BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Sheeple and scum and humatons, oh my!

 
  

Page: (1)23456

 
 
Withiel: DALI'S ROTTWEILER
00:14 / 24.03.06
[Partly spinning off from the Matrix Warrior thread, partly from general discussion here and there]

"Humatons do not think for themselves. Their so-called 'minds' are actually intricate recordings fixed on a loop of endless repetition." ~ Matrix Wanker

This worries me quite a lot. The above is Dangerous, and a Fucking Lie. It's fairly obviously conducive to frightening elitism, detachment from the society of others, and a whole host of bad things.

"Even the norms, with their normal mainstream music and their normal everyday televisions and their grey mundane food and their bland little lives, in the rain? Even them? The boring normal norms who are not special as I am, with my special individual music and my tasty special non-conformist food" ~ Flyboy

Yes. Elitism, detachment and self-aggrandisement in people who self-define as "alternative". Often of the teenage, male and ill-fitting black clothing-sporting variety. However. It must be said that for certain periods of my life, I have felt like a humaton. That is to say, I've suddenly become aware, for example, that I've not actually had any thoughts for a period of an hour and have been operating on automatic pilot for that time. Or I'll notice myself absorbing media uncritically, and ending up holding disturbing reactionary positions without meaning to. The above taken from my own experience because it means I can make fairly broad statements without projecting onto or othering other people. To clarify: regardless of anyone else, I've certainly felt "asleep" and in need of "waking up". Moreover, I feel happier and less frightened and paranoid when I am thinking and analysing myself and things around me. What I'm trying to get at is that it's possible to end up a bit like a human automaton through not engaging with things. Another example might be of someone blindly ignoring and dismissing politics as something they're simply not interested in. Finally, I would suggest, very tentatively, that States might have a vested interest in keeping the general populace in an unthinking state of obedience and a very limited frame of reference. In conclusion, I'm not sure that people can't "wake up", but if so it's in adopting a wider discourse rather than acquiring any super secret sexay knowledge or special sunglasses.

Is this a reasonable refiguring of the humaton business, or have I fallen into the hands of the leather trenchcoat brigade?
 
 
---
01:35 / 24.03.06
That seems like an ok idea about the situation. I think equanimity is the key with a lot of this stuff. Recognizing that even if you do end up "enlightened", you're never actually "above" anyone else, and that any added awareness you have carries the responsibility with it of using it to try and help others more than you did before, or in a more effective way.
 
 
*
02:46 / 24.03.06
My take:

Realize that everyone needs to be "asleep" to certain things for certain periods of time. Certain things are taken care of automatically. If one were to give equal attention to every single stimulus, from the position of approaching traffic to the fly tapping on a window forty feet away, we'd be utterly nonfunctional. I mean, yes, if you notice that you've walked two blocks past where you meant to go without realizing it and don't even know where your attention was, that could be a problem and you should probably do some mental calisthenics. Someone in mastery of their mind, I would think, is simply very good at prioritizing their attention. But "enlightenment" isn't attending to every stimulus; that's called becoming a drooling mess.

Similarly, be careful of breaking the mask too soon. It's true that there are a lot of things in life which many people take too uncritically and build simplistic illusions over which have the effect of hiding a more authentic complexity. That doesn't mean that """reality""" is an ill-usion, man; it means people are prone to oversimplifying things if the complexities are not immediately useful to them. Still, the simplification can be useful as well, and it's just as dangerous to build more complexity into a situation than is actually there.

So I see "waking up" as the work of constantly recalibrating our perspective to the most useful balance, not that of transcending the illusion to find a greater truth. After all, that's too simple.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
09:53 / 24.03.06
Being on 'automatic pilot' while awake is great. It's how I aim to get through the working day.
 
 
illmatic
10:31 / 24.03.06
You might find Gurdjeiff or Ouspensky's* work quite interesting here (or a digest at least, both of them being insufferable wordy, especially Gurdjieff). Gurdjieff refers to "being awake" as "self-remembering" - he makes the statement somewhere that "life is only real, then, when I am". Based on my experience, I do think that being "asleep" and "being awake" refer to certain specifc states of consciousness and it's been benefical to me to try and cultivate the latter at the expense of the former. I can safely say though, from what I've read of Jake Horsely that this is soemthing he has little experience of.

