Idea Development page 8

Site Map

Contents:

Incoming Ideas

[mytheme decoding/example {guard, furies, pollution, honor}] Hubristic Intruder’s Pollution & Impurities Arousing the Furies to Eject the Violator & Trespasser Who Refuses Honor to the Gods

The more I listened to and carefully analyzed the words and tone of voice of someone presuming to talk about the Egodeath theory, the more my automated alarms rang louder,

“Intruder Alert! High Pollution Level Detected! Robbery in Progress!”

RED ALERT! RED ALERT! UNDER ATTACK!

That’s despite other signals, “Surface readings indicate there is no problem.”

Meanwhile my Egodeath Guard-gods, Cerberus, smell something bad, and is/are barking their heads off!

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=cerberus

MALICIOUS HOSTILE FOREIGN INTRUDER INTO THE TRANSCENDENT REALM! DEFEND HADES’ DOMAIN! COMMENCE EJECTION!

wik: “In Greek mythology, Cerberus , often referred to as the hound of Hades, is a multi-headed dog that guards the gates of the Underworld to prevent the dead from leaving.

“He was the offspring of the monsters Echidna and Typhon, and was usually described as having

“three heads, a serpent for a tail, and snakes protruding from multiple parts of his body.

“Cerberus is primarily known for his capture by Heracles, one of Heracles’ twelve labours.”

Echidna – “a monster, half-woman [employ {virgin maiden}] and half-snake, who lived alone in a cave. She was the mate of the fearsome monster Typhon [serpent monster] and was the mother of many of the most famous monsters of Greek myth”

[podcast] Ironically, Podcast Suggests Using Specific Quotes from People’s Theories

postcast irony: ep3: 1:42:00:

“in future episodes, we should get more specific in focus, dissecting individual theories more closely, and incorrping sound bites and quotes from peoples’ theories in order to deconstruct, to have a more substantive focus.”

One guest could’ve used quotes of the written Egodeath theory (and two bouncers to keep him in check) to prevent his strawmanning the f out of the Egodeath theory.

Obsessively learn passages by heart, of the Egodeath theory, and recite from memory to everyone whose path you cross.

The Egodeath theory attracts the mind into control-seizure & trembling prayer conceding trust in the hidden controller/creator to avoid destruction. If you’ve been flipped from possibilism to eternalism the god did it, lion-headed god outside the fate-ruled system.

dove — better a gentle harmless {dove} overpower your {maiden virgin} soul, than an {eagle-headed fire-breathing serpent monster}, which is equivalent to {dove}. Saved by the lamb (not by the powerful ram like Isaac.

Surface connotations: Do Not Harm the Boy. the egoic control system. Demonstrating its vulnerability potential that is the organ through which the spiritual rebirth transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism.

[podcast, pop sike cult] How Pop Sike Cult Supports Prohibition

~1:43:00 episode 3, Transcendent Knowledge podcast: 1:47:00, 1:53:00 I think later is where Cyb famously says

It’s at 1:54:00 —

another highly quotable passage from a Famous Mystic:

“that drugs are a problem, and we just need to; drugs are a problem, but the way we’ve been doing the drug war is failing, and so we need to change the way we’ve been doing the drug war, or rename it or rebrand it or something like that”

“… MAPS works within Prohibition” — in a YT vid, the CSP (Council for Spirl Practices) guy reports that EVERYONE IN ENTHEOGEN RESEARCH IS FURIOUS AT RICK DOBLIN FOR ALLYING WITH THE PROHIBITIONISTS (starting w/ MDMA).

Rick Doblin is PERSONA NON GRATA.

Shades of Irvin discovering to his horror that all famous-name entheogen writers are in cahoots with schemers. If you’ve heard of them , they’re bad. Any entheogen writer whose work is promoted by The System is contaminated and compromised. That’s why Irvin flipped his values and bailed on the whole field of entheogen scholarship, after he interviewed all of them. Pop Sike Cult is a $3 bill. Fake Grassroots. Fake “Drug Policy Reform”.

[podcast, meta-theory, entheogen scholarship] Amateur History Blogger Hatsis Needs to Stop Centering the Field Around the Pop False Center, and Guide People to Properly Frame and Center the Field

I’m talking specifically about recognizing the real central role of Psilocybe in Hellenistic Mystery-Religion initiation & mixed-wine banqueting & esoteric Christendom.

AGAINST THE LETCHER-HATSIS BOOK-WRITING STRATEGY:

DON’T FORM & SELECT THE STUPIDEST POP THEORY YOU CAN THINK OF/FABRICATE, FOR YOUR “CONSPIRACY” BOOK, AND THEN PROP UP YOUR VENEER OF CREDIBILITY BY DEBUNKING THE SH*T THEORY THAT YOU SELECTED *BECAUSE* IT WAS THE WORST, WEAKEST THEORY YOU COULD FIND/FABRICATE.

Is that all that you’re able to do, debunk the very weakest, most malformed theory that you could dredge-up?

MAKE YOURSELF USEFUL!

PUT YOUR HISTORY EXPERTISE TO *GOOD* USE: REVEAL PSILOCYBE IN HELLENISTIC CHRISTIAN HISTORY.

Transcendent Knowledge podcast episode 3, 1:28:00

You do realize, Irvin’s left the field and flipped his values? So why center your critique around Irvin? and Allegro?

STOP CENTERING THE FIELD OF WESTERN MUSHROOM ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP AROUND AMANITA-IRVIN-ALLEGRO-WASSON!!

Strategy to Re-center the Field of Western Entheogen Scholarship

1. Point out the wrongness of making Amanita-Allegro-Irvin-Wasson the defining-center of the field; BUT YOU’RE NOT DONE YET!

2. Lead people to the correct center, which is Psilocybe Mystery-Religion initiation mixed-wine banqueting Christendom/Hellenistic integrated.

Transcendent Knowledge Podcast, Episode 3
1:34:00 – yet MORE CRITIQUE OF HATSIS
My page about all episodes:
Episode 3, May 8, 2016 – Reasons for the podcast
YouTube link to episode 3 at 1:34:00 “we can’t help but make fun of Hatsis’ personal style”:
94*60 = 5640
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykgeO6CD6RM&t=5640s

My commentary on Episode 3: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/25/commentary-on-transcendent-knowledge-podcast-episode-3/

Re-outlining a Page, Word, Origin of Egodeath.com, Added First 3 years of Postings to Egodeath.com

re-outlining this page: in WordPress, re-outlining a page is extremely hard. In Word, it’s extremely easy, which is why 1989-1996, I used one gigantic Word file, which became my egodeath.com website. Then I added-in all the the Egodeath Yahoo Group postings threaded, June 10 2001 to Valentines 2004. So any mythemes I decoded — or i wish, a Formal Accoun Announcement of THE EGODEATH THEORY OF MYTHEME DECODING –, before Valentine 2004, are at Egodeath.com website. What motivated me at that point in time, Valentine 2004, to copy all the Egodeath Yahoo Group postsings to Egodeath.com? (I f’d up, failed to put posting-dates at the website.) I knew that in Valentines 2004, that body of postings was top-quality, better than any other writing, contained my entire theory of mytheme decoding , which I then summarized all those postsings in the form of the main, 2006 article.

[podcast] Memorizing Classic Podcast Passages Said by the Great Mystics, in Order to Make a Show of Parrotting them at People

As I re-listen to podcasts, there are passages that stand out as quotable and classic.

Done: Episode 3, 57:00 todo: polish this transcription & add to Episode 3 Commentary page:

[podcast] Ruck’s Self-Contradiction: Entheogens Were Ubiquitous and Secret

Max: “But the more that Ruck pushes in that direction of broadening the scope of where you can identify entheogens, the more that his overall picture starts to look like a blatant self-contradiction, because what he’s saying is, absolutely everybody everywhere knew about entheogens and was tripping, but it was all kept- it was all a secret, and nobody really knew about it — but you know, which one of those is true?”

[university, degrees] Found Myself Forced to Assign the Higher Degrees

My granting bachelors’ degrees had come to be problematic, because it had come to be, ironically, an insult, to merely claim that Cyberdisciple and Max Freakout were “Bachelor degree”-level.

So I had inadvertently put myself in a position where I’d later be forced to also assign them, as if correctively, additional, higher degrees.

This is one reason why, even if in some sense “I *am* the University”, I can’t be in the business of assessing candidates to assign degrees; degree assignment is complex.

[books] Moved Sections About Books to a New, Misleadingly Presented Page, Which Doesn’t Cohere and Which Stands as an Example of an Ill-Advised, Socially Inept Approach that’s Not Likely to Succeed

I prematurely moved many book-related sections from the present page to my new, sketchy, and unlikely to succeed WordPress page, Mystics’ Writings Unhelpful.

That new, beginning page is very rough and socially unpolished, and makes grandiose statements that are high-risk and ill-advised.

My new WordPress page quotes mystics at great length from my reverently memorizing their writings by heart, while failing to say anything helpful, pertinent, and specific about why mystics’ writings are unhelpful.

Even more un-polished, naively, and ill-advisedly, I added a new section to the following page: Running Jokes at Egodeath Site:
The Absolute High Dose, to – by Sheer Brute Force of Extreme Overdose – Bust into the Elite Club of Famous Mystics, Who Wrote that “Blah Blah…

[to-do mgmt] Hiatus Now, Means Pick Only 2 To-do Items and Delete All the Rest

Now I have to go on hiatus, so I have to pick like 2 to-do items, and demote all the others to P5 (death-sentence for to-do items).

To Do Page Urgently Needed, Feels Like Working on this Site Isn’t Working, Isn’t Sustainable, To-do-Ideas Explosion

Standard strategy for this situation: use the To-do page to the max, aggressively demote priorities, assign priority to each item, then focus on letting the Pri0 items drive updates to the site.

I’m going to need 15 grad student slaves at this rate. Totally not sustainable.

I’m falling behind what fixes are needed, the more I work on this site. I remember how in Nov 2007, when I went on hiatus from public work until October 2011, … for one thing,

I remember my fear that Yahoo would delete the the Egodeath Yahoo Group due to lack of activity.

I was making full-speed-ahead progress on the Egodeath theory throughout 2007, but needed to stop, and it felt like there was no rational justification for stopping, but I had to.

In 2007, I was “living off credit cards”, or “borrowing” or “stealing time from the rest of my life”.

To make that kind of progress through 2007, required putting off stuff; it was borrowed time.

To accomplish the HUGE amount that I accomplished by November 2007, involved horrific levels of stealing from the rest of life.

so, Dec 2007-Sep 2011 I had to do all the other stuff that I should have been doing instead of my Great Achievements thorugh 2002-2007.

It felt like “there is no way to rationally justify this SACRIFICE, of stopping work on the Egodeath theory, to switch gears to infinitely less important stuff.”

[entheogen scholarship] Letcher-Hatsis Thinks Rebutting this New-Myth Book Is the Same Thing as Correcting Entheogen Scholarship

Blurb

“After reading you’ll know the truth about:

  • How reindeer fly through the sky
  • What made pine trees a quintessential part of holiday preparation
  • Why elves got roped into the scheme.

“In a time when we’re disconnected from old traditions, reawaken your family’s Christmas customs with this heartwarming story.

“hand-illustrated story of a 10-year old girl discovering the magical history of Santa Claus.”

[pop sike cult] Reviews from the Pop Sike Paradigm

“Our family loved this fascinating look into the history of some of the most beloved Christmas traditions.” -Katie Wells, Founder of WellnessMama.com

“The true story behind the legend of Santa Claus will bring a whole new dimension of jolly cheer to your celebration of Christmas.” -Aubrey Marcus, New York Times bestselling author

“Anyone seeking knowledge and greater understanding of self will find this book inspirational.” -Reggie Watts, Singer, Musician, Actor and Comedian

“This book connects the dots of the sacred past to our present understanding, and hopefully to our sacred and wise future.” -Ry X, Grammy Nominated Musician

“Reading this feels like experiencing the magic of Christmas all over again. Bring on the holidays; Santa was a mushroom shaman.” -Justin Boreta, Founding Member of The Glitch Mob”

[myth wrecking vs. mytheme decoding] Bah! Humbug.

My Ahistoricity Work Is Reluctant, not Gleeful Myth-Wrecking

tonotdo: link to Killjoy Hatsis‘ vid proving the bleak & drab history of the fake, manufactured, recently invented pseudo-tradition of so-called “Christmas”.

[meta-theory, entheogen scholarship] There Are Three Contending Positions on Mushrooms in Christian History, Not Just Two

Step 1: Debunk pop pseudo-history of mushrooms in Christendom history. THEN CONTINUE TO NEXT STEP.

Step 2: Specify the true role of mushrooms in Western religious history. “None” is not true. The choice is not between “bunk description of role of mushrooms”, vs. “No Role of mushrooms”; the choice is between “bunk” vs. “actual”.

There are not 2 contending options, but 3:

Pop Sike: “Santa = Amanita = Eucharist = Mystery Religion Sacred Meal = Mixed-Wine Banqueting”.

Letcher-Hatsis: “No mushrooms in Christian history.” His position re: mushrooms in Hellenistic history = Undefined.

Hoffman-Brown: Mushroom Shapes in Christian Art prove Psilocybe thorughout Christian history. Hoffman – “along with Psilocybe in Hellenistic Mystery Religions’ Sacred Meals & Mixed-Wine Banqueting”.

What is absolutely unacceptable is for Letcher-Hatsis to STRAWMAN to CONFLATE the Hoffman-Brown position with the Pop Sike so-called “Wasson-Allegro theory” or whatever the confused garbled view is.

THE HOFFMAN-BROWN POSITION IS NOT THE POP SIKE (SO-CALLED, ILL-DEFINED, POORLY SPECIFIED, POORLY LABELLED “ALLEGRO THEORY” OR “HOLY MUSHROOM”) POSITION.

[meta-theory, entheogen scholarship] Bad Titles of Positions and Books; How to Properly Label Fields of Research

Those careless, sloppy, narrow-perspective position-labels reek of an unscientific, improper, unprofessional approach. They are labels made by illiterate, under-read people. The writers / historians need a more adequate scope of reading in the fielld, b4 making-up position-names. These are terrible position names, that reveal that the person who coined them is grossly under-read in the field, and brings a highlight lopsided, unbalanced view, treating only 1/4 of the considerations. they are extrmely amatuer position-lablees, like Cyberdisciple would perceive if Muraresku were to make-up position-names that had BAKED INTO THEM, the very wrong notion / implication, that the only Mystery Religion was Eleusis.

Bad Book Title:

Understanding Mystery Religion: All About Eleusis

Bad Book Title with wrongness & ignorance obviously baked-in:

Are Psychedelics as Authentic as Traditional Meditation & Contemplation?

bad position-name, revealing the author who coined it is very under-read:

The Allegro Theory (why not just yell “I NEVER HEARD OF ROBERT GRAVES”)
The Holy Mushroom Theory (you might as well scream “I’VE ONLY READ ONE BOOK, BY ONE AUTHOR, 11 YEARS AGO, WHO CHANGED HIS VIEWS AND LEFT THE FIELD”)

The position-name “Holy Mushroom” is arbitrary, unjustified; mis-labelling the field as “the Allegro theory” or “the Holy Mushroom theory” distorts the field it presumes to clarify.

I do a lot of work on theory-naming, and lexicon-establishing.

These are terrible labels for positions! These position-labels grate on me! Everything’s wrong w them!

Those position-labels *stink*, they reek of STRAWMANNING THE FIELD, MISREPRESENTING THE FIELD AS the field OUGHT TO BE APPROACHED.

As a scientist, I agree with Hatsis, debunking pop pseudo-history.

As a mythology decoder, I side with pop pseudo-history, just as I support Christian exoteric literalists: I believe in Mr. Historical Jesus and I believe in Santa Claus.

Scrooge Grinch Hatsis should keep his hands off Santa.

Do entheogen scholarship, but must you destroy mythology in the process of explaining mythology?

the Mystic Truth is, Mystery Religions’ Sacred Meals = Amanita = Secret Santa Shaman Cult.

[meta-theory] Proof that God Exists: I Can Say “Peer Review” with a Straight Face

The proof is that I can talk about “peer review” of my Proof article, without laughing that the idea is a massive contradiction when it comes to Revolutionary Science, at the extreme, where there literally is no “Old Theory” in any meaningful sense re: scope or purpose, and there are no “Peer Group Cohorts in the Field”, bc the field doesnt exist yet dumasss r u dense??

Do you not understand the concept, “NEW FIELD“? How the hell do u talk in terms of “peer review”, WHAT “PEERS”, GIVEN THAT ITS A NEW FIELD – R U DUMB?

