|
Peter’s Correspondence on the Actual Freedom List Correspondent No 53
PETER: Hi, RESPONDENT: Peter, why haven’t you responded to No 59’s justifiable arguments from brouhaha indeed No 59 30 DEC 03 and Boy’s Own ‘How to Do Theoretical Physics’ No 59 01.18.04 yet? PETER: The first time I wrote to No 59, this was his response –
He did, however, continue and this was where the discussion was left as he didn’t respond further –
As you can see No 59 was not interested in having an ongoing discussion with me about some of the claims he made because he has his own mission on this list. Despite his ‘mission accomplished’ claim he has now refocused his mission and has continued on in the same manner – avoiding discussions about the claims he makes against actualism whilst ever moving on to make new claims. As you can see in the post to me he even wondered why I bothered to ‘argue at great length’ that actualism is brand new to history – to do so is apparently to ‘be defensive’, the opposite being that if I don’t respond ‘I am avoiding’. Apparently the only response that would be satisfactory is if I roll over and say a quick ‘Yes, you’re right No 59’ … and unless I do so I am ‘being arrogant’. Dammed if I do and dammed if I don’t. I decided that if that is his game on this list he can play it on someone else as I have far better things to do with my time. * PETER: As to why I haven’t responded to your question, you have made your intent on this list quite clear –
Again I have far better things to do with my time than providing ‘entertainment’ for someone with a fixed mindset. The issue on this mailing list is whether or not some human beings are intelligent enough and willing enough to stop being malicious and sorrowful – not whether or not ‘a supreme intelligence’ is playing some sort of perverse game with we humans by having us fight, feud, and suffer in our ‘earthly life’.
RESPONDENT No 23: Dimlogicism Nah, you’re not gonna find that word in the dictionary. In fact it is a variation on dimwitticism PETER to No 23: I think you will find that there is already an appropriate word that applies to
the subject matter you were addressing – mentalism Mentalism is a particularly chronic form of self-indulgence and one that mostly afflicts the males of
the species. I have an actualist friend who finds a good deal of the conversation on this mailing list to be bewildering and lacking in common
sense. I point out to her that this is how men think, by and large, and have done for thousands of years – they persist in trying to make a
philosophy out of the utterly simple and entirely down-to-earth business of being alive. RESPONDENT: Peter, but truth simply sits there, it doesn’t undress itself as hastily for us as your mother or Vineeto might. PETER: I am well acquainted with the nature of truth (aka Truth) as I walked that path for some 17 years. This is what I had to say about ‘the truth’ in my Journal –
In short, I discovered that there is no such thing as ‘the’ truth – it is always only someone’s personal albeit socially-imbibed view of what they perceive or feel to be the truth, i.e. there really is only ‘my’ truth, ‘your’ truth, ‘his’ truth, ‘her’ truth and so on. As a rule of thumb, the Truth generally reveals itself in a heartfelt flash and once one is hooked it takes a good deal of sincerity to not be suckered into abandoning one’s common sense entirely and become totally besotted by what is, after all, nought but one’s own impassioned imagination. RESPONDENT: Don’t you think that someone has to care about that which is beyond us? PETER: Nowadays I am only too happy to leave that to others. Humanity is consumed with considerations as to ‘what is beyond us’ to the extent that they have always ignored that which is right here under their noses as it where. RESPONDENT: If you do not have the intelligence to comprehend that which is beyond you, whereas I do, can you then say that you can offer any of us anything of value? PETER: Yes. What I offer is my report that the actualism method – the method Richard used to become free of the human condition in toto – does in fact work in practice in that if one applies it with the intent to become happy and harmless then one can indeed become free of one’s feelings of malice and sorrow such that one can become virtually happy and harmless. That others choose to either ignore or disparage my reports is their business entirely. RESPONDENT: Did you forget that there’s a reason you don’t post on this list much? PETER: Leaving aside the fact that I have written over 500 posts to this list and the reason that I have not written more is that I rate quality over quantity for the moment – perhaps you could enlighten me as to what the reason is you imagine I have forgotten that ‘I don’t post on this list much’?
RESPONDENT to No 66: Uh... I think I know what I’m speaking about when I say that based on observations of myself, and observations of you, this study may have perhaps been some kind of joke? Of course, I could be wrong, since, I am basing it on a study of the stastical data of this list. Even Peter himself expressed (and quite rightly I might add) that ‘[Respondent] must be the one with the highest IQ on this list ... unfortunately I cannot say the same about his EQ.’ Of course, don’t take my word for it, ask him yourself. As for you, I wouldn’t talk as you are merely my source of daily intellectual pride and therefore, are completely innocent for you know not of what you speak. Eternity 14.7.2004 PETER: I have searched through my posts and can find no reference to the statement you have attributed to me, nor anything that remotely resembles it – for example, I have no idea what EQ refers to. Given that your use of quotation marks indicates a verbatim quote, could you point me to the source in order that I can confirm that I did indeed say what you are saying I said.
