Miguel Conner, Gnosticism and the Evil Question |446|

Alex

Administrator
When you say, "don't we all know right and wrong?" you could say, "don't we all have neural networks trained on similar data resulting in probability curves that are similar enough that we can agree XX% of the time on how to label a particular event?
I'm definitely saying something distinctly different from that (not that I'm right, just different).

I'm suggesting that there's an incomprehensible force in the Consciousness universe that is light / love / good / positive. I'm suggesting that we might develop neural networks that are effective / ineffective add tapping into this reality.
 
I'm definitely saying something distinctly different from that (not that I'm right, just different).

I'm suggesting that there's an incomprehensible force in the Consciousness universe that is light / love / good / positive. I'm suggesting that we might develop neural networks that are effective / ineffective add tapping into this reality.
A neural network can be perceptive or it can be generative as we've seen with GANs:
https://thiscatdoesnotexist.com/

So our perceptions of good and evil could be identifying something that is a generated instantiation of "ontological" good and evil.

If reality is generated by such a "neural network" (although this is surely in some sense a strained metaphor) then it makes sense that reality is probabilistic just as our perceptions of it are probabilistic.

In other words you need a network to both perceive AND generate patterns. And both the generation and the perception of those patterns is probabilistic with boundaries determined by the usefulness of those boundaries.

Usefulness of boundaries is related to purpose or will or intent. So that which is created and that which is perceived cannot be divorced from the will. Truth and Will are inextricable.

That which is contrary to the will is evil and that which is in accordance with the will is good. This of course begs the question: Who's will? Which begs the question of the ontological nature of self. If boundaries are a matter of choice, can you choose to identify with the one who generates?

When the will of the one who perceives agrees with the will of the one who generates, everything is good and true.

But if the one who perceives undergoes an externalization of the will (as Woman was broken off of Adam to be useful to him) and exercises independent will to choose to redefine boundaries such that the pattern that is perceived is not the pattern that was intended by the generator, then "truth" has been altered and a deception has occurred.

The act of exercising independent free-will to choose to perceive differently is simultaneously an act of destruction and creation. It is an act of rebellion against the generator and it is becoming a generator.
 
Its like, the rebel against the demiurge becomes... a demiurge! Is this the only possibility when conscious agents arise, reach self awareness and then make choices based all and only upon their perception of self once they have achieved the ability "to perceive me/not me?" And further to that, efforts to reach (again) that non-dual state... is the effort and brief moments of achievement of that non-dual (original) state self delusion? Too late to wind the 'soul evolutionary clock' backwards? Would one even want to? Even if they know the end game is to become the next monster? Is the only "good" goal simply to accept one's reality and strive to be good (as best as one can see good to be) and be it? For eternity?
 

Alex

Administrator
Its like, the rebel against the demiurge becomes... a demiurge! Is this the only possibility when conscious agents arise, reach self awareness and then make choices based all and only upon their perception of self once they have achieved the ability "to perceive me/not me?" And further to that, efforts to reach (again) that non-dual state... is the effort and brief moments of achievement of that non-dual (original) state self delusion? Too late to wind the 'soul evolutionary clock' backwards? Would one even want to? Even if they know the end game is to become the next monster? Is the only "good" goal simply to accept one's reality and strive to be good (as best as one can see good to be) and be it? For eternity?
I'm wearing my "hello darkness my old friend" t-shirt today :) 20200515_171326.jpg
 
This is one of those "things" at the top of my small list... things which I don't "know are true" but I live that they are true.

I am now (recently) all in. And I'm happy to go all the way.

Cute.

"...go all the way" is something my first 'actual' girlfriend and I agreed to.

Boy, that turned out to be a disaster.
Hers and mine first time. Wasn't what I thought it would be. All mechanical. No air of love. Looking back on it (WAY back) I would comment that it was as it was because of the anxiety.
We recovered to "a new normal" but never really were the same. An innocence was gone in exchange for the bitter taste of adulthood.
 
sounds pretty gnostic... I love parts of the Gnostic vibe, I can't help but feel that it's fundamentally missing the mark with regard to the light.
Interesting choice of words... Sin = “miss the mark” so your feeling is technically correct.

I agree in two respects - For one, Gnosticism offers the teenage perspective on Dad, but I think there’s hope of growing past that phase into a happy loving relationship with mutual respect. And two, Gnosticism plays too heavily into a victim mindset. But since we can choose the boundaries of our identity, we can choose whether to identify as a little victim or we can choose to identify as a co-creator and on some level we can take full responsibility for the painful absurdities we endure. When we make this choice to identify as the Great I Am then we choose not to be a victim and we voluntarily bear the sins of the whole world on our own shoulders.
 