The Egodeath theory is THE definitive example of there being no “peers” b/c the New Theory has way broader scope of explanatory power, unprecedented scale of a New Theory.

In this extreme case, you have *no* “Old Theory” in any sense whatsoever; in contrast with the New Theory which is the broadest, best, completely successful with far more explanatory power than anything; there’ s… it’s incomparable.

Go look for “the Old Theory”, all you can find is heap of scraps, attitudes, assumptions, scattered dissipated across topics/fields. In this extreme case, the New Theory instantly completely wins by default, that there exists… the New Theory is 100% successful, and there exists no “Old Theory” to contest against.

In this extreme scenario, KUHN’S MODEL OF THEORY-REPLACEMENT OF AN OLD THEORY BY A NEW THEORY DOESN’T APPLY, BECAUSE THERE *IS* NO “OLD THEORY” TO COMPARE TO THE “NEW THEORY”.

AND THERE ARE NO “PEERS” TO DO “PEER REVIEW”, BECAUSE IT’S A COMPLETELY NEW THEORY IN A COMPLETELY NEW FIELD, EG LOOSE COGNITIVE SCIENCE + MYTHEME DECODING.

WHAT ARE you going to do, assign me Ruck as a “peer” to review the entheogen scholarship / entheogen history portion of the Egodeath theory, without Ruck and his co-authors even having any conception or awareness of the very existence of the Egodeath theory?

The Strawman Fabrication Industry

Are you going to assign some Expert Scholar of Mystic Sh*t to critique the Egodeath theory – when he hasn’t even read a single word of the Egodeath theory, and is intent on casting it into his manufactured garbage can of strawmanning, called “unfolding in time”, just as Hatsis cast Brown into the garbage-can of Hatsis’ own fabrication, “followers of the Allegro theory”?

Peers? What “Peers”, wtf nonsense are you talking about, are you not clear on the concept, of “New Field”? Every field has to be new at some point. Science & Engineering starts new fields all the time.

The whole concept of “peer review” reeks of mere “Normal Science” (said here with the same disdain as saying “people who think in terms of ‘unfolding in time’, as against us Special Elite Professional Certified & Credentialed Famous Mystics(TM)“).

I don’t do mere “Normal Science”. That’s for the little people; unpaid grad-student slaves.

I mustn’t sully my hands and be tainted with mere Normal Science; *I* strictly do Revolutionary Science.

[System of Theories] Podcasts Influencing Me to Preserve My Original Topics of Concern

Historical-Usual-Familiar Happenstance 8 topics

I assessed that in my system of 8 topics, 3 of them are clearly weak points:

no-free-will – Yesterday and day b4, I reasoned:

just b/c no-free-will was a major recurrent concern and reading topic of mine from November 1987 in breaking-through Watts Way of Zen to correct and make it articiulate, through 1999 What Love Is This book by Dave Hunt, and John MacArthur — ie, CALVINISM/REFORMED THEOLOGY, and thorugh 2006 — “determinism” — doesn’t mean I should annouince and promote it in 2021 as a signif topic. I’ts genero as hell. Similarly, no one cares about frivloous, cheapening Rock Lyrics theory. Similarly no one cares about irrelevant Ahistoricity; I sure don’t care about ahistoricity; it’s rock-bottom outer periphery and purely entirely negaative, not any positive contribution to the Egodeath theory.

  • no-free-will – No One cares, and this angle is least distinctive of the Egodeath theory.
  • Rock lyrics – No One cares, and this angle is least distinctive of the Egodeath theory.
  • Ahistoricity – No One cares, and this angle is least distinctive of the Egodeath theory.

Where does my terse top-level outline reside? In my IP page.
My IP page is in category “the Egodeath theory” (of Site Map).

[System of Theories] Terse Top-Level Outline of 1+2+8 Theories

  • the Egodeath theory
    • the Cybernetic theory
      • loose cognition
      • block universe
      • no-free-will
      • control cancellation
    • the Mytheme theory
      • Rock lyrics
      • ahistoricity
      • entheogen history
      • mytheme decoding

[Egodeath Yahoo Group] New Site: egodeathyahoogrouppostings

https://egodeathyahoogrouppostings.wordpress.com/2021/01/06/digest-1/#message28

*issue*: these Digests EXPOSE ADDRESSES IN SOME CASES. Have one of my grad-student slaves scrub a copy of the 183 .html Digest files to globally remove @foo, but can skip / keep the defunct utility @yahoogroups addresses. nuke the non-rendered ones as well. The goal is to delete domain name of personal email addresses of other people.

[no-free-will] Book: Bobzien – Stoic Fatedness

https://egodeathyahoogrouppostings.wordpress.com/2021/01/06/digest-1/#message28 —

“This is an awe-inspiring work… It is extraordinarily ambitious. It aims to
recover and understand, so far as the sources allow, the entire early Stoic
theory of fate, causal determinism, and responsibility. It achieves this
ambition while at the same time showing how immensely more difficult the task is than anyone had appreciated before….It will most certainly be the first
work that everybody interested has to get to grips with. They will have to
start here [after the Egodeath theory -mh] both because the book is a model of scholarly method and because it [the Egodeath theory? oh, no, just a stupid book on Stoic no-free-will self-contradictory waffling, inferior to MY self-contradictory Incompatibilist-Compatibilism theory of waffling -mh] is an outstanding example of lucid philosophical thinking in an area where clear thought is extremely difficult.” — Miles Burnyeat, All Souls College, Oxford”

[podcast] Approach for Quick Addition of Podcast Comments

Also consider: WordPress “Add Comment” format. The To-Do page is working, does seem to be right approach: Create various special-single-function WordPress pages (eg: Log of updates to old pages; to-do page; year lookup page for egodeath theory history; History long-form page; hourly log of accomplishments).

My Podcast Commentary approach is bad, unweildy, need lightweight.

  • Formal pages are too time-consuming to create.
  • finding my orig posts of commentaries is hard to complete, extremely high degree of distractability. Complex: broke off sep Commentary thread at some point. It’ s a PROJECT to “merely” locate my orig posting in the Digest HTML files and copy that posting to WordPress.
  • Create a streamlined approach to writing comments. eg in my single main Podcast page, add inline comments there. That should work very well. I wish I could conquer this task of copying commentary posts to WordPress, but that task will never complete, if i try to do ideal webpage for each episode’s comments. Even “merely copy the commentary post to the section of my single TK Podcasts page” is uncompletable, if I get pulled into interesting diversions , asides.

[mytheme decoding] Too Busy Harvesting Jackpots to Ever Get Around to Mentioning a Decoding I Accomplished 5 Years Ago — How Does that Work?

I Think of an Idea 18 Times over 3 Years Before I Finally Mention and Announce that Idea, WTF Is Up w/ That??
{*FIRE*-BREATHING gate-guarding DRAGON}

Decoded Fleetingly in Back of Mind, but Never Announced

[mytheme decoding] Mytheme Cluster: {fire-breathing dragon}, {guard gate passageway}, {angel with flaming sword}; {dragon teeth = blade}

(also [1:06 p.m. January 6, 2021] – dragons’ teeth sown by Perseus into the ground becoming fighting warriors army – TEETH = BLADES; DRAGON TOOTH = BLADE = FIRE-BREATHING). fact-check: aren’t these the teeth of Media’s Drakons? Perseus sow teeth army rock. How to fact check, some say “tooth”, some “teeth”.

Fact-Check: Perseus Sowed the Blade-Teeth of Which Drakon? Is Drakon Fire-Breathing? Perseus Repeats Actions of Earlier Cadmus?

Crap, I can’t research this fact now. 3 Pri0 tasks on the stack rn.

Cetus = ketos = short sea-serpent beast w/ front paw-fins

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=sea+monster+Cetus

trustworthy site, theoi.com,
https://www.theoi.com/Gigante/Spartoi.html
“THE SPARTOI (Sparti) were a tribe of warlike, earth-born men which sprang fully grown and armed for battle from the sown teeth of a Drakon (Dragon) sacred to the war-god Ares. The first of the Spartoi were sown by the hero Kadmos (Cadmus) from the teeth of the Drakon of the Ismenian Spring of Thebes. As they were sprouting from the earth, he cast a stone amongst them and they fell to fighting.”

wik preview “In Greek mythology, Perseus (/ ˈ p ɜːr s i ə s,-sj uː s /; Greek: Περσεύς) is the legendary founder of Mycenae and of the Perseid dynasty.He was, alongside Cadmus and Bellerophon, the greatest Greek hero and slayer of monsters before the days of Heracles. He beheaded the Gorgon Medusa for Polydectes and saved Andromeda from the sea monster Cetus [=ketos; short sea-serpent beast w/ front legs/fins].He was the son of Zeus and the …”

The Top 5 Dragon Slayers from Greek Mythology | Classical …
https://classicalwisdom.com/mythology/heroes/top-5…
“Aug 22, 2014 · He did as advised and stole the tooth from the sleeping monster. Then, like Cadmus, he sowed the dragon tooth into the field, which grew into an army… and, again like Cadmus, he threw a rock into the middle of the crowd. Not knowing where the blow had come from, the army once more turned on each other and self-destructed.”

{angel of death blocking the path / gate, with a sword of fire, flaming sword}

{blade = fire = winnowing-basket = salamander roasting} = remove the volatile portion, possibilism-thinking, leaving “that which endures fire after transmuation”, ie eternalism-thinking (+ qualified possibilism-thinking)

[OD gateway, battle of wits] Busting Through the Death-Guarded Gateway by Sheer Brute-Force of the Absolute High-Dose Overdose

[battle of wits] Truly You Have a Dizzying Intellect

To get into the exclusive elite club of The Mystics, requires passing through the narrow gateway that’s guarded by a dragon-serpent-angel, wielding fire-blades; that gateway being, “specifically”, taking the absolute high dose. <– too crude and vague of a concept.

The key is INTELLIGENCE & careful subtlety, *not* just sheer, stupid, brute-force dosage amount!

“… and you’re no match for my brains.”

“You’re that smart?”

“Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates?”

“Yes.”

“Morons.”

“Really? In that case, I challenge you to a battle of wits.”

“For the princess? To the death? I accept!”

“Good. Then pour the wine.”

…

“Truly you have a dizzying intellect”.

Movie: Princess Bride, “battle of the wits” scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZSx3zNZOaU&t=44s (after dismiss ads)

[mytheme decoding] Caution About Ever Saying “I Am Done Decoding that Mytheme”

THE PROBLEM WITH EVER DECLARING “I FULLY MAPPED THAT MYTHEME”:

WHAT IF, IN A VISIONARY STATE OF ECSTASY, the mind SEEs SIGNIFICANT NEW ANGLES AS the mind TURNs THE GEM, TO SEE IT AS EVERY ANGLE, TO PRESUMABLY “FULLY” (<– A false BOAST?) MAP THE GEM OF THE THE PERSONAL CONTROL SYSTEM.

[mythemes, why Transcendent Knowledge is highest value] Seeing Caduceus = the Timeless Classic Reference Point

Caduceus Means Reference Point – Interpenetrating Coupled Partner Ruler Serpents Frozen Worldlines of the the personal control system , we are controlled by two distinct things/ways: cross

CADUCEUS IS A BEACON POINT OF REFERENCE FOR HIGH THINKING EXPLORATION NAVIGATION.

CHECK FOR POSTS NOV ~29 2013, add to History Dates page: Figured out Caduceus (2011-2013 range).

Now that I have a more nuanced model of what’s involved in “decoding a mytheme”, and how that plays out over time, as you turn the gem angles and shine light on it at angles, my history of decoding this cluster of mythemes could be a complicated story like:
2011 63%
2013 85%
2020 95%
2021 98%

[mytheme decoding] My Engineered Invention: the Diamond Hammer of Interpretation 🔨💎🔥🔦📖

added to to-do page:

write-up the odd meaning of my diamond hammer of interpretation idea incl shining light at different angles (a useful new twist today [January 6, 2021])

[mytheme decoding] Decoded: {Hephaestos’ magic invisible net-trap caught Love & War coupled; mocking laughter by the gods}

[11:17 a.m. January 6, 2021]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephaestus
“Though married to Hephaestus, Aphrodite had an affair with Ares, the god of war.

“Hephaestus discovered Aphrodite’s affair through Helios, the all-seeing Sun, [sun light made perceptible in asc] and planned a trap during one of their trysts.

“While Aphrodite and Ares lay together in bed, Hephaestus ensnared them in an unbreakable chain-link net so small as to be invisible and dragged them to Mount Olympus to shame them in front of [ie perceived/seen by god-mode mind w/ Cautopates’ illuminating of the control-system snake(s) underneath [show tauroctony-related image of Cautopates pointing the 2-overlapped-snakes caduceus at the cista mystica snake-basket) + Cautes’ illuminating of the higher controller creator outside the entire personal control system, above] the other gods for retribution.”

“The gods laughed at the sight of these naked lovers, and Poseidon persuaded Hephaestus to free them in return for a guarantee that Ares would pay the adulterer’s fine. Hephaestus states in The Odyssey that he would return Aphrodite to her father and demand back his bride price.

“The Thebans told that the union of Ares and Aphrodite produced Harmonia. However, of the union of Hephaestus with Aphrodite, there was no issue unless Virgil was serious when he said that Eros was their child.[38] Later authors explain this statement by saying that Eros was sired by Ares [wrestle w/ angel all night = test and probe the personal control system; self-threatening; self-challenging to disprove the monolithic model of self-in-world – model #1 – king steering in tree), get a blessing / transmuation/ new self-concept; new model of time and control] but passed off to Hephaestus as his own son.

“Hephaestus was somehow connected with the archaic, pre-Greek Phrygian and Thracian mystery cult of the Kabeiroi, who were also called the Hephaistoi, “the Hephaestus-men“, in Lemnos. One of the three Lemnian tribes also called themselves Hephaestion and claimed direct descent from the god.”

[mytheme decoding] Torchbearers Making Perceptible What Is Above and the Below, Regarding the Personal Control System

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cautes_and_Cautopates —
Lame, reductionist, literalist, OSC-aimed mis-interpretation:
“In Mithraic images, Mithras either represents the sun, or is a close friend of the sun god Helios or Sol Invictus (Latin: the invincible sun [seeing, making perceptible, source of being able to see/perceive]) with whom Mithras dines. 🍄

“So attendants Cautes and Cautopates are supposed to represent the stations of sunrise and sunset respectively, or perhaps the spring and autumn equinoxes, or equivalently the ascending (spring) and descending (autumnal) nodes of the Sun’s apparent path on the celestial sphere [heimarmene-controlled block universe]. If eclipses of the sun and moon formed part of Mithraic symbolism, they could also represent the ascending and descending nodes where the Moon crosses the ecliptic.”

[even if they do so represent those things, EMPLOYING PLANETS TO SERVE AS ANALOGIES, THE ULTIMATE REFERENT IS THE PERSONAL CONTROL SYSTEM AS PERCEIVED (made perceptible, become perceptible) IN the FRENZY MANIA ECSTATIC STATE (loose cognition) , NOT STUPID PLANETS!]

Sun = illum’n , seeing, perceiving

Cautes = seeing/perceiving upward, the higher controller, to which both Sol and Luna are subject

Cautopates = seeing/perceiving downward underneath, the coupled male ruler (the control-thought inserter/injector ) + female ruler /controller (the control-thought receiver/receptacle).

[personal control system] Two Connected Ways in Which There Is Non-Control

  • worldline {snake}
  • control-thought inserter at any point along worldline, {phallus revealed in virgin maiden, they saw that snake, went insane, } w/ the control-thought receiver at any point along the worldline , seeing this intellectual and experiential potential point of view.
  • that is the Point of Reference, for high experiencing – the caduceus expresses ‘HIGH classic POINT OF REFERENCE FOR BEING HIGH WHEN awareness is HIGH the mind FIGUREs out, the mind finds out THIS: there are TWO coupled components, plus levels of control: the FEMALE PART OF THE PERSONAL CONTROL SYSTEM IS THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER, the MALE PART OF THE PERSONAL CONTROL SYSTEM IS THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER/INJECTOR. both are caught trapped controlled by snake-shaped worldlines in block universe controlled by line-headed creator outside heimarmene. WHY IS Transcendent Knowledge OF VALUE? B/C THERE IS A TIMELESS CLASSIC CONVERSATION, A REFERENCE POINT, A BEACON, THE CADUCEUS, WHAT YOU SEE WHEN HIGH AWARENESS LOOSENED PERCEPTION.
  • Transcendent Knowledge is valuable b/c you are blind and ignorant if you haven’t perceived how the personal control system system works in THE ALTERED STATE (LOOSE COGNITIVE BINDING).
  • THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER/INJECTOR
  • THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER/RECEPTACLE
  • ALONG HIS WORLDLINE
  • ALONG HER WORLDLINE, THE FORMER VIRGIN MAIDEN, MORTAL WHO WAS ABDUCTED, WRESTLED, WAS OVERPOWERED BY THE GOD, DIED, GAVE BIRTH TO THE GOD-BOY. IT’S WHAT YOU SEE
  • IN ELEVATED EYE PERSPECTIVE: YOU
    • SEE
      • THE WORLDLINES OF
        • THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER &
        • THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER

chick queen snake (at any point in time & in the cross-time worldline frozen in rock)
dude king snake (at any point in time & in the cross-time worldline frozen in rock)
The two are seen by the gods-thinking perspective, caught coupled together in Hephaestos’ magic net-trap frozen helpelssly in rock.