*Check out "In search of the Miraculous", there's a lovely sequence begins around page 117, where Ouspensky struggles with this idea, and realises its potential for the first time.
 
 
illmatic
10:42 / 24.03.06
Being "present" (rather than "absent") is perhaps a better way to put it, than being "awake" with all it's dodgy Matrixesque connatations.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:58 / 24.03.06
Heidegger also distinguishes authentic and inauthentic experience, the first being when one is actively engaged in a state of critical awareness with the perceptual world, the second when one is doing what you expect to be doing without really examining it. He doesn't claim that this is a bad thing, however - if you have to fix a car, having a critical engagement with every bit of that car-fixing is going to be bloody inconvenient.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
12:40 / 24.03.06
It's a difficult area, this. Suppose you say to a colleague: "What do you think of those justice for Palestine protesters?" and his answer is "They should all be arrested". Suppose this is how his general attitudes go.

Now, is he actually a fascist, or is he just "misguided"/"asleep"? It's too easy, somehow, to assume the former (that he is a fascist); yet the latter brings it's own problems: are we actually awake, for one thing.
 
 
BlueMeanie
13:10 / 24.03.06
I second the suggestion of Ouspensky - he was very good at writing about maintaining a 'non-robotic state'.

This is also dealt with in a very similar manner in the Mahamudra and Dzogchen traditions of Tibetan Buddhism.
 
 
illmatic
13:17 / 24.03.06
Legba: I'd differentiate strongly between the situation you describe and the kind of thing I'm talking about.

Sorry if it sounds a bit wanky but I genuinely find it difficult to find the words.
 
 
Jack Fear
13:18 / 24.03.06
Now, is he actually a fascist, or is he just "misguided"/"asleep"?

Whatever happened to "I disagree"?

Must everyone who holds an opinion different from yours be perforce either stupid or evil?
 
 
illmatic
13:21 / 24.03.06
The Doc is right - you can find that kind of awareness in mentioned in lots of Asian religions if you know what you're looking for. I suppose what I'm trying to say is there is a kernel of truth to some of those "awake"/"asleep" metaphors but it tends to be misused by the most appalling wankers. So much so that we should probably avoid the phrase altogether - see my post above.

Funny, some of this reminds me of those Marxist arguments about "false consciousness"...
 
 
BlueMeanie
13:31 / 24.03.06
The Doc is right - you can find that kind of awareness in mentioned in lots of Asian religions if you know what you're looking for. I suppose what I'm trying to say is there is a kernel of truth to some of those "awake"/"asleep" metaphors but it tends to be misused by the most appalling wankers.

It's essentially the very point of Buddhism. Thing is, mainly in the mahayana/vajrayana traditions, the training is carried out with the aim of increasing compassion - which is emphasised at all times. You are essentially doing what you're doing to be of genuine use and to serve to others.

There is also the concept of Buddhanature (tagathatagharbha) which emphasises that all beings have the ability to gain a fully awakened state, so being 'TEH ONE' isn't actually that special - and besides, you'll never get to that level without being completely compassionate to everyone.

I see nothing of this compassion or equality in any Matrix Wanker type ideas (which is why the 'wanker' bit is applicable) - especially if you're talking about 'sheeple' or 'humatons'. It's all about being the most ass-kicking, leather wearing One. All very self-centred, I think.

Of course I haven't read the book, so I might be talking crap.
 
 
illmatic
13:39 / 24.03.06
I think you talk sense. Who really needs to read the Matrix Wanker unless you especially want a laugh? You only need skim it to see it's appalingness.

To kind of link your (excellent) post to what Legba was on about, I'd say that being in that state of mind is more likely to make me understanding and inspire efforts to communicate with someone with a different point of view from mine, instead getting angry and "defending territory".

so being 'TEH ONE' isn't actually that special

Indded. Buddha Nature as I understand it, states that this is what we all are anyway, we all rest on and have access to this basic awareness. Sounds like bollocks when written down, but is obvious when experienced.
 