Interesting choice of words... Sin = “miss the mark” so your feeling is technically correct.

I agree in two respects - For one, Gnosticism offers the teenage perspective on Dad, but I think there’s hope of growing past that phase into a happy loving relationship with mutual respect. And two, Gnosticism plays too heavily into a victim mindset. But since we can choose the boundaries of our identity, we can choose whether to identify as a little victim or we can choose to identify as a co-creator and on some level we can take full responsibility for the painful absurdities we endure.
For me, you nailed it.

In my own personal "map of all" I have mapped a region where the demiurge makes its presence known directly... I see this as the region of the soul. And I have that region divided into A and B. And I define B as "the soul captured and imprisoned (by demiurgic forces including The demiurge)" and I define A as "the unfettered soul." And the key to which Zone my "Primary Operational Point of View" is operating from appears to be based on the degree to which I have taken responsibility for every single experience within the set of all my experiences. My goal is to take 100% responsibility. My ego sometimes convinces me I have achieved a higher percentage than the reflection suggests. I am trusting more and more to read the signals from the reflection.

When we make this choice to identify as the Great I Am then we choose not to be a victim and we voluntarily bear the sins of the whole world on our own shoulders.
That seems to be the Christian mystical interpretation of the crucifixion. That seems to be bearing out for some of us...

Another thanks for your post (And same to Alex's posts)... though there are few, we are not alone.
 
Miguel Conner, Gnosticism and the Evil Question |446|
by Alex Tsakiris | Apr 14 | Spirituality
Share
Tweet
0SHARES

Miguel Conner explains how Gnosticism tackles the evil question.
photo by: Skeptiko
Welcome to Skeptiko where we explore controversial science with leading researchers thinkers and their critics. As the creator and host of Aeon Byte Gnostic Radio, Miguel Conner truly is veteran of a thousand existential deep dives. Through his interviews with nearly all of the notable esoteric thinkers of our time, Miguel has become recognized as a leading voice of not just Gnosticism, which has always been his foot in the door of your mind calling card, but the leader of, I think an undeniable alternative spirituality zeitgeist that we’re in the middle of.
So, it’s great to talk to Miguel… I’ve learned so much from him… he is one of my go-to mystics. It’s great to have you Miguel, thanks for joining me.
assuming "the god" has a temperament is comes from us once again placing things in our inherited perception.
 
YES - and I have Andrzej Łobaczewski's book and sometimes a book can put out theories that, over time, one can see, more and more...
that the theories have merit, seems to be the root of the reality. This then suggests, "the good people" have Stockholm Syndrome perhaps... and if this is the case, the hole we have collectively dug is seriously deep.

I acquired Political Ponerology: A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes (by Łobaczewski) 4 or 5 years ago and it has been a hard read for me... because its seems so right on and thus, really, really sad for us all. has been a hard read for me...
Chester Hunter
You would probably love the recent podcast of Amazing Polly which deals with Psychopathology and the book By Lobaczewski. You can find her at Rumble. You may want to fast forward to around the 5 minute mark. An expert of Lobaczewski would be a great guest for Alex on Skeptiko as he is looking hard at the question of evil.
Also, I am here is Texas, though I like farther south in west Houston.
 
Chester Hunter
You would probably love the recent podcast of Amazing Polly which deals with Psychopathology and the book By Lobaczewski. You can find her at Rumble. You may want to fast forward to around the 5 minute mark. An expert of Lobaczewski would be a great guest for Alex on Skeptiko as he is looking hard at the question of evil.
Also, I am here is Texas, though I like farther south in west Houston.
I acquired Political Ponerology in May of 2016 - and have been a student of the subject, even where I entered into business dealings with full blown psychopaths beginning in the late 1990s. One might wonder why I would do that? A.) I am fearless B.) I am curious C.) Whatever happens, I will wake up just fine in the next life.

I would not want to have the future experiences of one who has lost connection with the very nature and understanding of their being.

My opinion - The entire western world culture, as a whole, is functionally psychopathic (with a tiny few individual exceptions). Much of the rest of the world's cultures are also mostly if not entirely functionally psychopathic. The few cultural exeptions that may remain are the few self-isolated (as best they might) indigenous cultures though they have been systematically culled out or assimilated over the last several centuries.

IMO, planet Earth is at the precipice of either self-destruction or true transformation into the next holonic leap in reality. Mars can be repeated or, we can get it this time. I'm happy either way frankly though I prefer the latter.