JUST B/C FEMALE HELPLESS THOUGHT RECEIVER SEES THAT SEE IS CONTROLLED BY THE MALE … THOUGHT INJECTOR, DOES *NOT* MEAN THAT THE MALE THOUGHT INJECTOR HAS FREEWILL POWER.

AT THE SAME TIME AS SHE (LUNA, THE THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER/RECEPTACLE) SEES THAT SHE IS UNDER HIS CONTROL (HIS = THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER/INJECTOR) , SHE (OR RATHER, AWARENESS, CAUTES + CAUTOPATES) ALSO SEES THAT *HE* too IS HELPLESS: that he is UNDER CONTROL BY THE ROCK, WHICH FORCES HIM TO INSERT CONTROL-THOUGHTS INTO HER. THE DUDE AND THE CHICK ARE BOTH HELPLESS COUPLED CENTERS OF CONTROL, AT ANY POINT IN TIME, AND, SPREAD ACORSS TIME IN .. EACH OF THEM IMPRISONED IN THEIR SNAKE-SHAPED WORLDLINE ACROSS TIME.

TWO SNAKES CROSSING = M/F COUPLING

IN THE EARLY version / form of Hermes’ caduceus, O with U on top means “coupling” where they cross at top of O, bottom of U.

{CROSSING} MEANS COUPLED, THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER INSERTING INTO RECEIVER, BOTH ALONG THEIR COUPLED WORLDLINES, OF THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER AND THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER.

THIS IS SEEN BY AWARENESS. COUPLED WORLDLINES INCLUDSES ESPECIALLY COUPLING IN THE SENSE OF, AT EACH INDIVIDUAL MOEMNET THE INSERTER INTO THE RECEIVER AT THTA MOEMENT, {PALLUS}, .

THE WORLDLINE OF THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER

switch from an animal-like, monolithic muddled model (the bull in the tauroctony) – possibilism-thinking – TO A BROKEN-OUT MODEL. The two models of self-in-world: from monolithic dumb model of “autonomous control agent king steering in tree” (the simple “person in tree” image in the tauroctony), to … this is the stem of the bestiary salamander mushroom tree – to a two-distinct parts model (this is the split-into-two stem of the
mushroom tree). A pair of coupled worldlines: the worldline of the now-perceived-distinctly, control-thought receiver & the control-thought inserter.

The basic shape of personal control, when seen clearly, is two coupled worllines: male the control-thought inserter, and female the control-thought receiver, BOTH OF WHICH ARE FROZEN-in-rock, snake-shaped worldlines.

To turn to look right/back/up, IS to insert blade into the vulnerability of the powerful bull’s shoulder. Yes, Sol is the the control-thought inserter so Luna is helpless as the control-thought receiver, BUT, there’s also non-control because both Sol and Luna are frozen into snake-shaped worldlines frozen in rock. The lion-headed god (control-agent, higher source of control) lies outside the rock, as creator/controller of the block universe, and the block universe is controlled by …. from monolithic control model (king steering in tree), to a HIERARCHICAL MULTIPART control model, DPI DEPICTED BY CADUCEUS TIMELESS CLASSIC POINT OF ERFERENCE. WHAT DOES THE MIND SEE IN THE CLASSIC STATE OF ECSTASY/ LOOSE COG/ MANIA/ FRENZY THAT MAKES INSANCE AND INSANE AND TRANSMUTATES?

THE MIND SEES INSTEAD OF A MONOLITHIC KING STEERING IN A TREE, (CONTROL… SELF-IN-WORLD MODEL 1) TO THE COUPLED INTERTWINED INTERPENETRATING M/F THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER & THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER …. HIERARCHICAL CONTROL MODEL (SELF-IN-WORLD MODEL 2) INSTEAD: [11:03 a.m. January 6, 2021]

  1. THE LION-HEADED CREATOR/CONTROLLER (OUTSIDE OF THE HEIMARMENE-ORB OF THE FIXED STARS)
  2. THE BLOCK-UNIVERSE ROCK (= THE HEIMARMENE-CONTROLLED ORB OF THE FIXED STARS)
  3. THE COUPLED SNAKE-SHAPED WORLDLINES OF THE (NOW SEEN AS DISTINCT SEPARATE FUNCTIONS/CENTERS OF CONTROL) THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER & THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER
  4. AT ANY TIME-SLICE, THE MALE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER
  5. AT ANY TIME-SLICE, THE FEMALE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER

FROM MONOLITHCI EGO MODEL TO 2-PART FEMALE CONTROLLED BY THE MALE CONTROLLED BY THE ROCK WORLDLINE SNAKES, AWAKEN TO FIND THE INSERTOR IN YOU bBUT AT THE SAME TIME YOU REALIZE THERE’S AN INSERTER AND A HELPLESS RECEIVER, YOU ALSO RELIAZE TTHEY ARE BOTH FROZEN IN SROCK. THERE IS A INSERTER AND , AND THE INSERTOR AND RECEIVER AT EACH POINT IN TIME COUPLED, ARE FROZEN IN ROCK. TWO SNAKE-SHAPE

  • SEE THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER & THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER (AT ANY GIVEN TIME-SLICE)
  • SEE THAT THE THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER AND THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER ARE FROZEN IN SNAKE-SHAPED WORLDLINES

THE COUPLING OF THE WORLDLINES IMPLIES ALSO THE PER-MOMENT, TIME-SLICE-SCOPED, INSERTER AND RECEIVER COUPLED IN THAT TIME-SLICE, IN EACH , DISTINCTLY IN EACH TIME-SLICE OF THE INSERTER AND RECEIVER COUPLED, RIVER FLOWING, MYSTIC RIVER FROM THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER TO DESTINATION NYMPH MAIDENS RECEIVING THE FLOW OF CONTROL THOUGHTS FROM THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER TO THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER. A RIVER, FOUNTAIN BETTER.

[pop theory ‘big ego’] The “High Dose / High Ego” Approach – Sounds Like a Plan

[pop theory ‘big ego’] Get Out Your Egoometer to Measure {the person’s actual worth} against {the person’s assessment of their worth}.

Is that person’s ego, in fact, too big? Scientifically speaking?

The size of your ego is incorrect.

On what basis can you assert that that person’s ego is, in fact, too big. Prove it.

Your ego is too big.

Prove that their ego is, in fact, too big; where is the scientific evidence that their ego is, in fact, too big.

I am disparaging you for having too large of a size of ego.

The size of your ego should be smaller than it is.

My egoometer says so. Its all vry scientific.

Your assessment of your worth might be slightly in question.

🤔 🤨

[podcast, ‘classic’] Amazingly Definitively Excellent Podcast Episodes – Podcasts of the Gods

Episodes 1, 2, 3, & 7 fit together.

Perfect, ideal, 10/10 (with tough standards), the Gold Standard Reference. I listened to Transcendent Knowledge Podcast Episode 1, 2, 3, & 7 again. Unrelenting top quality from start to finish. Excellent in all ways.

The kind of quality where other people say “No Fair, how in the hell are we supposed to match that quality? the Rock Gods; and we, mere mortals.”

I don’t know about the end, saying that the episode wasn’t an intro to the Egodeath theory; I agree with a variant of the final take, that the episode is a realistic real-life intro.

A timeless, definitively Classic episode, a historical record of the era.

The caduceus expresses the classic timeless concept of the worldlines of the the control-thought receiver & the control-thought inserter. frozen in rock per eternalism. against possibilism-thinking

The standard of Timeless Classic, means, edifying for expressing Transcendent Knowledge, in any era – this covers a late-modern era rebirth, re-blossoming, of gnosis – connected with timeless classic themes; themes expressing, analogical psychedelic eternalism. Fit with analogical psychedelic eternalism.

Future Podcast Suggestion: Why Is Transcendent Knowledge the Highest Value?

Why Express analogical psychedelic eternalism ?

We Should Avoid analogical psychedelic eternalism , because __ We should not matuer per how God hiimself designed to be able to force, so we have to because God gave the mind his … the argument from “i assume we have …. Is’ Is

It’s up to the serpent god whether i awake.

Should I try to awake, or should I stay asleep?

If God created the Ground of Being so as to have me know God, then I will be forced to know God. Should I try to avoid knowing God, if God created the Ground of Being to make me know Him?

In that case, I have no choice but to know God and sacrifice egoic thinking – so why then are we debating whether to value being brought to knowledge of God?

___

DO I HAVE THE CHOICE OF
HOW HIGH IN THE THEORY OUTLINE TO PUT
my theory of NO-FREE-WILL?

[‘classic’] What Defines What Is ‘Classic’

What is classic is what connects to {transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism}.

[‘classic’] Definitively Excellent Classic Transcendent Knowledge Rock Albums of the Gods

Diary of a Madman (explicit gnosis, integrated trajectory)

Caress of Steel & 2112 (explicit gnosis)

Ride the Lightning (explicit gnosis) and have to mention cover art of Master of Puppets

Physical Graffiti (some explicit gnosis)

Van Halen 1

Hell Awaits

Metal Heart

When the gods battled against each other:

Sgt. Pepper

Her Satanic Majesty’s Request in response, both a return-shot to –

Pet Sounds, which was the first “Recording Studio as Instrument” paradigm-shift.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Know_There%27s_an_Answer#Controversy_and_rewrite

  • Sgt. Pepper by the Beatles might express Transcendent Knowledge, to be Classic, in spirit – that is, the double-climax in Day in the Life – but,
  • the song Help! passes the test explicitly (that is, lyrically, not only musically),
  • the song No One at the Bridge passes the text explicitly, and
  • the entire (original, bona fide) album Diary of a Madman (by Bob Daisley and the band Blizzard of Ozz) is most definitive album, being a coherent trajectory-of-songs concept album, like an album-length expression of Caress of Steel Side 2.

Song Lyrics of Non-control: Little Dolls

I agree with Ozzy that the final song Diary of a Madman, while 10/10 – would it be possible to have a positive-toned outcome resolution instead of ending on a tragic-styled lyrical theme and key?

The song Diary of a Madman certainly exudes peak gravity, offsetting the disarmingly comedic Little Dolls – which is all-the-more fearsome, for its light-hearted, fooling tone – possessed by mind of Mithras inserting blade into vulnerability of bull’s powerful shoulder.

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/16/my-basis-for-concluding-mushrooms-in-christian-art/#Little-Dolls
2:17 = 137s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA1CKGGPYPA&t=137s

light-hearted Major key:
transcription by Michael Hoffman, for instruction of mystics

YOU NEVER IMAGINED SUCH A FATE COULD FOLLOW YOU
YOU NEVER THOUGHT IT WAS TRUE!
AND WHEN IT’S YOUR TIME, I WON,-DER HOW, ⚡️ YOU’LL DO
(I, WON, DER, HOW, YOU’LL, DO)
YOUR KIND OF TROUB,LE’S RUNNING DEEPER THAN THE SEA
(I WONDER WHAT YOU’RE GONNA DO, ⚡️ ABOUT IT)
YOU BROKE (THE RULE)
YOU’VE BEEN (A FOOL)
THE LITTLE DOLL IS YOU, YEAH!

NOWHERE TO RUN ⚡️ YOUR FATE IS IN HIS HANDS
YOUR TIME HAS COME ⚡️ YOU’LL LIVE TO HIS COMMAND
I’M WARNING YOU ⚡️ THE WORST IS YET TO COME
THE KILLER WHO ⚡️ REMAINS A MYSTERY

🎸

the long, 4th paragraph up, and the 3rd paragraph up

precursor song: Twilight Zone, from 2112, 5 years earlier; these are the days of many a hit https://www.rush.com/songs/the-twilight-zone/

___

It makes sense for Metal, to end on a Minor key.

Given that the album Diary of a Madman lyrically, explicitly expresses attainment of gnosis, the album in terms of substance is positive and victorious, despite the minor-key tone or stylistic spirit of the final song, Diary of a Madman, which is in any case, a masterpiece.

The trajectory of this album’s integrated song-cycle generally moves from innocent light-hearted, to heavy and tragic, with downs and ups along the way, and the foolish-maniac front cover, to the coded, back-cover photograph of transmutational victory.

With evil witch lurking in the background trying to ruin and replace the entire project, destroying the entire band in the process. Any project so great, engenders its opponent, interfering.

I wish I had formed some sort of record (such as video or photographs), documenting my listening of the original Compact Disc from the 1988-1989 lightning-storm era (accompanying my original first-run pressing full-size LP), where I put the CD or 320 kbps rip of that CD (I think CD, using optical drive of laptop), … on Repeat Album all night, with those amazing ~40-second guitar-lead slow, gradual fadeouts (on 4 songs, I think) – what atmosphere! to die for; in the great era post-hiatus period of mine, around 2011, with intensive posting day and night to the Egodeath Yahoo Group, decoding mythemes left and right.

But, what I do have, is posts about Diary, which likely record that date, of listening to the original album on repeat all night.

And we have someone’s photographs of the LP sleeve which I posted at the Egodeath Yahoo Group, and the music – so we’re pretty well covered for multi-media documentation of that experience.


[system of theories] The Egodeath Theory’s System of Theories

The Egodeath theory

the Cybernetic theory
the Mytheme theory
  • rock lyrics
  • ahistoricity
  • entheogen history
  • mytheme decoding
  • looming naming conflict:
  • the Mytheme theory <– GREAT IDEA LETS HAVE A NARROW, COMPONENT THEORY NAME “the Mytheme theory ” BE SAME AS THE broad THEORY NAME “the Mytheme theory “

[‘classic’] What Makes Something Classic: Expresses the Reference Point, of Mind Maturation

The theme of {transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism} defines what is classic, for any genre.

What’s lasting is this THIS REFERENCE POINT FOR MENTAL EXPLORATION AND MATURATION.

[value of Transcendent Knowledge] Defending this Position: Transcendent Knowledge is of Highest Value

Todo: Add to page “Transcendent Knowledge is of highest value”:

What’s so great about {TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM} <– SHOULDN’T WE AVOID THAT?

PROVE THAT WE SHOULD REVERE {TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM}

WE SHOULD AVOID TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM, BECAUSE __.

WE SHOULD NEGATIVELY VALUE {TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM}, BECAUSE __.

PROS AND CONS OF TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM:

  • PROS
    • CAUSE WE CAN; like asking innocent child why sx climax is valuable..
    • Because the gods need to be honored/fed.
    • CAUS ITS LIKE S3X MATURATION INBUILT OUR GODN COGNITIVELY DEVELOPMENTAL INBUILT INNATE DEVELOPMENTAL SEQUENCE THAT WANTS REAL BAD TO HAPPEN, THE KING START TO GUARD HIS INCREASINGLY AT-RISK RULERSHIP BECAUSE MIND IS MATURING AS GOD HIMSELF THE CREATOR DESIGNED THE MIND WITH THE INTENTION THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE SMART ENOUGH TO INTUITIVELY KNOW THAT {TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM} IS A GOOD INNATELY DESIRABLE, LASLOW SAID SO.
    • SELF-TRANSCENDENCE IS OUR LOFTIEST DESIRE INNATELY.
There Are Several Good Ideas Tangled in Here: Hypercalvinism, the Transcendence-teaching Glorious Failure of the Personal Control-System, Caduceus

todo: link this and above sections , cross-link to article “Why Transcendent Knowledge Is of Highest Value”.