 
BlueMeanie
13:50 / 24.03.06
I think you talk sense. Who really needs to read the Matrix Wanker unless you especially want a laugh? You only need skim it to see it's appalingness.

You only need to see the cover, I think. Or even hear the title.

To kind of link your (excellent) post to what Legba was on about, I'd say that being in that state of mind is more likely to make me understanding and inspire efforts to communicate with someone with a different point of view from mine, instead getting angry and "defending territory".

Thank you. What you've just said is similar to what Trungpa Rinpoche taught, as can be seen in his excellent book "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism". Non-awake beings keep themselves non-awake by trying to maintain and protect a self, which is like trying to herd cats, and therefore causing a lot of suffering from themselves. Learning to relax and let go makes the unconscious mechanisms become apparent, and then they dissolve by themselves - so you stop trying to defend the (not really existent) self. Then all this energy, no longer wasted on protecting the self, can be spent on helping other people.

Indded. Buddha Nature as I understand it, states that this is what we all are anyway, we all rest on and have access to this basic awareness. Sounds like bollocks when written down, but is obvious when experienced.

Yep - working with and recognising the 'basic nature' is the practice of Dzogchen and Mahamudra. Simple, but very, very special. It's the highest Buddhist tantra.
 
 
illmatic
13:52 / 24.03.06
Can't seem to stop adding to this thread - what I like about Gurdjieff and Ouspensky's approach is they emphasise how much one continually "falls asleep" or loses this self-remembrance, awareness and clarity. It stops one thinking "oh, I've made it". It's a state of mind that I get a lot, after years of practice, but it still disappears just as quick.

I offer this by way of explanation for those who know me, as to how I can be such an idiot while being simultaneously enlightened.
 
 
BlueMeanie
13:57 / 24.03.06
Can't seem to stop adding to this thread - what I like about Gurdjieff and Ouspensky's approach is they emphasise how much one continually "falls asleep" or loses this self-remembrance, awareness and clarity.

One thing that Ouspensky said that's very interesting is that if you ask someone if they're self aware, then at that moment, they are because they are self reflecting, and therefore might not believe you if you then say that they are un-aware for most of their lives. It's blindingly obvious if you learn to meditate, though.
 
 
Jack Fear
13:58 / 24.03.06
Blindingly obvious to you, maybe.
 
 
BlueMeanie
14:06 / 24.03.06
Blindingly obvious to you, maybe.

Everyone I know who's meditated at all has had a lot of trouble not wandering off mentally. I think it's a fairly universal experience. It's certainly mine.

I apologise if there was some kind of assumption you thought was negative in some fashion in that statement...
 
 
_Boboss
14:11 / 24.03.06
he probably didn't - most likely just the farmers flaring up again, eh jack? maybe a soft pillow or inflatable rubber ring would help?
 
 
Jack Fear
14:24 / 24.03.06
What's very interesting is that if you ask someone if they're consumed with an adolescent loathing for humanity, then at that moment they'd say they aren't, because they're entertaining ego-gratifying messiah fantasies of "rescuing" people from their unexamined lives, and therefore might not believe you if you then say that they are blinded by their own self-importance into mistaking patronizing contempt for true compassion. It's blindingly obvious if you grow the fuck up, though.
 
 
_Boboss
14:41 / 24.03.06
'OOooh, me grapes...'
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
14:56 / 24.03.06
I'd actually say I was with Jack on this one...how much of it is people being "non-awake" or whatever, versus simply being from a different background/subculture/world-view than you and therefore having different opinions and prioritizing different things...things you might even, personally, find meaningless, but they give significance too. People do think differently and value different things. It doesn't mean their human robots or whatever, sheeple, they're just people. Instead of trying to antagonize their world view by implying they're asleep, or trying to push them until their world view "wakes up," have you tried asking them about their world view?
 