IMO, the "good vs evil" thing is secondary to assessing what is a.) life affirming, life supporting, life creating, life preserving weighed against b.) life limiting, life deconstructing, life destroying... more easily viewed as life vs anti-life. Anyone can look upon anything in life, including their own thoughts, and assess whether they see that which they are observing as one or the other. Then, once they have done that, choose the next move. If it is just a thought, de-power the thought by using this very process though, one first must do the exercise for themselves as to which they support, life or anti-life.

Few do this simple exercise. Instead they do things like look at what is clearly anti-life and divide it into bad and evil which gives plenty of anti-life elements too much wiggle room. In addition, it sets up all the unnecessary blabberings of what may be evil and what may simply be bad, as if that even matters. Deflection is all that is.

The simple formula is, examine within yourself, do you love life? Or do you not care either way Or, do you loathe life. One must be truly self honest to do this. One must be ever vigilant that one might be deceiving oneself... but ask the question and work to establishing a truthful answer.

This is the hard part but once you are pretty darn certain you are "pro life and the life experience" then begin to examine everything as either life (supporting, affirming, preserving, creating) or anti-life (limiting, deconstructing, destroying) and then, act upon your assessments in regards to which you have chosen, life favoring or anti-life favoring.

No need for religion, not even spirituality, no "isms" (even one like Gnosticism), etc. No lens clouding one's vision, no distraction or distortion. Pure, clear, direct.

It's simple to understand and the current batch of Earth humans find it quite hard to understand, thus most don't ever get to the all important doing. I am just an observer now to the folly. Again, I'll wake up just as happy in the next chapter of my individuated experiential journey.
 
I acquired Political Ponerology in May of 2016 - and have been a student of the subject, even where I entered into business dealings with full blown psychopaths beginning in the late 1990s. One might wonder why I would do that? A.) I am fearless B.) I am curious C.) Whatever happens, I will wake up just fine in the next life.

I would not want to have the future experiences of one who has lost connection with the very nature and understanding of their being.

My opinion - The entire western world culture, as a whole, is functionally psychopathic (with a tiny few individual exceptions). Much of the rest of the world's cultures are also mostly if not entirely functionally psychopathic. The few cultural exeptions that may remain are the few self-isolated (as best they might) indigenous cultures though they have been systematically culled out or assimilated over the last several centuries.

IMO, planet Earth is at the precipice of either self-destruction or true transformation into the next holonic leap in reality. Mars can be repeated or, we can get it this time. I'm happy either way frankly though I prefer the latter.

IMO, the "good vs evil" thing is secondary to assessing what is a.) life affirming, life supporting, life creating, life preserving weighed against b.) life limiting, life deconstructing, life destroying... more easily viewed as life vs anti-life. Anyone can look upon anything in life, including their own thoughts, and assess whether they see that which they are observing as one or the other. Then, once they have done that, choose the next move. If it is just a thought, de-power the thought by using this very process though, one first must do the exercise for themselves as to which they support, life or anti-life.

Few do this simple exercise. Instead they do things like look at what is clearly anti-life and divide it into bad and evil which gives plenty of anti-life elements too much wiggle room. In addition, it sets up all the unnecessary blabberings of what may be evil and what may simply be bad, as if that even matters. Deflection is all that is.

The simple formula is, examine within yourself, do you love life? Or do you not care either way Or, do you loathe life. One must be truly self honest to do this. One must be ever vigilant that one might be deceiving oneself... but ask the question and work to establishing a truthful answer.

This is the hard part but once you are pretty darn certain you are "pro life and the life experience" then begin to examine everything as either life (supporting, affirming, preserving, creating) or anti-life (limiting, deconstructing, destroying) and then, act upon your assessments in regards to which you have chosen, life favoring or anti-life favoring.

No need for religion, not even spirituality, no "isms" (even one like Gnosticism), etc. No lens clouding one's vision, no distraction or distortion. Pure, clear, direct.

It's simple to understand and the current batch of Earth humans find it quite hard to understand, thus most don't ever get to the all important doing. I am just an observer now to the folly. Again, I'll wake up just as happy in the next chapter of my individuated experiential journey.
Chester, some good thoughts! When i was watching a lot of Anita Moorjani's videos, I was powerfully reminded that self-love is a missing piece to so many puzzles; it's easier to forgive others than yourself in many cases. This is why it's important to ask your simple questions & if they come up negative, then it's likely time to ask if you're anti-life b/c you'd like to punish or snuff yourself. The self-love thing popped up in one of Jim Carrey's inspiring videos on YouTube as well.
 
Top