  • CONS (ie, Reasons why we should avoid Transcendent Knowledge, not elevate its value to the highest value)
    • CRAZY
    • HIERARCHY OF NEEDS IS TOPPED WITH SELF-TRANSCENDENCE” <– FACT CHECK: *BULLSH*T*.
      RAINBOW TRIANGLE 🌈△ SAYS SELF-ACTUALIZATION ON TOP.
      https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=maslow%27s+hierarchy+of+needs. SO THIS IS A CON AGAINST TRANSFORMATION OF THE MENTAL WORLDMODEL FROM POSSIBILISM TO ETERNALISM.
    • DO NOT TRANSCEND THE EGO.
    • YOU SHOULD STAY IN POSSIBILISM-THINKING MODE, NEVER GO INTO ETERNALISM-THINKING MODE, THAT’S BAD, AVOID IT.
    • YOU SHOULD STAY EGOIC, NOT BECOME TRANSCENDENT.
    • AVOID DIRECT CONTACT WITH GOD AND WITH THE ATTRACTIVE VULNERABILITY TO CONTROL-INSTABILITY, LOSS, CATASTROPHE, CANCELLATION, STATE OF TOAST, NO WORKIE SYSTEM INSTABILITY SEIZURE INNATE TRANSFORMATION INBUIILT BY GOD SO THAT THE GODS AND GIANTS CAN PULL UP VIRGIN MAIDENS TO FEED THE GODS AND HAVE OFFSPRING WITH MORTAL WOMEN.
    • Why should we avoid Transcendent Knowledge: __
    • IT’S NOT UP TO THE WOMAN, SHE’S ILLUSION; ALL POWER IS WITH THE GOB GROUND OF BEING.
    • BOW DOWN BEFORE GOB, AND BEFORE CONTROLLER X THE RULER AND CREATOR OF GOB.
    • GOB CREATED 4D GOB, GOB CONTROLS WORLDLINE OF THE CONTROL-THOUGHT INSERTER/INJECTOR & WORLDLINE OF THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER/RECEPTACLE.
    • Mystery Religions chest contains snake, that is explicitly revealed.
    • Objects plural were in the chest, if banana peel in goddesses’ chest then goddam you know it is a way holy banana peel, like mushroom-level valuation of that damn banana peel, they are Ruck-Consubstantial.
    • Carl Ruck is consubstantial with the word ‘consubstantial’.
    • PRAISE GOB, THE GOD GOB.
      GOB MADE ME DO IT
      GOD created the GOB, and the GOB MADE ME DO IT. therefore god’s fault, all hail all powerful god, whose fault everything is. I’m just a powerless ego. God is all powerful over my control-thoughts, therefore, any thought I think is God’s fault.
      Every thought in the devil’s mind is God’s fault, more or less directly, God is SQUARELY to blame for everything, cos hes all powerful,

Q.E.D.

God is making poor Satan think all his evil thoughts, therefore, God is responsible for the evil thoughts Satan has. Satan is a helpless puppet of God, –> 1 Power in Heaven, vs. the 2 Powers in Heaven model, one sense of ‘dualism’. Satan is innocent, framed. Satan is a puppet of God, creator of GoB. Satan is frozen into GoB, spear through his side (vulnerability along the time axis of the frozen personal wworldline with thoughts given to the puppet by the puppetmaster, that’s with Controller X being closer.

the ‘god is Indirectly responsible” model: god create gob, gob make u do x

poor u being forced by male time-snake worldline running through the helpless virgin maiden skewered by the worldline into the future, and by the moment-to-mon… at each moment of the worldline, there is a the control-thought receiver & the control-thought receiver two snakes … [
[ a.m. January 4, 2021]

148am

I explained the caduceus plain and clear, on December 2, 2013 in lecture vid.

caduceus depicts two intertwined control-components.

  • early version of the caduceus: o with u on top on pole
  • later version of the caduceus: winged ball with two spiral snakes.
  • 😵

🌈△

[hypertext theory] 🍝 Links 🔫

My WordPress site before I properly used Site Map sections. I almost want to go back and delete all my “see also” links; specifically, rule:

If an article is in section S of Site Map, the article should not contain any links that are also in section S.

Let the Site Map do its work.
Philosophy of Hypertext: do not make “leave this node” the main emphasis:

Welcome to Topic T. DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE? MAYBE YOU WANT TO GO AWAY TO HERE, OR TO HERE. WHAT ABOUT HERE, OR HERE, DO YOU WANT TO GO THERE INSTEAD OF WHERE YOU ARE? PROBABLY SO. <– EVERY PAGE IS WRITTEN LIKE THIS. CART BEFORE HORSE.

INSTEAD, MUST VISUALLY STRONGLY SEPARATE THE NAVIGATION CONTENT-DISPLAY, FROM THE CONTENT DISPLAY.

THE CONTENT DISPLAY SHOULD NOT BE EXPRESSED AS “NAVIGATE AWAY” UI.

MUST HAVE SEPARATION OF CONCERNS: MAKE UP YOUR MIND:

  • ARE WE READING CONTENT NOW,
  • OR ARE WE “NAVIGATING AWAY FROM HERE” NOW?

PRINCIPLE:

the Egodeath theory is *THE* DESTINATION — NOT “THE PLACE TO GO AWAY FROM”. iow: F[orget] LINKS! DEATH TO LINKS!🔫 quarantine links into a suppressed “see also” section.

Ask yourself: WHY IS IT SO NECESSARY TO GO AWAY FROM HERE?
IS THE PRESENT CONTENT SO WORTHLESS, THAT THE BEST THING WE CAN RECOMMEND FOR IT, IS TO GO AWAY FROM IT?

See Also [ie, See Instead, of the present worthless content]
Something Worth Reading, Instead of the Present Content
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=cat+videos

[ahisty] Email to Earl Doherty

Hi Earl, 

I’m happy to have retrieved your book from a storage box, the scary-thick edition.  I read the thinner edition.  
http://jesuspuzzle.com/jesuspuzzle/books.html

I also want Carrier’s new book, Jesus from Outer Space, which I imagine explains the Spiritual Christ, like your book.

I was surprised to see just now, that you published in JHC (1997).
“In Fall 1997, the Journal of Higher Criticism published his article:
The Jesus Puzzle: Pieces in a Puzzle of Christian Origins.”

See my JHC article — I have stories to tell, about the journal ending… so my 2006 JHC article never made it to print:

Wasson and Allegro on the Tree of Knowledge as Amanita
Michael Hoffman
Journal of Higher Criticism, 2006
http://www.egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm

Egodeath.com = 2007.  Includes lots of Ahistoricity content.

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com = 2020.  Not much on Ahistoricity, just a couple podcast episodes 12 & 13 where Max Freakout gets a mystic to actually THINK about his default historicity-assumption.
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/07/transcendent-knowledge-podcast-episodes/#Episode-12

Cheers – In Spiritual Christ
— Michael Hoffman, the theorist of ego death 

Emojis

Nuking a Super-Annoying Autocomplete Suggestion (for Emojipedia)

*Finally* nuked that tiresome obsessive autocomplete suggestion from the URL bar! emojipedia/dragon <– i’m gonna hurl if i see this suggestion one more time. dude LET IT GO! Just b/c I went there ONCE, doesn’t mean i wanna tattoo it on my forehead FOR LIFE! What did I do to deserve this PUNISHMENT?

You know your UI sucks when it INFLICTS LIFETIME PUNISHMENT on the user.

I FINALLY found the stupid magic keystroke to nuke that obsessive-fixation autocomplete suggestion:
Shift+Fn+Delete. <– *%$& man, can you make it any more OBSCURE?!
Tell me again, how this company does “good UI design”?

😱🤯😵

🤨🤔

😄🎉

🍄

Showing this, is what happens at the climax of Mystery Religion initiation.
tThis is what’s hidden in the mystic chest.
The ultimate mystery, revealed, is revealing this.

Not so much otherworlds, as shallow… misplaced emphasis.

plant vs
cognitive state, and an innate transformation to a more durable form

reductionistic

Like the book Astrotheology & Shamanism: not wrong,…

😴

🍝 <– his reasoning

Bizarre Finding: Wand 🪄 Fails to Render in Edit Mode, But Displays Fine

🪄<– darn it, when ever are they gonna get “Magic Wand” supported on this platform*? I need it. Any Decade Now 🤨
“Magic Wand was approved as part of Unicode 13.0 in 2020 and added to Emoji 13.0 in 2020.”
It’s not 2020 anymore, do I need to update browser, wth??

*”this platform” — is actually a complicated, opaque idea. How can one browser, be multiple, different, incompatible platforms??  🤯

😵

 

🤨

🤔

Nice – but weird: In same Browser, emojis are completely differently styled in Edit view than in View view. 🤨 (I could show via screen capture, how entirely differently the emojis are styled)

[the Egodeath system of theories] Packaging and Framing a Major System of Theories Is Hard Intellectual Work

If Re-Outlining a Set of Theories and Re-Titling Them Is “Mere Superficial Decoration”, How Come It’s a Slog and a Multi-Day Drag? Packaging and Framing a Major System of Theories Is Hard Intellectual Work

[the Egodeath system of theories] Minimal Outline of the Egodeath Theory and Its Component Areas

  • the Egodeath theory: 10
    • the Cybernetic theory: 10
      • loose cognition: 7
      • block universe: 8
      • no-free-will: 5 WEAK LINK lump canc’n
      • control cancellation: 10
    • the Mytheme theory: 8
      • Rock lyrics: 2 WEAK LINK lump mytheme decoding
      • ahistoricity: 1 WEAK LINK lump mytheme decoding
      • entheogen history: 6
      • mytheme decoding: 8

[the Egodeath system of theories] Short & Long Name of Each Component-Theory of the Egodeath Theory

See new page:
Names of Component Theories of Egodeath Theory

[the Egodeath system of theories] Minimal Outline of the Egodeath Theory, with the Four Area-Names from the Main Article

little exercise: match with the following outline, the 4 areas per the 2006 article: Cybernetics Determinism Dissociation Metaphor

  • the Egodeath theory
    • the Cybernetic theory – Cybernetics
      • loose cognition – Dissociation
      • block universe
      • no-free-will – Determinism
      • control cancellation – Cybernetics
    • the Mytheme theory – Metaphor
      • Rock lyrics – Metaphor
      • ahistoricity
      • entheogen history
      • mytheme decoding – Metaphor
Illustration for the 2006 main article contributed by someone in the Egodeath Yahoo Group, probably findable in the Digests

[the Egodeath system of theories] Streamlined Outline of the Egodeath Theory and its Component Theories or Topics – with Groups of Phrases That Are Used Within the Egodeath Theory

[mushrooms in Western entheogen scholarship] The Two Available Options and the Choice Confronting Hatsis

The Image

The Mushroom Tree with Hanging, Balancing, & Sword
The Top Row of the Image
The Entire Image
The Entire Page Containing the Image

Canterbury Psalter, folio 134
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom
High-resolution, zoom, & fullscreen

Option A: Swordsmanship Acrobatics

The Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image depicts swordsmanship acrobatics training.

The banquet meal is mandrake and cannabis (not Psilocybe mushrooms, like the tree shape).

The audience is cheering-on the sword-acrobats, from the left.

The audience is directing the acrobats by displaying their left or right hands, and lifting their left or right foot.

As a reward, the acrobat-fencers are surely granted a Parasol of Victory (like the Parasols of Victory tree that they practice on).

Option B: RETRACT, THOMAS, RETRACT! Save Yourself!
Psilocybe Banqueting; Personal Control Stability Requires a Non-Branching Mental Worldmodel

The Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image depicts Psilocybe mushrooms, and depicts that viable personal control stability during the Psilocybe session is a function of adopting a non-branching worldmodel.

The image communicates that strict textbook training is required, before being allowed to ingest the banquet meal, to avoid catastrophic personal control instability.

That Lesser Mysteries training literally now means: studying specifically the Egodeath theory spec’d out by me, as a requirement, to be allowed to partake of the mushroom banquet.

That’s the coherent message successfully transmitted and communicated from Canterbury in 1200 A.D. and received and transcribed by me at the present egodeaththeory WordPress site in 2020 A.D. (including yesterday’s January 3, 2021 solution of the Pink initiate’s upturned palm touching the blue bowl).

Proof that the Canterbury Psalter’s Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree Is Psilocybe
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/proof-canterbury-psalters-mushroom-trees-are-psilocybe/ 

My Proof article was an offshoot of my Criteria article for Brown:

Defining “Compelling Evidence” & “Criteria of Proof” for Mushrooms in Christian Art
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/defining-compelling-evidence-criteria-of-proof-for-mushrooms-in-christian-art/

My Proof analysis & article lists Cyberdisciple in the Acknowledgments section.

My Proof analysis & article leveraged my decoding of the Bestiary Salamander image which Hatsis’ article brought to my full attention.

I completed my ~2016 decoding of the Salamander image, in the above, November 2020, Criteria article.

Bennett, Samorini, Irvin, and Hatsis all treated, but failed to decode, the bestiary salamander image.

To decode the bestiary salamander image, I relied on my even earlier decoding-work of mythemes including:

  • {limping king}
  • {crippled Hephestos}
  • {turn to look to the right and behind and above you, and remember}

My mytheme-decoding work is evidenced with datestamps back to June 10, 2001:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#yahoo-group
Multiple people can corroborate the authenticity of these posting-digests and dates.

June 2001 represents an early version of my breakthrough “analogical psychedelic eternalism” theory of mytheme-decoding, which leveraged my fully developed Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

I discovered and formulated the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence in 1988, and I published that Theory in summary outline-spec form on the World-Wide Web at the main Cybernetics website in 1997.

To decode mythemes, including the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” entire image, I invented, discovered, developed, and applied my theory and system of mytheme decoding: the “analogical psychedelic eternalism” theory of religious mythology:

Religious mythology is description-by-analogy of repeatedly taking psychedelics, producing transformation of the experiential mental worldmodel from literalist ordinary-state possibility-branching to analogical psychedelic pre-existence.

My theory of mytheme-decoding, that I summarized above, has roots in my innovative system of Rock Lyrics decoding around 1992, but mostly I figured out how to systematically relate mythemes to my 1988-1997 Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence in 1999-2003.

[books; mystics’ writings unhelpful] I Created the Egodeath Theory Because No Writers Properly Explain Transcendent Knowledge

copied this section to top of History article

to-do: make sure this section is in new page “Mystics’ Writings Unhelpful”. DONE.

All books that tried to explain mystic knowledge, were and are wholly inadequate, irrelevant, and unhelpful. If that weren’t the case, I wouldn’t have created the Egodeath theory, starting in 1985.

In 1985, I read the field of spiritual self-help and enlightenment books, and it was all too clear, that none of the explanations came anywhere near to what they should have been.

No writers on enlightenment were holding relevant, correct objectives or approaches. That was true in 1985 and remains true in 2021 (aside from my 1988 Cybernetic theory and my 2003 Mytheme theory).

That is why I rolled up my sleeves and said:

“Step aside; I need this knowledge.

“I’m sure Transcendent Knowledge exists to be found and figured out and explained clearly and properly, per modern, direct scientific and engineering explanation, with clear systematization.

“I’ll have to figure out Transcendent Knowledge myself.

“Afterwards, I’ll have to formulate Transcendent Knowledge myself, for everyone.

“I will figure out Transcendent Knowledge and then explain it properly.”

To figure out Transcendent Knowledge, starting in 1986, I read Ken Wilber and Alan Watts.

The Wilber & Watts books were given to me by my father, around 1985.

I also read a handful of other books that my father gave me, or that I got from the university bookstore.

In late 1987 and early 1988, I corrected the malformed explanations provided by Ken Wilber and Alan Watts.

History of Developing the Egodeath Theory

[acro]/keyboard shortcuts Demo for Theory Subtheories

Motivation: History of Transcendent Knowledge development — WHY DID I NOT ANNOUNCE AT ONE POINT IN TIME, “THE MYTHEME DECODING THEORY” (EVEN THAT term is new to me, why?

Why was , historically, my mytheme decoding talent and success, SO PIECEMEAL, while in contrast, the maximal entheogen theory of religion was Athena, born fully formed? Why was my…

WHY DO I STILL NOT TO THIS DAY HAVE A PROPER NAME FOR MY DECODING TECHNIQUE OF MYTHEMES?

I got spoiled from my how smoothly it went in 2002, announcing the maximal entheogen theory of religion.

Even though I complained about taking 1 yr 2 mo before i FINALLY posted the straight phrase “the maximal entheogen theory of religion”, it is very unusual to go so smoothly in discovering/announcing/naming/packaging a new theory (subtheory).

Maybe the maximal entheogen theory of religion is an oddball, why does a marketing-name fit so well, while the other 7 areas topics below, don’t need a snappy marketing label? why not?

I am puzzled and frustrated and embarrassed WHY AM I STILL DOING BASIC ELEMENTARY WORK IN NAMING THE THEORIES I HAVE BEEN USING FOR YEARS???

