Against Freedom, Liberty, & Freewill: Leveraging the Clue of Maximum Offense Against Egoic Premises of Value

I had huge problems with voice dictation here this morning. I’ll clean up the page later. I have to commit to a rule of never use voice dictation within the WordPress app; always use it within the notes app and then copy paste it into the app.

https://www.amazon.com/Waking-Up-Spirituality-Without-Religion/dp/1451636024 – psychedelics-positive but zero integration of his no-free-will assertion

https://www.amazon.com/Free-Will-Deckle-Edge-Harris/dp/1451683405/ –

Harris book blurb:

“A belief in free will touches nearly everything that human beings value.

“It is difficult to think about law, politics, religion, public policy, intimate relationships, morality—as well as feelings of remorse or personal achievement—without first imagining that every person is the true source of his or her thoughts and actions.

“And yet the facts tell us that free will is an illusion.

“In this enlightening book, Sam Harris argues that this truth about the human mind does not undermine morality or diminish the importance of social and political freedom, but it can and should change the way we think about some of the most important questions in life.”

Adding quotes from Hanegraaff, Brown, & Davis taking for granted that the goal of life & enlightenment is personal freedom a la egoic premises, which includes per today’s raw voice recording VOX_TK_4117.wav) two distinct components interlocked:

• personal freedom/choice/control/steering power, the “personal control” aspect …
• within a context of branching possibility/ tree/ world/ time. the “eternalism” aspect.

Egoic Assumptions & Attitudes Toward Personal Control Freedom and Presumed Branching Possibilities: The Assumed Selling Point that Transcendent Knowledge Gives You Control Power and Freedom in an Open Future

Eve is not a weak-willed woman … she is a courageous spiritual guide who leads humanity to exercise free will and achieve higher consciousness.

Brown & Brown. Page 7 of 2019 article. Entheogens in Christian art: Wasson, Allegro, and the Psychedelic Gospels. Journal of Psychedelic Studies, Special Issue on Psychedelics in History
and World Religions, re: Plaincourault

[in Late Antiquity, the spirituality industry’s “I Hate Fate” theme of hermetic spirituality & of Late Antiquity – find ‘free’, “liberty”, “liberate”, “the Ogdoad, above the heimarmene”[sic!]]

Wouter Hanegraaff, page n, Hermetic Spirituality, 2022

[Davis’ framing and narrative, assuming a selling point, that the purpose and end-goal project and objective of the Egodeath theory is to provide transcendental freedom and “a way out of the matrix” of block-universe determinism ]

Erik Davis, page 122, Led Zeppelin IV, 2005

2-level model of mental model development when alternating 2 states of consciousness:

• 2) eternalism-thinking
• 1) possibilism-thinking

I don’t believe that in 2005 I ever said that it’s a concern of the Egodeath theory to “solve the problem” of block-universe determinism.

I did strive to explain and model the 3-level model of:

• 3) qualified possibilism-thinking based on eternalism-thinking – not throwing eternalism-thinking into Hanegraaff’s Rejected wastebasket demonized as “infection, contamination, impurity, negative psychological traits”. Specifically not possibilism-thinking that’s separate from and opposed to eternalism-thinking, as if to venerate Mithras (hypercosmic; cosmos model levels 9 & 10) separated from Helios (heimarmene, level 8, fixed stars, cosmos highest level /boundary).
• 2) basic eternalism-thinking (cosmos level 8; fixed stars)
• 1) naive possibilism-thinking (cosmos level 1; Earth)

Per a 4-level “states & stages” model:

• 4) eternalism-based possibilism experiencing (ie tightcog state)
• 3) eternalism-based eternalism experiencing (ie loosecog state)
• 2) possibilism-premised eternalism experiencing (ie loosecog state) [“unstable!” 😨 😱]
• 1) possibilism-premised possibilism experiencing (ie tightcog state)

loosecog = loose mental construct association binding (ie the altered state from 2 bowls of cubensis 1.5 hours apart x 10 weeks, or from exactly equivalent plants)

tightcog = tight mental construct association binding

Beware of the pre/trans fallacy cautioned by Wilber: naive possibilism-thinking is very different than eternalism-based possibilism experiencing – a different basis relied on; possibilism “based” (ie possibilism premised), vs. eternalism based.

______

Egodeath Mystery Show discussion yesterday (see date in url and in UI, was Sep 17 2022 date of voice recording) & recorded today so far, Sep 18 2022.

