they run for instance) and you dont use a weapon against a weaponless person unless they have you trapped and you dont beat them too much after they are helpless i suggest doing a web search or asking a LEO in your area to find out the specifics
    • How Do You Save the World? (Last post by Ariane)
    • Thanks for your posts Deciding to save the world and what change can be made, for most of us its an assessment of what we value. Humans value things that are desirable and necessary and we want to improve ourselves and strip away bad or undesirable traits in ourselves it's our personal approach, to change ourselves. However lets just say that humans saved the planet and more correctly that we 'saved the planet from ourselves' and that we did indeed became self-sufficient every single human had enough food and shelter. And that we had saved the world from unclean fossil fuels. It would have taken a financial investment of money to save the biosphere and if everyone worked to heal our planet and had achieved it, it would have cost us 300 quadrillion dollars to achieve. Could humans raise that much money before its too late and save the planet, perhaps not, we all will suffer climate change and worsening weather. No one will ever raise enough money in the near future to save the biosphere. Which is the most necessary resource we humans have. Our most desirable resource is Anti-Matter which would become a valuable resource for its power and energy and could be a cleaner source of energy than oil. To see how much it costs to heal the planet I believe the only solution is mass producing another energy source called Anti-Matter which is worth 65 trillion dollars per gram. But since we only have 5 trillion dollars of us dollars and a total combined value of all fiat currencies in the world is $60 trillion. It seems no one could afford to buy antimatter either. :lol: I expect that saving the world would cost a lot of money and if it were possible today to solve the problems by spending money then it wouldn't be a problem. But climate change is not something you can throw money at and neither can we reject technology and live in harmony with nature like our ancestors. However the solution to our problem of climate change and our addiction to fossil fuels is also much cheaper and in the future when saving the world becomes cost effective we will throw money at it.
    • Live Service - Friday, 1 May 2015 at 17:30 UTC (Last post by V-Tog)
    • Quote: Quote: The next service is today... the time has changed from the time in the thread title. If you look at V-Tog's last post above, she gives a link to tell you what time it will be where you are. Yes, great, thank You BUT As I said it was too late for me so I asked when is next service So? And question - what is "service"? Is it lecture? I've red sermon, but this is about five minutes? The current schedule can be found here. The next live service is scheduled for 7th May, but the time hasn't been announced yet. You'll have to keep an eye out for another announcement thread similar to this one! A live service usually consists of the line-by-line delivering of a sermon, a line-by-line recitation of the TOTJO Creed (you repeat/type each line after the Minister) and sometimes other elements such as prayers, meditations, music, discussion, etc. I would say that on average they tend to last somewhere around about 30 minutes or so, but it can vary a lot depending on what the Minister decides to include.
    • Tree of reflection (Last post by Slebo)
    • Think I might do that and use it as my daily que from the daily hustle and bustle to make time to tend and meditate. Could even be the centerpiece of a prayer shrine. Thanks again. :cheer:

There are 748 visitors, 14 guests and 46 members online (none in chat): Zanthan Storm, steamboat28, Shadouness, RyuJin, Jestor, Kitsu Tails, Nakis, Sven One, Adder, PloKoon, Darren, Proteus, V-Tog, Reacher, Alexandre Orion, Elemental Harmony, PatrickB, Khaos, Calem, Llama Su, Kamizu, Edan, SilverWolf, Zenchi, Pyrus Erath, Skyywalker, Venator Mortis, Mathew Erickson, Cabur Senaar, KalSterner, GreyWesbrock, Matsukaze, focone oceanlast, Tarran, Exarchias, Rocda, den385, Poggenata, Tk768, Hitira38, Loudzoo, Atticus509, Krieger, asteropos, ChesShadowkin, MaGnA CrYsTaL, PaintedWarrior, Blackbeard, mw, ashleekatet, Straylight, Lahush, crhunt.

Follow Us