WHY DO I HAVE PHRSES LIKE “MYTHEME DECODING “, YET, I HAE HAVE NO GOOD MARKETING SNAPPY THEORY NAME LIKE I ANNOUNCED FOR THE MAXIMAL ENTHEOGEN THEORY OF RELIGION IN 2002???

ANYWAYS — AS embarrassed and frustrated and puzzled as I am over the present situation, here is the marketing snappy names of all the stuff…. or a lame short step toward it.

driving strategy: have [acro]/keyboard shortcuts for each of the 8 + 2 + 1 items (theories/subtheories).

  • the Egodeath theory
    • the Cybernetic theory
      • loose cognition, the block universe, no-free-will, control cancellation
    • the Mytheme theory
      • Rock lyrics, ahistoricity, entheogen history, mytheme decoding
  • the Egodeath theory <-the entire theory, shortform
    • the Cybernetic theory <-Phase 1 theory, shortform
      • loose cognition <-area/topic, top-level area constit’g Cybernetic theory.
      • the block universe
      • no-free-will
      • control cancellation
    • the Mytheme theory <-Phase 2 theory, shortform
      • Rock lyrics <-area/topic, a top-level area constit’g Mytheme theory.
      • ahistoricity
      • entheogen history < the maximal entheogen theory of religion
      • mytheme decoding

[pop theory: big ego] Accomplishments, Pride, Bragging, Inflation, Manipulation, Accurate Claims

If I mock someone for saying “I’m great”, it’s not because saying “i’m great” is necesssarily bad.

Saying “I’m Great” is a good thing to do, when it’s true. When a person is great, they ought to say “I’m great”.

When a person says “I’m great” but it is untrue, then saying “I’m great”, in that case, is bad.

It’s not the sheer act of saying “I’m great” that is in any way bad.

If “I’m great” is a true statement, then it is good to say that.

If “I’m great” is a false statement, then it is bad to say “I’m great” — what makes saying “I’m great” bad in that case, is the falseness of the utterance, not the utterance itself.

People who think poorly, get mixed up about this. They think that saying “I’m great” is never good, and is always bad, regardless of whether the statement is true or false in a particular case.

False humility is a lie, and therefore generally is bad. Were I to solve the the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter reader, and then say “It was nothing”, that would be a lie and therefore bad.

If I say “My solving/decoding {the Canterbury Psalter hanging/sword Image} was an awesome historical achievement and momentous breakthrough with huge ramifications”, that would be a true statement, and therefore, saying my saying that statement, is (generally) good.

But were I to have said that, back when I was only 6 hours into Day 1 … when that work was still just a section within the Brown article (the Criteria article), I would’ve been saying a falsehood, and that would make it bad for me to say “whaat i acomplished was greate’.

done: give Brown credit in that article. checking Ack’s section:.. it wouldn’t have hap’d wo him; just like my Plainc artic woudn’t have happened w/o Robert Price’s invitation to write it. <– no, can’t make those type of statements. but the Robt Price statement is true; there’s NO WAY I WOULD have written the Plaincourault without Robert Price inviting to publish it in journal.

Literally, I planned, designed, and in every way, shaped the article FOR JHC, journal. even if I had written a webpage aob about Plainc, I wouldn’t have specifically shaped and styled the article as I did.

Similarly, the Brown article (Criteria), was shaped for Brown’s context and POV. And the Proof article was spawned off that article, when the Proof section of Brown’s article reached 11 pages and was fast growing, after about 6 hours of work

what? there’s no Acknowledgments section in the Criteria article??? done – added.

By that logic, I’d also need to credit Brown as the inspiration w/o which the Canter article…. fallacy.

We can never say “X wouldn’t have happened if Y didn’t ahppen.” we can only say “here’s how X happened to come about.”

AVOID THE PHRASE “WITHOUT WHICH” – THAT’S HIGHLY DEBATABLE.

Chances are, I wouldn’t’ve …. my path went through Hatsis’ articles too.

And before that, in Samorini article in ~2006, I must have seen the “dancing ” bestiary b&w salamander image,

As always, history of any breakthrough has long trails before it, how far back to trace the tendrils, never-ending, but thinner and thinner?

A small b/w image of salamander in a Cramorini article ~2006, you expect me to have decoded THAT???

HATSIS’ CONTENTIOUSNESS OVER SALAMANDER BROUGHT IT TO MY full ATTN.

COMPARE (directly relevant) Nov ~11 2020, when I was in middle of writing Criteria article, I did search on like “christian mushroom”, and two guys had gallery webpages (2nd being Ancient Psychedelics site), both pages showed horrible yellow crop blurry of the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image.

which I instantly decoded in like 2 hours, within the Crit article….

DID I EXPAND SECTION ABOUT CANTER IN TO 11 PAGES AND MOVE TO SEP ARTICLE BEFORE OR AFTER, Cyberdisciple SHOWED ME THE HI-RES URL/CONTEXT WHOLE IMAGE??

I really need to work harder on my article “Methodology for Decoding the Canterbury Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree”.

Instead of jumping straight to adding an Ack section to Crit artic, work-up a history :

2006: read Samor artic, w/ bestiary salamder b/w

2015~, read Hatsis article about salamander image.

2016 partial solution of much of sal image.

2016 solved Hephastus — NOW THAT I HAVE the Egodeath Yahoo Group DIGESTS, I can prove that date of when I solved “left foot = possibilism, right foot = eternalism”. Hephaestus

[history of mytheme decoding] Aside: Toward Re-finding the Date of My Solving {serpent} = worldline

digest 71:

Group: egodeathMessage: 3611From: Michael HoffmanDate: 29/10/2004
Subject: Re: Snake referring to visual distortion, turning staff to snake
Snake and no-choice labyrinth and meander all have similar spatial geometry.
The snake is wise because it has elixir of death, has rebirth, moves like
visual waving distortion, and knows about the 1-D worldline frozen into the
heimarmene-ruled block universe. When you mentally perceive your experienced
life as a 1-D worldline timelessly frozen into the block universe, your sense
of open steersmanship dies, like seeing the attractive and deadly gorgon-face
of the snake-haired Medusa and being thereby turned to stone.

Thus the snake is shown wrapped around the heimarmene-ruled celestial globe,
or penetrating through it. The snake is wise about determinism, but I see the
snake as representing attaining the jump from ignorance to fatal awareness of
deterrminism, *not* the second major leap, which is the truly divine leap from
awareness of determinism to transcendence of cosmic determinism.

[Aside – Aside:]

http://www.stoa.org/diotima/essays/garrison_essay.shtml — “The females who [ALARM – MINOR DECODING/MAPPINGS/CONNECTIONS [5:12 P.M. January 3, 2021] NOTE THAT THEY ARE GIRLS; VIRGIN MAIDENS; = THE CONTROL-THOUGHT RECEIVER/RECEPTACLE. The last time I decoded
{girls see snake in chest, insane rock cliff}, I don’t think I knew the {female} mytheme.
RE: {SUICIDE}: SEE Cyberdisciple’S EXPL IN PODCAST, SEE the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image with the trained, self-threatening Psalter reader AND WITH THE CYBERCIDES. ]
commit suicide in a state of madness are Agraulos and Herse, daughters of
Cecrops, the half-serpent man. … when Athena gave to these girls for rearing
the offspring of Hephaestus’ aborted attempt to impregnate her, she instructed
them to keep the child hidden in a chest. While sister Pandrosos obeyed, the
other two girls failed to heed her warning and upon seeing the snaky child
within went mad and hurled themselves from the [WHY DID YOU REMOVE ‘ROCK CLIFF‘ IDIOT? AW MAN LINK 404]… though the girls’ own
father was half-snake, the sight of such an infant drove them insane.”

Agraulos Herse Cecrops Athena Hephaestus
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Agraulos+Herse+Cecrops+Athena+Hephaestus

Herse – Greek mythology
https://www.greekmythology.com/Myths/Mortals/Herse/herse.html —
“Herse was a mortal woman in Greek mythology, daughter of Cecrops [HALF SNAKE]. Her sisters were Aglauros and Pandrosos. She is mentioned in the myth of Erichthonius, one of the first kings of Athens. When the god Hephaestus tried to rap the goddess Athena, she tried to evade him; however, his seme fell on her leg. Athena, disgusted,” EXAMPLE: I CANNOT SOLVE THIS INTERESTING DECODING RIGHT NOW BC I’M JUGGLING LITERALLY 8 OTHER THINGS RN.

[mytheme decoding] Forgot old problem of {limping king}! now able to solve! Important breakthough – so, #57 on current stack of to-do items

See, the problem when I get going, i can’t type fast enough to log my jackpot rate of successful experiments that (depending, either):

  1. (if we consider this to be a case of Revolutionary Science) Corroborates the New Theory/Paradigm majorly and/or:

2 (if we consider this to be a case of Normal Science) “fill-in” per “Normal Science”, the New Framewrork/ Paradigm (per Kuhn). (minorly).

I’d have to say… by now, after my masterpiece completed at Noon today, Completed today decoding the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image to my full satisfaction –

WHEN I LOOKED AT HIS HAND THIS MORNING ROUND 11AM, IT BUGGED THE SHT OUT OF ME, HIS ARM IS *SO* TWISTED, WTF IS MY EXPLANATION?

I’M POSER, CLAIMING TO HAVE DECODED the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image, AND YET I HAVE JACK SHT EXPLANATION FOR BIZARRELY TWISTED ARM AND WTF WHY THE F IS … DOES Pink HAVE TWO BOWLS, OR WHAT?

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom

The PROBLEM [revealed thanks to my new theory] THREATENING MY NEW THEORY, A PROBLEM THAT MY “NEW THEORY” CANNOT ACOUNT FOR: (SOLVED BY NOON TODAY) [January 3, 2021] —

Found “limp” but not “right foot”, in Digest 138:

Group: egodeathMessage: 7110From: egodeathDate: 14/11/2015
Subject: Re: Announcement: Deciphered Omphalos net trap navel rock
Always the next step here every time for me is image search and web search to confirm and to judge the confirming evidence.

The evidence that doesn’t agree with my Theory, I pronounce to be junk, noise; and the evidence that agrees with my Theory, I pronounce to be signal; correct, valid evidence made by those with good taste and acumen and perspicuity like me. i’m looking for an echo chamber with good, sonorous runaway feedback buildup.

Evidence and support of my latest breakthrough of deciphering Greek myth in terms of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence from the ivy-covered halls of the Engineering department in 1988:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=net+trap+hephaestus

In Greek mythology, find the themes of trap, net, snare, pit.

Hephaestus constructs a throne that when the goddess Hera sits in it, she is trapped in the throne.

Mixed-wine banqueters Heracles and Perithous are trapped with snakes fastened to the banqueting bench in Hades.

Hephaestus traps his wife Aphrodite with Ares in an invisible net. All the both of you can do is cry out “Help! I need somebody!”

This breakthrough to increased network connections of meaning and a leap in explanatory power includes, I have solved now quite more deeply, crossing the threshold, the decipherment problem of ‘the limping king’:

The egoic self-control agent is malformed and deformed and when wrestles with the angel during several sessions of mixed wine banquet, Hephaestus limps.

When he wrestles with self-control power, he has consciousness of broken, malformed, malfunctioning egoic Possibilism-premised self-control power, it’s not working as it is supposed to be working.

— Cybermonk
[pop theory: big ego] Making a Statement About One’s Accomplishment or Status (Accurately, Truthfully) Is Good; Lying Is Bad

The ultimate problem or (generously) limitation with the pop statement “That person has a big ego”, is that the statement is vague.

Saying “I’m #1” or “I won the Gold” is good, or neutral, when it’s true.

Thread “I am Science, I am the University” — someone in thread posted “i guess you’re trying to trigger ppl by acting big ego” <– see, this descrbibes conventional, wrong thinking. He’s one of those guys who thinks in terms of the stupid idea, “size of ego”. I could give a f about triggering people. He — it is evident — he revealed, by making that accusation, that HE thinks in terms of trying to impress ppl or have an effect on ppl. i could give a f about my impression i make on ppl.

IF I SAY “I *AM* SCIENCE AND I *AM* THE UNIVERSITY”, IT IS BECAUSE I AM NOTING AND OBSERVING AND REMARKING ON A FACT/TRUTH/REALIZATION.

If you claim that i say that in order to manipulate ppl, then you’ve tipped your hand, you’ve exposed your own poor way of thinking; we know how YOU think; YOU THINK IN TERMS OF TRYING TO MANIPULATE PEPOLE.

But such a person is incapable of understanding how I think.

The closest I’d come to employing the accusation “that person has a big ego”, would be: that person overestimates their accomplishment.

I am *not* criticizing someone for stating publicly that they value their accomplishments; I am criticizing making a statement that is OVERvaluing.

Like, if Max said “My podcast is the best”, that statement is true; therefore, making that statement is not “big ego”, but is an accurate assessment-statement.

[decoding visual mythemes (Canterbury mushroom trees)] Solved: Pink Initiate’s Open Palm & Facial Expression at Banquet

Why Settle for Emptying Just 1 Bowl?
Problem/puzzle to solve: palm up touching 2nd mushroom bowl
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom
Unsolved Art Interpretation/Decoding Problem

These are expressive artists. Why do these artists go out of their way to show his empty right hand, palm up? Bowl inventory:

  • White bowl: almost certainly for the angel-pulled red initiate off to the left.
  • No bowls are for the bearded telestai.
  • Red bowl is certainly for pink initiate.
  • Pink bowl is certainly for the maiden (the Psalter viewer), who is presently … shown in the act of taking (= {receiving, being given by worldline serpent}) the mushrooms which are implicitly in the bowl.
  • WHO IS THE BLUE BOWL for? Pink initiate is touching it so we are safe in concluding that it is his, therefore DOUBLE DOSE.
  • WHY IS PINK INITIATE’S PALM UP, TOUCHING BLUE BOWL w right hand/limb? Extremely unnatural, therefore it signals that we are to solve its meaning. Compare red initiate:
    touching the blue sword of God with left hand,
    touching the blue cut-off branch with right hand.
  • i got something*: eat with right hand, not left hand. His right hand is empty, therefore he finished eating two bowls of mushrooms. In contrast to maiden, who is about to eat the mushrooms.

[at this point, about 10 minutes ago, ie [11:46 a.m. January 3, 2021], I passed over the hump toward solving/decoding this problem.

takeaway lesson learned: you must leverage (take into consideration) all of the data together, that the artist presents.]

Solution: Empty right hand means he finished eating two bowls, SHE SEES THAT the pink initiate (her spiritual brother) HAS EATEN TWO BOWLS, AS SHE (THE VIEWER) IS BEING REASSURED BY HIEROPHANT/instructor/examiner AND FOLLOWING THE COURSE OF THE PINK INITIATE BUT IN MORE MODERATION THAN HIM.

I reject the possibility that the white bowl is hers. The white bowl must belong to the red initiate out-of-frame already pulled up by angel.

ASSUMPTION: NO ONE IS MIDWAY THRU EATING. The states are simple and clear; to communicate simply.

  1. The red initiate is well ahead. Single dose (white bowl).
  2. The pink initiate just finished ingesting the mushrooms. Double dose (red & blue bowl).
  3. The virgin maiden (the psalter viewer) is about to begin eating. Single dose (pink bowl).

Important: Implicitly, the maiden has passed the Lesser Mysteries textbook test exam, by the hierophant, as shown far left of top row.

To be permitted to eat the bowl of mushrooms, the maiden must have previously displayed her right (not left) hand to the examiner (now sitting next to her), her brow was completely un-furrowed, and she placed her right foot on ground, and left foot floating in thin air powerlessly.

The maiden was (like any initiate) first required to fully understand that one must put dependence consciously on the non-branching mental worldmodel, in order to have self-control stability during the mushroom-induced intense mystic altered state.

More commentary (than I emailed with wrmspirit) re: pink initiate’s expression. SOLUTION: MEANING OF PINK INITIATE’S FACIAL EXPRESSION:
“I have just finished ingesting a double dose of mushrooms, which are about to kick in. You are about to begin ingesting a single dose. We passed the training and exam together. We are spiritual brothers.” [12:00 Noon SHARP, January 3, 2021]

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom

That’s good enough interpretation-elements to merit adding to the Proof article.

That’s actually a brilliant, pregnant & portentious shorthand title:

the Proof article

Copy the entire above decoding section to a history file — done:
Methodology for Decoding the Canterbury Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/methodology-for-decoding-the-canterbury-leg-hanging-mushroom-tree/#Banquet-Meal-then-Pulled-by-Angel

Site Map: copy 3 links to the “Entheogen Scholarship” section, where Proof article resides. DONE.

copy from section:

Scientific Theory Methodology

Article really needs a final structural-edit pass, within each major section/chapter. And the Hem chapter is too short, should dissolve. You can tell WordPress is inadequate for large-scale composition like this article.

