mat wrote in message <43525ce3.0208031227.68be6d5 at posting.google.com>...
>[...]
>He also has a terribly affected writing style, using copious numbers
>of apostrophes, hyphens and regular repetitions of the same word
>(inherent or commensurate are his favourites) in an attempt to imbue
>the content with some sense of greatness and the reader with a sense
>of awe
There's a =lot= in my 'style', but that's not-it.
At the 'level' that you address, all I'm doing is thumbing-my-nose at this or that "status-quo" stuff that 'stands-in-the-way'.
I figure, if I do it enough, all the folks who're victims of the Tyranny of stuff like 'style' will see that there's stuff that's much-more-important than 'style', and while, themselves, continuing to write with accepted 'style', will, nevertheless, become enabled beneath the 'language' interface.
I put a =lot= of energy into lifting folks up with respect to this one thing.
Really, mat, if you, or anyone else, ever 'bothers' to meet with me in-person, what you, or they will discover is that I'm pretty-'normal' in just about every respect.
In a crowd, you'd probably walk-right-by me without noticing - that 'normal'.
The one 'quirk' I have is that I prefer to do what needs to be done, while remaining 'in-the-background', not because I'm 'shy', or anything like that, but because there's so much Waste inherent [:-] in working in any other way. Working 'in-the-background' largely eliminates all that Waste [but does introduce another form of Waste that derives in 'being-alone' - requires extra quantities of 'self-nurturance' [I let NDT's stuff be my guide with respect to such. Makes enduring the 'solitude'-that-eliminates-the-larger-Waste endurable.]]
I got the preferance-for-working-in-the-background stuff from my Mother. It was her way. She just forsook 'Recognition', and Did what Needed to be Done [which, to my enduring Sorrow, I only came to understand late in her Life].
My Father just Did what Needed to be Done, too, but he 'grabbed the bull by the horns', and Did it, asking no quarter, and giving none.
In the twain, I found what works for me.
I always just grab TSEOTS, and get-on-with-it, while remaining 'invisible' until it's 'time' to Give stuff to others.
Which Problem [Giving-it], with respect to NDT's understanding, is inherent [:-] in doing-completely what needed to be done with respect to NDT's understanding.
Note all the Waste inherent [:-]?
All the work was done decades ago, but it's taking these decades just to Give-it to folks.
'Ironic', no?
So, I'm 'fighting' through-it, while 'whittling'-away at this most-largely-Wasteful stuff [which, in the end, isn't really Waste, because it needed to be done, 'two'], while being sure to self-nurture via the 'clown-act' inherent [:-]
Part of what's inherent [:-] is that it became clear, long-ago, that I could eliminate much of the larger-Waste by adopting a 'funny' 'style', since folks who put 'style' before substance would self-divert ['move away from'], leaving those who think beneath the 'language' interface [which is actually everyone, but some don't get-it] to explore NDT's stuff.
See?
>an example:
>>Keith:
Who is "Keith"?
I do have a theory in Physics.
I'm not discussing it these 'days'.
This is a Neuroscience 'place'.
I'm discussing Neuroscience.
Anyway, if it sounds, from what's in-here, like I'm 'angry', I'm not.
It's just that I've Chosen, all along, to take a lot 'on the chin', and it's a Sorrow when I see all that going-to-Waste, 'two'.
This Sorrow derives in my awareness that most folks were just Victims.
I've wanted to bring the understanding forward without 'embarassing' anyone, with respect to such.
But, every 'time' I'm Forced to 'explain', I 'pop-out-of-the-background', in what, I understand, can only seem 'untoward' ways.
Such ain't =my= Choice.
My Choice was to =just= do what Needed to be done.
I understood, as is briefly discussed in AoK, Ap10, that NDT predicts its own difficult 'birth', but was unprepared for such unfolding ad extremum in not being allowed to meet with folks in-person.
See?
The most 'frustrating' thing is to be cajoled, castigated, while 'caged', and folks' 'image' of me contorted into that which I am not.
The only thing that makes such possible is that no one will meet with-me in-person.
'cause, then, folks'd see, right-off, that i'm just pretty-'normal'.
Which, it's seemed, is what some're working to 'move away from' becoming manifest.
What remains, as things stand, is folks 'fabrications' - folks' 'imaginings' with respect to my 'being', which ain't my Being at all.
So, if you, or anyone else, wants to discuss unsubstantiated hypotheses, well, =there= is the 'place' to start.
Inherently [:-] commensurate [:-] with the stuff of your post, no?
Yup :-)
[BTW, as is pointed-out in AoK, when a word "strikes-one's-fancy", one uses it repetitively be-cause, each 'time' one does so, doing so generates a little squirt of "inverting reward". The reward flows, with each use, as TD E/I-minimization occurs with respect to all of the verbal-symbol's connotations - as the 'language'-interface stuff becomes increasingly directionally-mapped with respect to the larger information-processing that occurs 'beneath' the 'level' of the 'language' interface. I do it because it 'feels-good', and because I'm aware that, in a kind of 'inverse' of AoK's "Infant's crying behavior" example, can act at a distance, allowing other folks to 'feel good', too, for the analogous reason, with respect to "inverting reward" in their own nervous systems. :-]
ken [k. p. collins]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://iubio.bio.indiana.edu/bionet/mm/neur-sci/attachments/20020804/a791661a/attachment.html