 
BlueMeanie
15:11 / 24.03.06
People do think differently and value different things. It doesn't mean their human robots or whatever, sheeple, they're just people.

Too right. I think it'd be really horrid without these differences, personally. That'd just be stagnation.
 
 
illmatic
16:20 / 24.03.06
Jack - If that was addressed to Dr A above, a clarification - what s/he is saying is that in the specific sense we've been talking about, most people - no, scrap that, everyone - including ourselves is lacking in "presence" (trying to move away from loaded terms, like awareness/awakeness). I can say this with some certainity, as I struggle with it so much myself.

Noting the same isn't holding oneself up as special or holding down others in contempt.
 
 
Jack Fear
16:42 / 24.03.06
[I]n the specific sense we've been talking about, most people - no, scrap that, everyone - is lacking in "presence" (trying to move away from loaded terms, like awareness/awakeness).

Well, at least we're moving away from judgmental, anecdotal, purely subjective definitions, which are, by definition, bullshit...

I can say this with some certainity, as I struggle with it so much myself.

Oh dear.
 
 
Char Aina
16:44 / 24.03.06
it does read a little like you're jumpin down the wrong throat , jack.
i dont think your vitriol was as bang-on-target as it can be.
 
 
illmatic
16:49 / 24.03.06
Oh dear.

I do think it's a fact though - people (including me) aren't "present" in this specific sense.
 
 
Jack Fear
16:54 / 24.03.06
I do think it's a fact

Find the paradox here.
 
 
Char Aina
16:57 / 24.03.06
to be clear;
i mean your post lampooning dr.A.

you made a valid point as i understand it; that we might not all percive the same things meditating and, even if we did, we might interpret similar experiences differently. where i feel you went too far was the psot after that, the one where you as good as accused the doc of being consumed with an adolescent loathing for humanity and entertaining ego-gratifying messiah fantasies. i get that it was an illustration, i just dont think it was necessary or aimed well.

i'm sure i'm just blinded by [my] own self-importance in seeking to suggest your conduct may be less than admirable, but i would apreciate some direction as to why you disagree, if indeed you do.
 
 
illmatic
16:59 / 24.03.06
Care to prove otherwise?
 
 
illmatic
17:01 / 24.03.06
My post to Jack obviously - happy to try and provide more description of what I mean by "presence" if it will help.
 
 
BlueMeanie
17:11 / 24.03.06
you made a valid point as i understand it; that we might not all percive the same things meditating and, even if we did, we might interpret similar experiences differently.

I said that because it's my experience, the experience of everyone I've ever talked to about the subject, it's mentioned in every book on meditation and it's been talked about by every meditation teacher that I've ever heard. I think it's a universal experience, so that's why I wrote what I did - but it obviously might not be the experience of some, although I've never come across them. If someone doesn't have a mind that is prone to wandering about and not paying attention, then I think that's seriously fantastic. It's an immense achievement.

where i feel you went too far was the psot after that, the one where you as good as accused the doc of being consumed with an adolescent loathing for humanity and entertaining ego-gratifying messiah fantasies. i get that it was an illustration, i just dont think it was necessary or aimed well.

I found this odd and hurtful, to be frank. I don't think I have any loathing for humanity, and I don't have any "ego-gratifying messiah fantasies". I guess I must've come across like that, but I tried to make it clear that I have a real dislike of the superiority in the Matrix warrior book. It's dangerous. Maybe I said it better in the original thread.

Sorry if I came across as being an arse.
 
 
illmatic
17:16 / 24.03.06
I said that because it's my experience, the experience of everyone I've ever talked to about the subject, it's mentioned in every book on meditation and it's been talked about by every meditation teacher that I've ever heard.

... and it's the non-wandering mind - amongst a variety of other things that I'm talking about when I'm using the word "presence". Perhaps more than "judgmental, anecdotal, purely subjective definitions, which are, by definition, bullshit." Hmmm, Jack?
 
 
Jack Fear
18:02 / 24.03.06
Care to prove otherwise?

The burden of proof is not on me, son. That's not how it works.
 
  

Page: (1)23456

 
  
Add Your Reply