heavens 'carrot' & EEG

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Tue Nov 30 05:08:21 EST 1999


patrik bagge wrote:

> >> kenneth Collins wrote in message <383D10C8.EACA9170 at earthlink.net>...
> >> >i read a story, tonight. Bishop Fulton Sheen told it. it was an old
> Russian
> >> story
> >> >about a person in Hell who was asked by an Angel whether, if granted the
> >> means to
> >> >get out of Hell, would the person take the opportunity? the person
> >> answered,
> >> >"Yes." so the Angel came back and held out a carrot for the person to
> grab
> >> onto.
> >> >the person grabbed hold, but all the other people in Hell tried to grab
> >> onto the
> >> >person.
> >> >
> >> >so, all remained in Hell.
> >>
> >> Interesting story, allow me a variation:
> >>
> >> The person is quick and since he has
> >> the advantage of being first,he slips the hangarounds
> >> , eats the carrot on the way to Heaven, since
> >> he's really hungry too !, arriving to heaven, both
> >> happy to be there and well fed, going 'burp'
> >>
> >> The next part of the story is really interesting, for
> >> once he is in heaven, he finds this large pile of
> >> carrots and friendly angels. Being the
> >> compassionate/ethic/moral
> >> person he is, he manages to convince the
> >> angels to rescue the other poor individuals from
> >> hell.
> >>
> >> In the light of this scenario, should he or should he
> >> not, at least, have an attempt on the carrot in the
> >> first place ?
> >
> >when i started out ~29 years ago, my view was something like that. but it
> soon
> >became apparent that, when folks get 'side-tracked' by 'money', folks get
> >'side-tracked', period, and end up doing a lot of stuff =except= what needs
> to
> >be done. the 'money' always comes 'with strings attached'... all the 'tugs
> on
> >the strings' work against one's doing what needs to be done.
> >
> >so, to avoid the 'strings', i've avoided the 'money'.
>
> sounds a bit 'binary', the computer of life seems analog

i'm talking about the stuff entailed in 'running a business'. i'm not against
wherewithal that'd allow me to just do my work. i'm against illusory
'wherewithal' that only impedes one's doing one's work.

there's a big difference.

> I have personally seen the 'sorrows' of reality and occasionally
> find myself donating this ugly 'money' thing to organisations
> trying to do something about this 'sorrow'.
> (you see the positive circle of life?)
> Understanding what money is and isn't have failed many,
> this is one tiny little 'sorrow'.Dishonest 'borrowing' is another
> sorrow, but can easily be avoided.

i've no money to 'lend'. i use the term, 'borrowing', as a more-gentle way of
addressing plagerism and theft.

> This money thing is a bit 'funny', it's often a hangaround to honest
> work and intellectual capacity, combined with some little 'marketing'

ideally, yes. all i've experienced with respect to the same are folks wanting to
assure that such could not be for me, so that it could be for them.

> All the 'fuzz' usually starts when one is hungry ...
>
> >it's 'funny'. in my Youth, i was Gregarious. the one who was always working
> to
> >make things 'fun' for all in my company. but then i became aware of all the
> >Suffering that's out-there, and saw that it was mostly-needless. so i gave
> my
> >life to doing what needed to be done. my life has been 'pretty'-drab as a
> >result, but if that's what it takes, that's what it takes. a man does what
> needs
> >to be done, regardless.
> >
> >> Is it justified to lie, when 'convincing' the angels ?
> >
> >no.
> >
> >> may it even be 'acceptable' to push a hangaround
> >> in the flames when going for the carrot ?
> >
> >no... 'cause one never knows who'll find the stuff of Redemption within
> >themselves, and Redeemed 'hanger-around-ers', because they had to come to
> >understand sufficiently to see the worth in 'hanging-around', might be able
> to
> >do some Good.
> >
> >so, i just work around the 'impediments', as best i can.
> >
> >i understand that (how & why) folks 'view' me as being a 'naive mark', but
> all
> >these decisions are mostly-easy for me, because i understand the
> Consequences.
> >
> >the Consequences make 'failure' Unthinkable.
> >
> >'success', one snippet at a 'time' does make for pretty-slow-going, but it
> >cannot be that the understanding is ab-used.
> >
> >if you 'wonder', i do wonder if that 'concern' of mine is a 'carrot' of my
> own
> >manufacture.
> >
> >but, it's just so strange that, after as much as i've shared, there's been
> only
> >Resistance to Communicating the work in fullness.
> >
> >because it's been so, it's clear that there's something 'sinister'
> operating
> >out-there. what would such 'sinister' stuff do with the understanding?
> >
> >build 'weapons systems'? become 'Dictator' to all folks, everywhere? suck
> the
> >Life out of Humanity?
>
> a big bite of the apple of reality, unfortunately...
>
> >the Answers will come when folks make it safe to communicate by
> communicating
> >in-person.
> >
> >meanwhile, a lot of the good that the understanding can do is being
> forsaken,
> >but i've been 'dribbling' it out in bits and pieces, and i do see folks
> >'responding' (which does add to my 'curiosity' with respect to the
> Censorship).
>
> We all have our answers to questions like these, they seem to define our
> moral.
> The next phenomenon one could study, is the correlation between
> thought&written
> moral and behaved moral.
> At the end of the day, it usually boils down to survive&reproduce.

naw, that supposition is 'ancient history', which one can see, clearly, if one
studies History. it's been everyone's going 'bananas' over 'survival' that has
reduced 'humanity' to the level of the "carrot in Hell" way of 'existence'... no
one can do anything that can make any difference be-cause everyone's afraid
anyone's doing anything that can make a difference will jeopardize their
'survival'.

so the condition in which mere-survival becomes the only thing available to
folks follows, as a matter of course, out of folks' own actions.

it's all non-sense because humanity's existed on 'automatic pilot', all
knee-jerky.

> allow me a quick change of topic, i'm really interested in this
> 'thought' / EEG correlation thing and have already managed to
> get some expert opinions in the matter. The EEG ERP correlation
> to recognizing 'faces' etc is old news, What i'm interested in is
> correlating active 'concepts' such as 'red' to eeg neuronal activity.
> Do you have any knowledge on the topic?

i've worked as many of this type of problem as i've come across all the way
through, but i don't do such stuff in ways with which folks're familiar, which
is why i'm begging for an opportunity to get beyond the fundamentals.

as things stand, i see folks, having already 'borrowed' much of what i've
shared, wanting me to tell more so that they can 'borrow' that, "two", with
still more disregard for the folks on whose behalves the work was accomplished.

it's 'pretty'-disgusting to experience such... the same old 'song' that's so
ravaged Humanity, playing again, over and over, like some funeral dirge.

ken

> Yours
> /pat
>
> PS i have seen my own 'thought', it's quite a mess, but hey
> , let's not make any jokes around that...








More information about the Neur-sci mailing list