Pink showing his empty right hand is equivalent to sticking out his tongue to display a dose, then closing his lips & swallowing, then sticking out his tongue to display none.

[samorini mushroom trees] Cramorini

Samorini’s PageMaker article, dude! How about a little explicit structure? TALK ABOUT WALL OF TEXT! with some images crammed into it. His presentation was driven by cramming Italian and English side-by-side, packed sardines. There’s no breathing room at all! “Cramorini”. This is an example of how formatting can make a document literally unreadable. No wonder I read this article by 2007, yet never really fully read it; it’s unreadable as formatted.

Strange: in Egodeath Yahoo Group, I allude to Samorini’s article and show strong familiarity with it, yet I didn’t post any citation/URL for it; it’s in my 2006 Plaincourault article bib: http://www.egodeath.com/WassonEdenTree.htm#_Toc135889247

The ‘Mushroom-Tree’ of Plaincourault

Giorgio Samorini, “The ‘Mushroom-Tree’ of Plaincourault”, Eleusis: Journal of Psychoactive Plants and Compounds, n. 8, 1997, pp. 29-37.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Samorini+%22The+Mushroom+Tree+of+Plaincourault%22+Eleusis

“Mushroom-Trees” in Christian Art

“Mushroom-Trees” in Christian Art
Article by Giorgio Samorini
Journal issue: Eleusis, n.s., 1:87-108, 1998
The source file, original article:
https://www.samorini.it/doc1/sam/sam-alberifungo-1998.pdf

Extracted images, added to the most major collection on the Web, of images of mushrooms in Christian art:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/13/images-of-mushrooms-in-christian-art/#Samorini-Mushroom-Trees-in-Christian-Art

Giorgio Samorini, “The ‘Mushroom-Trees’ in Christian Art”, Eleusis: Journal of Psychoactive Plants and Compounds, n. 1, 1998, pp. 87-108.

title glitch there, in the latter; why is “The” added? pdf shows exact title as:

“Mushroom-Trees” in Christian Art
no ‘The’.

Search for:

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Samorini+Mushroom-Tree+Plaincourault

[Samorini mushroom trees] My Review of Letcher Recommends Both Samorini Mushroom-Tree Articles

[meta-theory] Diversion/Aside: Theory of Science: A Successful New Theory Enables Perceiving New Problems (misreading: “the New Theory is revealed to be problematic b/c of new problems”)

I happen to mention Samorini in review of Letcher, still no cite/url. anyway,

it appears I read *both* Samorini articles before April 2007.

Group: egodeathMessage: 4577From: Michael HoffmanDate: 02/04/2007
Subject: Re: Book: Letcher; Shroom: Cultural History of Magic Mushroom
My book review is below.

Shroom: A Cultural History of the Magic Mushroom by Andy Letcher
http://amazon.co.uk/o/asin/0571227708 — June 15, 2006
http://amazon.com/o/asin/0060828285 — February 27, 2007

4 stars out of 5 <– DIDN’T I TAKE THIS DOWN TO 3 STARS?
How did i review the book on or before April 2, 2007, if the book wasn’t published until Feb 27, 3.5 weeks later?

old posting continued, Letcher review, book Shrooms:

… he would need to engage the range of art that is
presented in the first three issues of Entheos magazine, and the range
of arguments such as those presented in Giorgio Samorini’s articles
about Christian mushroom trees.
/ end of old posting excerpt

[I posted that review to Amazon on April 1, 2007. Therefore, I read Samorini’s article(s) before that date, and therefore must have seen “Hatsis'” dancing man image, in b&w, before April 1, 2007. Which image I mostly solved maybe in 2015.

That solution then enabled me to get huge jump start decoding Canterbury image, which I completed decoding 8 hours ago, Noon …. yeah just turned 8pm [8:00 p.m. January 3, 2021], EXACTLY 8 hours AGO, i finished decoding the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image. Now i traced roots kinda to 2007-ish Samorini article (Hatsis i learned from him, that the image was in Samo aritcle,and i confiemd the other day what Hatsis said, that Samo mentions Chris Beennet and maybe even got the image literally from Chris Bennett, for Samo’s ~1998 mushroom-trees article (not Samo’s Plainc article of 1997, iirc the dates of publication) . I don’t believe i paid *any * partic attiont attention to “dancing man” in Samo article (awful formatting, b&w), in 2007-ish. i would NOT say I began decoding Canterbury in ~2007 from Samo’s article’s bestiary salamnder image which Hatsis aroudn 2015 showed us in color. Which Irvin book did Hatsis see Salamnder dancing man in??

now i’m tracing the history of PREVIOUS FAILED ATTEMPTS BY OTHER WRITERS TO SOLVE DECODE the bestiary SALAMander/DANCING MAN, AS PRECURSOR FOR MY ORIGINAL IDEA I’M THE DISCOVERER OF, OF TRYING TO SOLVE the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image.

History & Theory of Science

INTERESTING, HISTORY OF SCIENCE POV: “a precursor problem that other scientists:

1) had posed as a problem to solve, then

2) failed to solve. Bennett failed to solve that probl, then Samorini, then Irvin failed, then Hatsis failed, then I saw the problem at that time (Hatsis’ rebuttal article), and I SUCCEEDED at 75% solving “dancing man” image, THEN:

3) I ADDED A NEW PROBLEM TO SOLVE: the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image , BUT, AT THE VERY SAME TIME, I INSTANTLY SOLVED IT LIKE IN 2 HOURS, SO 4) (2 HOURS AFTER STEP 3) I SOLVED the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image (WHICH I WAS THE ONLY PERSON AWARE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE PROBLEM AS A PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED AT THAT TIME) BASED ON MY SOLUTION OF THE “PREVIOUSLY KNOWN”, SHARED PROBLEM THAT BENNETT/ Samorini/ IRVIN/ HATSIS DEBATED.

WHICH BRINGS US A QUESTION:

DOES ANYONE OTHER THAN ME, KNOW ABOUT “THE PROBLEM OF the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image”? SORT OF.

“EVERYONE” IS “AWARE” OF “THE ” PROBLEM, OF the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image.
BUT, THEY FAIL TO RECOGNIZE THE PROBLEM OF “LEFT VS. RIGHT”.

The only “problem to be solved” that the inferior, less-than-scientists perceive, THEIR LITTLE MINDS/CONCEPTION, IS MERELY FISTICUFFS IN PROXY WAR, “DOESN’T THIS MUSHROOM MEAN MUSHROOM”.

Theory of Science, Decoding Visual Mythemes

I copied this entire table cell to page “Methodology for Decoding the Canterbury Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree”; that is the Real Copy now. To clean up the below strikethrough text there.

my point: it’s like, BY ADDING ANOTHER PROBLEM (“What does L/R mean in the familiar, communally known Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image?”) , I SOLVED — AND PROVED MY SOLUTION — OF THE ENTIRE SET OF PROBLEMS, KNOWN AND NOT KNOWN, TO THE COMMUNITY OF SCIENTISTS. I solved Bestiary Salamander, and I positively confirmed that the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image is mushrooms, and I solved the not-known prolblem, “what does L/R mean in the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image?” Turns out, that my being able to answer the not-known-to-the-community problem, of
“what does L/R mean in the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image?”,
was sort of the key, to being able to answer the entire set of questions:
o What does dancing mean, in besty salam image?
o Is dancing tree a mushroom, in besty salam image?
o is Canter msh tree mushrooms?
and (newly ident’d problem):
o What does L/R mean in Canter image?

WHEREAS FOR ME, MY GENIUS AND LUCK OF BEING IN THE RIGHT PLACE/TIME, LEVELED-UP THE PROBLEM, ADDING “WHAT DOES LEFT/RIGHT MEAN”, TO NOT … TO b*both* be able to definitely answer *yes, it definitely is Psilocybe/mushroom/ psycho-msh* – but ALSO to do … to be victorious at solving a problem which no one but me even consciously formulated! Inferior scientists merely asked “yes or no, is the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image mushroom?” I, tho, superior scientist, asked an addl question, not even articulated by the other scientists: what does L/R mean? turns out, the ability to answer that (by borrowing both the Salamander *problem* , a known-t-to-them problem, and by my unique success at decoding that known problem known tho to those other scientists, .. the ability …

my ability to answer the New Question, the New Problem — that I’m the only one to identify *AS* a problem , of “what does l/r mean?” TURNS OUT TO BE , THE KEY TO BEING ABLE TO ANSWER THE FAMILIAR PROBLEM WHICH THE OTHER SCIENTISTS *DO* KNOW ABOUT, THE PROBLEM “IS the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image MUSHROOMS?”

(NOW re-outline the above, and summarize the flow above.)

Examining that flow , of the cycle of identifying problems, sharing debated solutions, and finding ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS ARTICULATED TO BE SOLVED, <– enables solving the first, widely-known problem!

Seems like a pretty interesting dynamic, a flow, of
1) identifying problems,
2) PUBLISHING problems so they are shared among science community,
3) comm’y tries & failed to solve,
4) i solve that problem,
5) I take another communally known Problem (the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image), and I simult add/identify/recognize/perceive an Additional problem (but don’t announce it as a problem for the community to solve, b/c i instantly solve it in 2 hours!!! ) … so by the time I announce the existence of Problem #2 with the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image, I’ve already solved that newly identified problem AND all of the known problems, f*cking EVERYTHING! the whole set!

You just can’t get better confirmation than that, of a New Theory. The New Theory check Kuhn) is able to IDENTIFY NEW PROBLEMS TO SOLVE, *AND*, SOLVE THEM. THAT’S HOW MUCH BETTER THE NEW THEORY IS, THAN THE OLD THEORY/HEAP/MESS/ LESS-THAN-THEORY.

THEN ADD’LY consider today’s Problem that fully came into view, that I was able to fully perceive. You see, today, some 8 hours ago, I decided for the first time, This Simply Will Not Do.

For GOD’S SKAE, what the F is going ON with his TWISTED ARM?!

First, around 11:45 am today, (current: [8:35 p.m. January 3, 2021] ), first, I looked carefully, and determined: YES, THERE REALLY IS A PROBLEM HERE.

1) FOR THE FIRST TIME, I PROVED THAT THE ARTIST IS POSING FOR US, A DECODING PROBLEM/COMMUNICATION; A MESSAGE TO BE RECEIVED/UNPACKED.

Theory of Science takeaway: Sometimes after forming and settling the New Theory, so you switch from phase “Revolutionary Science” to phase “Normal Science”, after 1 month, only then, it becomes clear the magnitude of a Problem Made Perceptible by the New Theory. That problem may have been Registered during the RevSci phase, but assessed as “How bad this problem is, is not clear (observed data not yet explained by the New Theory), but we had to wait until the New Theory entered “Normal Science” status, before we could assess more accurately the magnitude of the problem posed by the “wrinkle” data. About 11:40 am Jan 3 (yesterday) 2021, since dust had settled and the New Theory had entered “Normal Science” state, I took another look at the “known wrinkle of unclear magnitude”, and I determined that the mag was Signficant. His arm is very, very twisted, and especially, his palm is so emphatically displayed! Not just “visible” like I thought before, but rather, HE IS EMPHATICALLY DISPLAYING HIS HAND — TOWARD HER SIGHT. HE (No sooner had I noted that, and her eating-hand being her right hand, and him EMP… SAME LATER I REALISTED SAME as if he were sticking his tongue way out. he was “sticking” his palm so as to SHOW her his palm. No merely “visible” palm; but HOSWI SHOWING palm TO HER who …. it’s clearer, my wording is unfairly priviledged now, I was about to write a priviledged piont, as she is ABOUT to BEGIN (<– priv pt) eating,

translate the whole thing into modern scenario:

She is holding her one in her fingers, while he is sticking out his empty tongue at her, where a moment ago, there were two on it.

I LOOKED AT HIS ARM, AND THE LOGIC (PROVING THAT THERE’S A PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED) BECAME CLEAR TO ME: ‘there is most definitely something wrong here.

There is CERTAINLY a signal here.

I wan’t sure, Nov 10-Jan 3 11am, whether there was a signal, here, that thus DEMANDS decoding. ~11:30 am, for the first time, I recognized, yes, there CERTAINLY, definitely is a PROBLEM HERE.

MY THEORY IS SH*T IF AT THIS 11TH HOUR [ie now that the New Theory has changed from RevSci status to NormSci status], MY THEORY IS INCAPABLE OF FIGURING OUT WHAT MUST BE THE COMPELLING CORRECT SIGNAL DECODING.

THAT WAS THE PROBLEM THAT FELL ONTO MY PLATE, NOW FULLY PROVED THAT IT IS INDEED A PROBLEM, ABOUT 11:45 AM THIS MORNING.

A NEW “PROBLEM” CAME INTO VIEW, thanks thanks to the New Theory.

Who else, before me, ever even ASKED wtf is with his twisted arm, and palm up?

At 11:45 I could NO LONGER avoid and brush it aside like I (and everyone before me) did.

[a more generous read, in terms of “now able to better assess the magnitude of the previously noted, ‘non-explained data’, from [10 p.m. January 4, 2021], is above. Also, more generous: against my too-harsh take, THE ARM-TWIST-PALM WAS VERYMUCH NOTED BEFORE, BUT, WAS NOT CLEAR IF IT CONSTITUTED “NON-FITTING DATA”. I KNEW I HAD NO EXPLAN, BUT WASN’T SURE IF THERE WAS ANY SIGNFICANCE; IS IT A PROBLEM? IS IT “NON FITTING DATA”, OR IS IT SOMETHING TO NOTE AND SHRUG OFF? I ATTEMTED TO SHRUG OFF… THEN RE-ASSESSED YESTERDAY, AND GAUGED: NO, IT’S A SERIOUS WRINKLE; SHRUGGING OFF IS NOT APPROPRIATE, IT TURNS OUT, UPON RE-ASSESSMENT. SPECI’LY, I WAS TRYING TO DETERMIN ~11:30 AM YEST, WHOSE BOWL IS WHOSE, HOW DO I KNOW FOR A FACT HE OWNS BOTH BOWLS? LEFT HAND OBV CERTAIN HIS BOWL. RIGHT AHND… KEY Q: WHY IS HIS PALM TWISTED UP AND TOUCHING SIDE OF BLUE BOWL INSTEAD OF SHOWING CLEAR OWNERSHIP BY HAND *ON* OR *UNDER* BLOUE BWOL? WHY IS HE NOT HELPING INDICATE TO ME THE THING I AM LOOKING FOR: HIS FIRM OWNERSHIP OF HIS BOWL#2.? WHY IS HE INSTEAD, TOUCHING BOWL2 W/ SIDE OF HAND, WHILE UNNAT’LY TWIST’G SO AS TO BE … THE MORE I LOOKED, THE MORE “WOW, HIS PALM REALLY REALLY IS EMPHATICALLY UPWARD FACING / DIRECTED: SHOWING. NOT “LYING” ON TABLE, BUT HE IS *SHOWING* *THAT* HIS HAND IS EMPTY. CONNECT THAT FACT TOGETHER WITH THE 100% UNNATURAL WHITE BOWL AIMED AT US___, AND IT’S CLEAR IT’S THE SAME EQUIVANT “X IS SHOWN TO THE VIERWR”. WHY IS “PALM DISPLAYED TO THE VIEWER” JUST LIEK “WHITE EMPTY BOLW IS DISPLAYED TO THE VIEWR”? WE IKNOW THE MEANING OF THE DISPLAYED BOWL: BAT-CAVE SIGNAGE SAYS:

“EMPTY BAT-BOWL DISPLAYED TO THE VIEWER”

THEREFORE : EMPTY PLAM HAS A BAT-SIGNAGE SAYING:

“EMPTY BAT-HAND DISPLAYED TO THE VIEWER”

WHICH HAND? RIGHT HAND. HER RIGHT HAND IS ON HER BOWL. TO EAT. HIS HAND IS INSTEAD, DISPLAYED — TO HER, TO THE WORLD , TO THE VIEWER. CONTRAST: HER RIGHT HAND IS ON BOWL TO POTENTIALLY EAT. BUT IN OCNTRAST, HIS HAND IS NEXT TO BOWL, EMPTY –> THUS : *NOT* EATING. JUMPTO : *DONE* EATING. HIS LEFT HAND: ON BOWL. HER LEFT HAND: ON TABLE EEDGE. SO HE OWNS TWO BOWLS. SHE OWNS ONE. NO QUESTION, HIS RIGHT HAND *IS* TOUCHING BLOW BLUE BOWL. FROM WHOLE IMAGE WE KNOW TOUCHING = CONNECTION. THERE CANNOTBE ANY DOUBT, THERE … IT IS *CERTAIN* HE OWNS TWO BOWLS; THAT IS EVEN MORE CERTAIN THAN WHO OWNS WHITE BOWL (but plaenty of evid that Red guy owns white bowl.). i am fully prepared (as puzzle solver) to defend on all available points of evidnece, the bowls assignments. arrtist left us enable enough points of evidence to communcate the message unambigly. but you must read all the data and consider the options of interp. It’s a math problem, set up to only all one allow one definitely correct answer — after you consider all of the clues. Once you consider all of the clues, THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY. BUT, you can’t half-ass it. You *must* consider *all* the given data/clues, same as Classroom Exam on left. ONLY THEN is there no ambiguity.


]

I for this first time, PROVED that this REALLY IS a PROBLEM that DEMANDS solution, SUCH THAT: no one can possibly claim to have “solved” the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image , while having failed to even attempt, seriously attempt, to compellingly consistently systematically EXPLAIN his arm twist palm up touching his 2nd dose blue bowl.

WHY ISN’T HE HOLDING THE BOWL? YOUR THEORY IS SH*T, IF YOU CANNOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION!!!!! (your theory is both “SHIT”, and “SHOT”!) THE REALLY FUNNY ODD THING IS, THAT AS SOON AS I PROVED THAT HIS HAND REALL, REALLY, IS A BIG BIG PROBLME, (1145AM TODAY), IT ONLY TOOK 5-10 MINUTES TO SOLVE! !! HELL, IT TAKES ME 2 HORUS HOURS TO THEORIZE, ABOVE, ABOUT THE THEORY OF SCIENCE: THE CYCLE OF DISCOVERING A PROBLEM, POSSIBLY ANNOUNCING THE PROBLME TO COMUNITY, HYPOTHESIZING, TESTING, PUBLISHING THE SOLUTION, AND YOU MAY HAVE A COMBINATION, OF MANY PROBLMS, INCLUDING BOTH, OLD KNOWN UNSOLVED PROLBLEMS, PLUS, NEWLY REVEALED PROBLEMS THAT THE NEW THEORY IS ABLE TO RVEALE MAYBE LIKE 11145 AM TODAY I WAS ABLE TO REVEAL AND FULLY ADEQUATELY *ARTICULATE* THE PROBLEM THAT THE OLD “LESS-THAN-THEORRY’ IS OBLIVOUS TO, AND TAT THAT NEW NEW THEORY, PROVIDES PROVES ITS MERIT BY BEING ABLE TO REVEAL “HEY HERE’S A PROBLEM WE CAN NOW SEE THANKS TO THE NEW THEORY”. SO, IT’S TOO NEGATIVE TOSAY , “OMG THE PALM-UP SHOWS A PROBLEMATIC QUALITY OF THE NEW THEORY”. NO. RATHER, THE OLD THEORY WAS SO BAD AND BLIND, THAT IT COULDN’T EVEN *SEE* THE PROBLEM. THE NEW THEORY IS SO *GOOD*, THAT THE NEW THEORY powerefullly makes perceptivble, the problem that was hidden, befrore. and, being awesome theory, IT ONLY TOOK 10 MINUTES OF APPLYIN GHT ENEW THEOR APPLYING THE NEW THEORY, TO SOLVE THE “NEW”, RATHER, .. NEWLY MADE-VISIBLE-BY-THE-WORONDERFUL NEW THEORY”, PROBLEM.” IT’S NOT A NEW PROBLEM, SO MUCH AS, A NEWLY *discovered* problem. Who gets crediit for … don’t just ask “who gets credit for SOLVING” THE ‘NEW PROBLEM’, NO. ASK: WHO GETS CREDIT FOR *DISCOVERING* AND *REVEALING* AND MAKING PERCEPTIBEL, THE “NEW” PROBLEM. ANSWER: ME, AND the Egodeath theory (SPECIF’LY, my previous the Canterbury Psalter “mushroom tree/ hanging/ sword” image decoding work/system.) So I grant myself doulbe-credit; my Theory, my decoding, is DOUBLY CONFIRMED AND CORRUPOBATE: CORROBORATED:
O THE NEW THEORY IS CONFIRMED, IN THAT IT SUCCESSFULLY EXPOSED / DISCOVERED A NEW/ PREVIOSULY HIDDEN PROBLEM. (STRONGER: NEW THEORY PROVED THERE REALLY IS A REAL, SERIOUS PROBLEM. IT IS *NOT* A “PROBLEM WITH THE NEW THEORY”, THAT’S MIS-FRAMING. IT’S A PROBLEM MADE VISIBLE THANKS TO THE HUGE MERIT OF THE NEW THEORY.)
O THE NEW THEORY IS CONFIRMED, IN THAT IT SUCCESSFULLLY SOLVED — IN ONLY 10 MINUTES — THE PROBLEM.
THAT IS TWO WINS. NOT A LOSS + A WIN.

MY NOON ACCOMPLISHMENTS TODAY, BOTH WHICH CONFIRM THE NEW THEORY/DECODING-SYSTEM:
1. I USED THE THEORY TO PROVE THAT THE IMAGE PRESNTS A DECODING PROBLEM: PALM UP. THAT TOOK 5 MINUTES.
2. I USED THE THEORY TO SOLVE THAT DECODING PROBLEM. IN ONLY 10 MINUTES.

-mh 2020]

looking for my Shroom review at URL to check # of stars: I’m guessing I always wanted to take my rating down from 4 to 3… did I? No.

But see, even now, I COULD reduce my rating from 4 to 3. I was always reluctant to do so. Because we need books on the topic, including critical books, which Shroom is.

As max/cyb says about James Kent: WE AGREE WITH HIM ON SOME POINTS/ASPECTS.

[entheogen scholarship] Customer Reviews of Letcher’s book Shroom

partial, one cust review: Nov 20, 2008

1 out of 5 stars:
Why did he write it?

I have a hard time imagining what Andy Letcher’s motivation for writing it was. I was waiting for some kind of new insight which would justify the time spent, but all I got was a lot of humorless nit-picking about “history” [this reviewer takes “history” as seriously as I do -mh], a protracted exercise in defamation, and a vacuum of misunderstanding of what his targets were about. History can be shaped to appear to prove or disprove anything anyway, by anyone with the will and patience to do so. Why title a book “Shroom” and then proceed to suck every ounce of wonder, mystery and fun out of the topic? [ damn, reviewer reveals how similar Hatsis is to Letcher. I say, let Myth be Myth, allow Santa Amanita. otoh, Hatsis’ History-of-Christmas video IS quite interesting. -mh]

Letcher is trying to reassert cold science’s dominion over early 21st century life, refuting all ideas that fail to live up to the challenge of scientifically verifiable data.

But this is totally missing the point anyway. Whether or not the ideas of McKenna, Wasson, Allegro, or Heinrich can be proved or disproved by someone calling himself a “historian”, they are mythology anyway, and a useful, vital mythology is what any culture needs to thrive. Our society is desperately in search of a new myth to help it negotiate the current state of disgrace it finds itself in. Just read a little Joseph Campbell for starters. You won’t be able to “prove” any of it but you might come away with some inspiration, and that’s more than I got from this book. …”

might be some cool negative reviews of Letcher. Mine was probably the first review at US Amzn – CHECK UK NEGATIVE REVIEWS TOO.

One bonehead reviewer — who you’d expect to cheer-on Letcher — instead strangely disses him. Anyway that guy wrote this rubbish:

“The very idea that any substance initialized religion is absurd.“

Explain to us, Big Brain, why the idea that
{substances which induce strong religious experiencing
initialized religion}
is absurd?

Given that Psilocybe are edible directly; fresh or dried, explain how ingesting psilocybin came after asking your 19th C-styled, rationalistic questions, “What is all this for? Why are we here?”
Your argument makes NO SENSE.

Reviewer’s arg:

“religion is the ideas and/or organization that occurs as a result of fundamental questioning, like, “what is all this for? why are we here?” etc. [BS! who says? that’s your arbitrary hypthetical late-Modern-styled explanatory model, your Rationalistic 19th C theory of religion. -mh]

“Questions [in the ordinary state -mh] like those are the basis of any religious or spiritual effort and precede ingestion of psychadelic substances. [yeah, i trust yor jujmint on psychadelics -mh] Psychadelics then aid in altering perspective and function as self-investigative tools.”
ok your towering intellect totally convinced me; you’re almost even capable of writing a position statement defining your arbitrarily assumed, 19th C Rationalistic Theory of Religion

2007 reviewer:
“Recently, the occult-like or New Age orientation of various popular offerings about psilocybin mushrooms has begun to come under critical fire, as it does here in Shroom.”

My local copy of my the Egodeath Yahoo Group post, book review of Shroom:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/20/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-90/#message4577

My review at Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R2S31GIZ2GJYOE/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0060828285
goddamit what’s the date dude, follow protocol!

Customer Review
Michael Hoffman
4.0 out of 5 stars Partial critical engagement with entheogen theory of religious origins
Reviewed on April 1, 2007


4 of 5 stars. (I always after, felt that was too generous)
Review by me
32 ppl found this review helpful
“It doesn’t occur to Letcher to imagine and address the obvious critical arguments and questions against his hasty discussion, such as: why assume that a mushroom allusion had to be secret? why is an officially designed depiction of a mushroom automatically ruled out as unthinkable? why was the fig tree stylized in the specific form of a Liberty Cap mushroom? what about the hundreds of other specifically psilocybin mushroom-shaped trees in Christian art?”

[strawmanfest] Daily Vocabulary Building

hubris

hubris – excessive pride or self-confidence.
synonyms:
arrogance · conceit · conceitedness · haughtiness · pride · vanity · self-importance · self-conceit · pomposity · superciliousness · feeling of superiority · hauteur · uppitiness · big-headedness

In Greek tragedy: excessive pride toward or defiance of the gods, leading to nemesis.

nemesis

The inescapable agent of someone’s or something’s downfall. A downfall caused by an inescapable agent. “One risks nemesis by uttering such words.”
Synonyms: downfall · undoing · ruin · ruination · destruction. retributive justice.

braggadocio

braggadocio – boastful or arrogant behavior.

impertinence

impertinence – lack of respect; rudeness. Synonyms: rudeness · insolence · impoliteness · unmannerliness · bad manners · lack of civility · discourtesy · discourteousness · disrespectfulness · incivility · impudence · cheek · cheekiness · audacity · temerity · effrontery · nerve · gall · boldness · brazenness · [more]

a big mouth

idiom:- a big mouth – A tendency or habit of speaking incessantly and indiscreetly, especially about sensitive or secret information. If I’d known you had such a big mouth, I’d have never shared my secret with you! God you’ve got a big mouth! Don’t you ever stop talking about other people’s business? 2. A person who talks in such a manner.
freedictionary.com

But I mean “big mouth” in two distinct senses:

  • braggadocio (unsupported by actuality), “big talk”
  • lack of all discretion
big talk

idiom: big talk – Boastful, arrogant, or grandiose talk or statements, usually that which is without merit, veracity, or substance.
“Lucy is always full of big talk, but she rarely follows through on it.”
— Farlex Dictionary of Idioms

gauche

gauche – Lacking ease or grace; unsophisticated and socially awkward, clumsy.
Behaving in a way that is offensive to other people, because of not knowing what is correct or not caring about the feelings of others.

punk

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punk –
3a: a young inexperienced person : BEGINNER, NOVICE
especially : a young man

[strawmanfest] Podcast Guidelines

Page title: Transcendent Knowledge Podcast episodes
Subsection: Rules for Unruly Guests at Banquet – for the Horses (Bouncers)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/07/transcendent-knowledge-podcast-episodes/#Rules-for-Guests
Subsection: Ideas for Future Topics
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/07/transcendent-knowledge-podcast-episodes/#Ideas-for-Future-Topics

[safety] Phrase of the Day

Don’t be a comically exaggerated reckless maniac character straight out of a Cheech & Chong movie, to the point of self-parody, like a cartoon character.
This isn’t a spiritual wang-measuring contest.

[strawmanfest, safety] Good Values, and Lessons Learned

  • The Egodeath theory does not make recommendations for first-hand experiencing or intensity. The Egodeath theory recommends reading and studying the Egodeath theory, per the Lesser Mysteries textbook education.
  • Do not invasively probe and publicly discuss private matters. Respect people’s privacy. Mind Your Own Business. Have some common sense. Don’t be a blabbermouth. Respect people’s personal space. Be low-key. Don’t be doing your best ADHD+Aspergers caricature impression; give people some space. Tone it down. Be mellow to be around, not on full blast all the time.
  • Do not fixate on and fetishize a particular idea-label such as ‘the Absolute’. Be consistently flexible with concept-labels. Don’t be rigid and superstitious and brittle, about concept-labels, or about areas of focus and value. A simplistic, 1-dimensional, one-size-fits-all, mono-focus value system is too rigid and limited.

    [value multiple interrelated distinct things,
    not just value “the experience”, inarticulate, all lumped vaguely together into one undifferentiated heap.

    Here’s the trajectory:
    o Loosecog, the intense mystic altered state.
    o Experiencing nondual unity oneness awareness (unearned).
    o Battle, wrestle angel.
    o Transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism.
    o Experiencing nondual unity oneness awareness (earned).

    Here’s the trajectory:
    1) UNEARNED GLIMPSE of unity, bringing your pollution/impurity to the god(dess)
    2) spot the dragon monster, mental pollution awakens the furies/ wrath of the god; discover the control-vortex fascinating vulnerability
    3) battle/ reconcile with the dragon/vulnerability
    4) EARNED unity ]
  • Honor and listen to other people’s self-description of their position; don’t [carelessly, nonchalantly, flippantly] presume to dictate to them what their position is. Have a good amount of self-doubt in determining accurately what the other person’s position is. Check with the other person or system, to see whether you are accurately representing their position.
  • Do not fuse together and conflate two ideas such as ‘the Absolute’ and “high dose”. You have to differentiate as well as integrate, not only integrate so as to fuse and conflate and lose all distinctions.
  • Do not go around publicly broadcasting, all hat & no cattle, 365 days a year talking and talking incessantly to everyone about what high doses you do (which you don’t even do). And how your experience is bigger than everyone else’s. And how everyone else’s metaphysics is wrong, in the same identical, undifferentiated way, because [you think] their experience is smaller than yours. [censored]
  • Oversimplistic extremism leads to total self-contradiction and gibberish and misrepresentation; false self-aggrandizement through strawmanning; falsely reducing and misrepresenting others’ views; and unnecessary, increased danger and risk.
  • Don’t be reckless, naive, and foolhardy; be cautious and reasonably reserved. Have some balance. Don’t be a comically exaggerated reckless maniac character straight out of a Cheech & Chong movie. This isn’t a spiritual wang-measuring contest.
  • Shut up and let the other person talk at length, uncrowded, without interrupting them repeatedly. One person talk at a time; let the other person finish their thought.
  • State your logical argumentation structure explicitly, like “I think that the other person asserts X; whereas my position instead, is Y.” This is basic intellectual discussion decorum and communication.
  • Trust your gut: if your dosage level proposition frightens you, hint: it’s too much. You’ve ended up with bad values; jettison those harmful values.
  • Use greater amount of the Lesser Mysteries, and lesser amount of the Greater Mysteries. Do more studying of the Egodeath theory, receptively, without forcing preconceptions onto it; and use less reliance on extreme experiencing.
  • Avoid extremism. Have some balance. If you are always saying “more”, and never saying “moderation”, that’s extremism, and has lost its balance, and is out of control.
  • Don’t spread bad values, telling people that the ideal is to trip so hard every time, you can’t even form thoughts, and that it’s a good idea to always increase dosage every time, and that the first thing you always ask everyone whose path you cross, is “Have you regularly tripped hard on 20 grams like I do?”
  • Have some sense, decorum, modesty, propriety, and balance. If all you ever say is “more is better”, and you never balance that out, that’s completely out of control; that’s an uncontrolled value-system.
  • There are many various experiences, not requiring chasing more and more extreme ultra-hyper experiences, as if that’s the only thing in the world that matters.

[strawmanfest, safety] Moving My Corrections of Opportunistic Misrepresentations of the Egodeath Theory, to the Hidden, Drafts Area

I will try to keep a balance of tone here at WordPress.

If people strawman and misrepresent the Egodeath theory for their own misguided self-aggrandizement, and they mislead other people, they should not cry when they get set straight on the facts of the matter.

One time, two years ago, I tried being nice. I quickly learned how abusive of treatment that being nice can lead to.

If I can be bothered getting around to it, I will move more of my scathing analysis to the drafts area, hidden.

If someone grossly misrepresents the Egodeath theory for their own misguided self-aggrandizement, and if they mislead people with awful advice and bad values, the record will be set straight.

[esoteric initiation, safety] Would Firsthand Experience Be Required, to Have Gnosis? Yes, if One Were to Be a Hierophant Guiding Others

[2:19 p.m. January 2, 2021] – Good idea about the question of “is firsthand experience w/ loosecog required?” Can you be considered to have gnosis by studying the perfect the Egodeath theory in textbook, or, does having gnosis require firsthand experience?

Here’s a pretty solid point of reference:

trip sitter must have firsthand experience. Hierophant. No such thing as a hierophant who lacks firsthand experience.

In the Lesser Mysteries, candidates for initiates fully study and learn text book knowledge, using the ideal the Egodeath theory instruction. The only thing that’s aded in the Greater Mysteries, is first-hand experience of what the initiates, when they were candidates/students, learned in COMPLETE 100% DETAIL.

  1. Students/candidates for initiation, study 100% all about loss of control, mental worldmodel transformation , seizure, prayer, reset, purification, mythemese. They know everything that there is to know, 100%. Detailed descriptions of the train of thought, reset, everything inside & out thoroughly.
  2. Initiates then experience first-hand, guided by hierophant who must have full firsthand experience (all these people have 100% of the textbook knowledge and reports from the reports first-hand people). By this definition, there is no more textbook theory to be learned by initiates during firsthand experience; they already studied the reports entirely, and the theory entirely, and explanation of the sequence of experiences and control-thoughts. There should be literally nothing left to learn, as a second-hand student, from total description based on hand experiences. If initiates learn any additional textbook knowledge /theory during initiation, that means that the textbook training was incomplete.

[entheogen scholarship] Moderate Entheogen Scholars = Peak Self-Contradiction

Come to think of it, I’m almost less annoyed by the Minimalists who deny all entheogens in Western history, than the super-annoying Moderates, who don’t even have the have the integrity to be 100% evil liars.

Modern entheogen scholars are the worst.

As a Maximalist, my main bad-guys are the Moderates, who are closer to me than the Minimalists.

The Minimalists, well, they just do what they do, head fully in sand.

But the Moderates, are really aggravating, they walk in a complete self-contradiction.

Minimalists do not walk in contradiction: they are consistent – can respect that.

Minimalists are not self-contradictory.

Moderates are Peak Self-Contradiction:

“Teh Sooper Sekret Mushroom cult, was EVERYWHERE!!! Here’s 8 more books packed w/ evidence of the ultra-secret!”

[conflict of interest, scholars’ mushroom cover-up] Healthy & Balanced Scorched-Earth Skepticism

https://cyberdisciple.wordpress.com/2020/11/17/moving-on-from-muraresku-the-immortality-key/

“What does it mean, to “not take an author seriously” on a given topic?”

By default, assume an author has a hidden deceptive ulterior motive. Assume insincere and compromised until proven otherwise.

Far as I’m concerned, any author writing about Psilocybin in Greek or Christian religious history is a con artist for hire, paid to play-act in a cover-up.

The entire field is corrupt. (Unless an instance is proven otherwise; exception proves rule.)

What would it be like to do scholarship with such a mindset?

I’ve kind of been operating that way since about 1995 when I descrecrated a bunch of books. That paid off.

All Books and Authors Are Fake and Cr*p and Phony, Unless Proven Otherwise. Kind of liberating.

What’s this author’s phony put-on shtik?

Don’t default to taking them seriously; default to not taking any writer seriously, until they prove themselves.

Book industry is all phony;

“Scholar for Hire:

Just let me know what conclusion you need, and I’ll scholar-it-up for you.

Competitive Rates.”

I call massive BS on all entheogen books — with one hand they give, with one hand they take away.

“Look, wow, Mandrake in Christian history — but no, no artist in history EVER, not ONE time, EVER painted a mushroom.“

Yeah go jump cliff, poser. C-grade play-actor; scholar for hire.

I am so DONE with the lot of ye. Phonies All!

I no longer take ANY entheogen book seriously. It’s all totally politized/compromised.

What Is The Ulterior Motive for this Fake or… LEVERAGED purpose-driven scholarship? Not to follow the facts where they lead, out of intellectual curiosity, that’s for sure.

That’s some examples of the mindset, one mindset, we could mean by “I no longer taking any scholarship seriously”.

The whole thing’s a racket, a pretext, more than anything.

What’s HIS agenda?

Every book has some covert agenda; what’s this book’s covert manipulation agenda?

Every writer who ever weighed in on mushrooms in Christian history, has an agenda.

All Are Compromised; All Can be Reliably Trusted to Be Scheming in Some Way or Other, every one of them.

Prove me wrong, that’s fine — but Defenses Up.

Every writer is “selling” something. Helpful assumption.

The whole stinking field is crookeder than a barrel of snakes.

I would never believe a single WORD of any published writer about this field, Psilocybin in Greek & Christian history/art.

The whole field is a crookd op.

Everything written on the topic is baloney, same way I feel about Meditation Hucksters, and it’s the same way harsh atheists feel about “priestcraft” — frauds all.

I wouldn’t make “not taking any writer seriously” that way my only view, but it’s definitely a must-have tool in your utility belt, healthy strong skepticism.

I have seen such scorched-earth, oversimplistic dismissal misapplied, like “every religion book ever, is hokem” – how many babies to throw out, with so much oceans’ worth of bathwater?

[podcast] Sleuthing for Podcast Commentary Posts

Initially I posted them in thread “Transcendent Knowledge podcast”, they started in 2016. Then created later new thread just for comtary, “Transcendent Knowledge podcast commentary”? when?

doing Find in local 183 Digest html files.

Episode 3 ctary: a few short posts: add them reight right now to the existing WordPress page for ctary 3…

wow just had flash memory recollection, of having the episodes outlines backwards in the thread and then forward, when I decided to bulk-post all the outlines. In the Egodeath Yahoo Group Digest 154, top, is Ep5 outline post, then 4, 3 ,2, 1. whats at end of digest 153?

Digest 153 includes threads:

  • Subject: Re: Intellectual autobiography & origins of Egodeath theory
Group: egodeathMessage: 7975From: egodeathDate: 24/06/2016
Subject: Re: Transcendent Knowledge podcast
Episode 1: Cyber
Episode 2: Max
Episode 3: Paradigms
Episode 4: Ball
Episode 5: Nutt
lotsa

lotsa random stuff:

Group: egodeathMessage: 7979From: egodeathDate: 25/06/2016
Subject: Redosing mushroom wine
Redosing mushroom wine

Sacred meal banqueting parties in Antiquity used a superior practice of extending and tempering the peak window of the mystic altered state:

o *Drinking* psilocybin wine, instead of eating mushrooms.

o *Redosing*, instead of a single dose with excessive peak and insufficient duration of the useful peak window.

This approach gives qualitatively different results, optimized.

Redosing enables controlling and extending the peak window of loose cognitive binding to reach the ideal target intensity and stay there for an extended duration, rather than a bell curve or triangle shape with constantly changing intensity ramping up and then immediately ramping down.

Using a short-duration psychedelic gives faster control over the speed of increase and the speed of descent.

A short-duration psychedelic makes it possible, through timed redosing, to rapidly rise to the desired level, *stay* at that constant level for the desired duration, and then *when desired*, rapidly descend to baseline.

The modern poor conventional approach of taking a single massive dose at one point in time is like going into a bar and immediately pounding five shots and then no more, versus Antiquity’s redosing rounds which is like drinking one shot at a time staggered over hours.

— original research by Michael Hoffman, the Egodeath theorist.
Copyright (C) 2016 Egodeath. All Rights Reserved.
Group: egodeathMessage: 7981From: egodeathDate: 25/06/2016
Subject: Re: Transcendent Knowledge podcast
Episode 5 (critical analysis of Psychedelic Neuroscience) has quickly become the most popular of the first 5 episodes.

The Transcendent Knowledge podcast is exceptional, a model of high signal-noise ratio, cogency, impact, profundity, and relevance. There is practically no room for improvement in the content.

My only suggestion is about production, not content: use dynamic level *compression* or uniform speaking volume, on Cyber’s voice, like Max’s elocution; sometimes Cyber’s voice is too loud or quiet.

Transcendent Knowledge Podcast, episode 5:
critical analysis of Psychedelic Neuroscience
Group: egodeathMessage: 7993From: egodeathDate: 25/06/2016
Subject: Re: Transcendent Knowledge podcast
This podcast series is a powerful constructive critical analysis.

This is a valuable fully critical analysis, with constructive analysis and recommendations.


This podcast series has birds commenting in it, and a magic bus makes a stop here, on its way to losing control steering around a high mountain corner, a skid, an extended silent fall, and crash explosion below.

— Michael Hoffman, certified therapist, trip guide, tour guide, sitter, Shamanic Psychotherapist, cognition healer, magician, hierophant, priestly magus magician, professional official sacrificer, teacher, high Philosopher, and state-licensed exorcist
Group: egodeathMessage: 7997From: egodeathDate: 26/06/2016
Subject: Re: Neurobollocks

https://neurobollocks.wordpress.com/ –

NeuroBollocks
Debunking pseudo-neuroscience so you don’t have to

[block universe, no-free-will, determinism] Nice Phrases: “Determinism vs. Eternalism”, “Causal-Chain Determinism vs. Block-Universe Eternalism”

‘domino chain’ is still clearer in a way, b/c causal-chain determinism could mean hierarchical levels of control: god->heimarmene-> the control-thought inserter/injector -> the control-thought receiver/receptacle. Domino-chain is a nicely literal model.

Preferred pairing (short form):
“determinism vs. eternalism“
Preferred pairing (long-form):
“causal-chain determinism vs. block-universe eternalism“
Rare pairing; discouraged:
“causal-chain determinism vs. block-universe determinism“

Nice phrase-contrast:
causal-chain determinism
block-universe eternalism;
for short, “determinism vs. eternalism” – sweet. most of the time, avoid
“block-universe determinism”,
just adds confusion, not enough diff’n

I like this particular phrase-contrast:

  • causal-chain determinism
  • block-universe eternalism

Can read/elocute as:

(causal-chain) determinism vs. (block-universe) eternalism

and that opens a wonderful gate, opportunity, to have the short elegant version:

determinism vs. eternalism

[Western entheogen scholarship] Scholars’ Cover-up of Mushrooms in Christian History

Scholars Who Have Argued in Bad Faith in Order to Cover-up Mushrooms in Christian History

In some cases, it might be true that a writer is deliberately or unintentionally asserting one position, while actually holding a different position.

I covered McKenna’s hypocrisy and false, deceptive self-presentation elsewhere (per Jan Irvin’s research).

In the field of Western entheogen scholarship, in the subtopic of mushrooms in Christian art, various scholars have participated in a cover-up operation, where the scholars first agree and decide that their objective is to suppress mushrooms from Christian history, and then in support of that prior commitment, they concoct excuses and false reasoning, which they themselves do not believe, in order to deceive and persuade everyone that the mushrooms in Christian art are not mushrooms, and that no Christian painter ever intentionally depicted mushrooms.

Obviously, ‘Mushrooms’ Means Psychoactive Mushrooms, for the Purpose of Religious Experiencing

As a formality, to shut out a stupid attempted bad-faith argumentation move:

To point out the screamingly obvious, against those who pretend to be dense and dimwitted:

When I say ‘mushrooms’, obviously and of course I mean, psychoactive mushrooms ingested for the purpose of religious experiencing — as everyone knows perfectly well, despite their pretense of being stupid and dense.

[meta-theory, Transcendent Knowledge development technique] It Didn’t Work, Trying to Work-Up Ideas as a New Weblog Page Without First Using this Idea Development Page

I tried writing an actual Weblog Post, but for certain material, it’s much better to work within this idea development page instead.

Bad-Faith Arguers & Con Artists. As an experiment, I tried using WordPress weblog “Post” format as designed, but I fear too many pages. I kind of like the long “idea development pages”.

I didn’t like using the WordPress “weblog Post” format as intended. I don’t like that approach though. I like the balance of visibility and non-visibility, of working-up text within the idea development page, and after a bunch of messy blasting-away there, then I selectively copy-out clean passages to the posting.

Conclusion: using the WordPress “weblog post” format alone, doesn’t work – and simultaneous didn’t work either. Better is:

  1. Work-up ideas in idea development page.
  2. Possibly create a weblog post later.

I have to be able to be sloppy and have lots of room on the cutting floor; there are going to be lots of rejected -or at least, “not officially part of the article” passages. f this (forget using only a weblog page, to work-up ideas).

I have to work-up the ideas in idea development page, not in present post. Now creating section of idea development page 8…

Incendiary Fulminations

Don’t Move this John Lash Material into the Weblog Post

I meant to find a guy excited to discover mushrooms — but instead, found John Lash 😦

Lash almost smells like he has much in common with Allegro. Some Same vibes.

Same politicizing of Mushrooms: LET’S USE THE FACT THAT WE FOUND MUSHROOMS IN Christianity, AS A WEAPON TO HARM NORMAL Christianity.

It is hard to articulate a common bad motivation of Lash & Allegro. They have too different of trajectories.

This isn’t the positive angle I was looking for —
Lash’s deleted pages where he found the Psalter microfilm Canterbury, they didn’t let him view Psalter directly, but microfiche. Lame-brain anti-Christian John Lash – who shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the field of Western entheogen scholarship.

Subsection of idea development page 6:
Article: “Illuminated Heresy: More Images from the Paris Eadwine Psalter” (Lash 2007)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/idea-development-page-6/#Article-Illuminated-Heresy

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/idea-development-page-6/#Lashs-Deleted-Mushroom-Articles

Subsection of idea development page 6:
John Lash Likes Entheogens, and Hates Abrahamic Religion, Therefore, Abrahamic Religion Cannot Have Included Entheogens
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/idea-development-page-6/#John-Lash-Likes-Entheogens-Hates-Religion-Therefore —

Here’s John Lash, who hates Christianity (ab’ic rel’s), looking through Psalter, excited and mind blown b/c mushrooms. I think he reasons, “those were heretical mushroom users in Christianity, b/c I love entheogens, and hate Christianity, therefore, I cannot allow “actual that is, evil” Christianity to have had mushrooms, therefore, the evidence I just found for mushrooms in Christianity, has to be “not actually Christian use of mushrooms”.
YEAH, THATS THE TICKET!

From idea development page 2 [7:50 a.m. November 27, 2020]: copied here, clean up: current = [12:20 p.m. December 31, 2020]

todo: in idea development page 3, add image URL for “Snake Oil” product.

I already moved a couple paragraphs from the below section; keep the remainder here on the cutting floor:

PRIESTS SELL SNAKE OIL – the Meditation industry & the fake-Eucharist Mass industry – of Literalist Ordinary-state Possibilism AND THEY SUPPRESS MUSHROOMS TOGETHER WITH SUPPRESSING Analogical Psychedelic Eternalism.

Priests suppress mushrooms in order to sell fake religion, snake oil [the Meditation industry & the fake-Eucharist Mass industry], for profit; selling fake Eucharist & Literalist Ordinary-state Possibilism, which requires suppressing mushrooms & Analogical Psychedelic Eternalism.

Expanding “huckster priests suppressed mushrooms”, to “suppressed Analogical Psychedelic Eternalism to sell snake oil [the Meditation industry & the fake-Eucharist Mass industry] of Literalist Ordinary-state Possibilism”.

The Protestant reformation literally was Ott’s Entheogenic Reformation.

Luther wanted people to know about mushrooms and Analogical Psychedelic Eternalism, against the priests who were selling for profit snake oil [the Meditation industry & the fake-Eucharist Mass industry] of non-mushrooms, fake eucharist, Literalist Ordinary-state Possibilism , with clearing of sin by magical thinking requiring blood literal sacrifice – which John MacArthur condemns wonderfully resoundingly, “Catholics” (Literalist Ordinary-state Possibilism snake oil [the Meditation industry & the fake-Eucharist Mass industry] salesmen).

/ end of material from idea development page 2

WordPress “Post” Format Is Better than “Page” Format, to Quickly Enter Edit Mode for Authoring, though Narrower Column When Viewing/Reading

Motivation: Make “Edit” link appear at top not bottom of page, to enter idea development page edit mode faster.

Authoring is no different in present WordPress weblog “Post” vs. WordPress web “Page” format.

Page format is a bit of a pain to enter Edit mode, b/c link for Edit is at bottom. Need to cut keystrokes to enter edit mode for idea development! So, go back to using “Post” not “Page” format, here.

Unknown's avatar

Author: egodeaththeory

http://egodeath.com

Leave a comment