Interesting and surprising critical critique of Erik Davis page 122 of Led Zep 4, he claims that the Egodeath Theory is about engineering a solution to the “problem” of the Transcendent Knowledge experiential revelation of block universe determinism.

Look how naturally – he cannot just stop and halt at saying that transcendent knowledge is of block-universe determinism.

[voice dict’n deleted the main text here, and multiple attempts at summarizing]

what Erik Davis expresses may be a half truth , that we do end up in a return to baseline consciousness, which has the experiencing of, in which we experience in the form of branching possibility and the power of steering with freedom power.

We freely steer among the branching possibilities.

But when we return to baseline state (tightcog), eventually the mind remembers the metaphysical enlightenment experienced and perceived in the altered state (loosecog).

Erik Davis claims that the end goal of Transcendent Knowledge according to the Egodeath theory is an increase of free will power freedom and liberty. Davis says the Egodeath theory presents and discovers a problem of block universe determinism.

And then Davis emphasizes out of seemingly out of nowhere, and he projects on to the theory of Transcendent Knowledge, he takes it for granted that it must end up and we need to end up in the state of increased liberty and freedom in free will, that we’ve got to engineer a restoring of liberty and freedom after the revelation of block-universe determinism.

I critiqued, I criticized and discovered that Davis frames — he accurately describes the Egodeath theory — but then he frames it with an emphasis and a marketing spin a framing by adding onto the end of it that the Egodeath theory presents a solution to this “problem” of block-universe determinism, in order to return our precious presumed premise of liberty being the goal of revelation.

And look how naturally it comes to our constitutional instinctive premises that we need to end up in a state of increased personal liberty — that’s a taken for granted goal.

Now look at that, stop and consider that, & leverage that – but look how these words are loaded with value premises.

… it that’s … branching possibilism-thinking , naive possibilism-thinking,

and the main idea of this posting and have … yesterday’s strategic insight

[voice dictation deleted my summarizations]

This instinctive assumption that of course the goal of revelation, metaphysical enlightenment, must be an increase of my power, and an increase of my power to steer among the open branching possibilities —

The fact that the most offensive idea in the world would be to assert that transcendent knowledge reveals the lack of freedom provides an important and valuable clue to the nature of naive possibilism-thinking & the substitution project, and avoidance project, of delusion-based enlightenment.

Delusion-based enlightenment takes it for granted the whole goal of the game — as Erik Davis incorrectly describes a Egodeath Theory — he assumes that the whole goal of the game must be to return to freedom, and the increase of our personal freedom of branching steering.

It occurred to me yesterday talking through the show …

[summary was auto deleted here]

The main idea is some thing about leveraging the fact that it is maximum maximally offensive to our instinctive premises to suggest that revelation of Transcendent Knowledge is not about an increase of your personal agency power of steering among open future branching possibilities but rather the opposite, that the revelation — the unthinkable and completely shocking to death.

____

I’m noticing a pattern across authors that the malformed assumptions about gnosis provided by Wouter Hanegraaff and provided by Erik Davis and other authors — Brown in 2019 article says that the Plaincourault fresco with Eve, he says that the whole idea there is that Eve represents the wise wisdom assertion of free will.

Notice how it would be unthinkable unthinkable for Brown to say that wisdom is the revelation of no free will.

Notice how instinctively naturally how naturally it comes to him to just take it for granted that of course gnosis must be associated with the assertion of free will.

I can leverage that instinctive avoidance of the truth to accomplish a maximum condensed summary and I can follow that as a negative guiding star.

Look for the ideas-expression that’s maximally offensive to egoic instinctive premises of fetishizing “I demand that ego transcendence must, of course, be about increasing my freedom power of branching-steering in an open future world” — when gnosis is a revelation of two-level control where local personal control agency does not control its source of control-thoughts, but rather the opposite revelation that kills ego and cancels it altogether, as I realized January 1988.

Block-universe determinism 100% instantly totally annihilates the basis, premises foundation of the egoic thinking worldmodel constitution.

Block-universe determinism kicks the entire foundation right out from egoic illusion based thinking, mental worldmodel undermined at its foundation.

No wonder egoic thinking recoils in terror and invents instead a thousand Atman project fabrications, inventing phony substitution avoidance projects versions of fake religion and fake esotericism fantasized enlightenment projects instead of the one that actually threatens the very foundation of delusion.