RESPONDENT to No 66: Uh... I think I know what I’m speaking about when I say that based on observations of myself, and observations of you, this study may have perhaps been some kind of joke? Of course, I could be wrong, since, I am basing it on a study of the stastical data of this list. Even Peter himself expressed (and quite rightly I might add) that ‘No 49 must be the one with the highest IQ on this list ... unfortunately I cannot say the same about his EQ.’ Of course, don’t take my word for it, ask him yourself. As for you, I wouldn’t talk as you are merely my source of daily intellectual pride and therefore, are completely innocent for you know not of what you speak. Eternity 14.7.2004 PETER: I have searched through my posts and can find no reference to the statement you have attributed to me, nor anything that remotely resembles it – for example, I have no idea what EQ refers to. Given that your use of quotation marks indicates a verbatim quote, could you point me to the source in order that I can confirm that I did indeed say what you are saying I said. RESPONDENT: Basically, IQ is the idea that gave birth to the equally as popular term, EQ. It came about years ago as a methodology for the purpose of assessing a secondary aspect of oneself – emotional intelligence, which, refers to how one is able to use understand people and themselves from an emotional vantage. For example, when I used to make friendly banter about your mother or Vineeto getting naked for everyone I did not actually mean it, it was just for entertaining No 59 and the ‘comedians’ of the list like No 66 too. But when you took it as a personal attack your reaction was indicative of someone with a low EQ. PETER: And yet you didn’t make friendly banter about my mother or Vineeto ‘getting naked for everyone’. This is what you said –
Given that my response had everything to do with the subject matter – ‘the truth’ – and had nothing to do with my mother or Vineeto, your presumption that I ‘took it as a personal attack’ is far fetched to say the least. As for the term ‘emotional intelligence’ being a popular term, maybe the fact that the term ‘emotional intelligence’ is an oxymoron – emotion always impedes intelligence – accounts for its lack of popularity in my neck of the woods. * PETER: Given that your use of quotation marks indicates a verbatim quote, could you point me to the source in order that I can confirm that I did indeed say what you are saying I said? RESPONDENT: First of all, do you believe that it was something you could have possibly said and have forgotten? PETER: Not at all, which is why I included the reference to being ignorant of the term EQ. I could have hardly made reference to something I did not know of in a comment I am told I made, especially since I can find no reference to anything remotely resembling the rest of what you say I have said. RESPONDENT: Is this the most a priori judgement you have made about why you could not find the quote? PETER: And yet I did not make an ‘a priori judgement’ at all – I looked through all of my previous posts to you and could find no instance of my having said what I said you said. There is nothing presumptive or philosophical involved in clicking a mouse and reading printed words on a CRT screen. RESPONDENT: If not, then what would be the next most reasonable thing to believe about what I said? PETER: And yet I have already done ‘the next most reasonable thing to do’ given the circumstances. I asked you –
– to which you have yet to respond. RESPONDENT: This is a test to see if actual freedom has not impaired your understanding of the world ... go! PETER: One of the things I did very early on as an actualist was to abandon the habitual reaction of trying to make a philosophy out of the utterly simple and entirely down-to-earth business of being alive. Rather than continue to sit on my backside, endlessly thinking about life and remaining a spectator, I set about gaining a pragmatic and hands-on understanding of the human condition in action – an essential prerequisite if one aspires to become free of its invidious grip. This could well be an appropriate moment to pass on my experience of the failings of trying to understand the world via a purely intellectual and philosophical understanding – an understanding that is invariably based upon the accumulated ‘wisdom’ of others and usually manifest as the latest fashionable reinterpretation of that wisdom. My first insight into this world came during my university years when I was taught to have a by-and large intellectual approach to the practical business of designing and building buildings. It took me many years of practical hands-on experience to discover that much of what I was taught as being truths were little other than the foibles, whims, prejudices and predilections of academics who were passing on their own interpretations of what they in turn had been taught to be truths from their peers and from their gurus. I particularly remember having to do an assignment that involved nothing else but reading what others had written about the particular subject and writing up a summary of it in a way that gave the impression that I had some direct knowledge and intimate understanding about what I was saying. This gave me an insight into the fact that by far the majority of academic intellectualism involves little more than the regurgitation, reinterpretation and repackaging of past regurgitations, reinterpretations and repackagings of concepts and theories that is very often rooted in ancient ignorance of the origins of animate life, the physiology of the human psyche and a lack of knowledge of even the most basic functioning of the physical world. Upon reflection it was these insights combined with the lived experience of the inherent failings of
trying to understand the world via a purely intellectual understanding which allowed me to listen to what Richard had to say about the human
condition and about how to become free of it without feeling personally attacked or without feeling the instinctive need to defend the status quo Discarding the myths, legends and fairy tales that give credence to spiritual beliefs and religious dogma is an essential first step in becoming free of the human condition … but daring to question the real-world wisdoms and universally-accepted truths of Humanity and taking the time and making the effort to find out for oneself the facts of the matter is the nitty-gritty business of actualism.
Peter’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer |
