twin psychics

[maybe_my_monkey]

I'm often not even my own cup of tea, for whatever that's worth.

Ditto and would make a good name for a philosophy club......

[findingblanks]

Hey Soul, I'm sorry that this isn't yet definitive but since you want to read these and seem to have a bit of time, I figure you might get to them faster if I inch you along with me as my friends get back to me with ideas.

My friend Max thinks that the lecture wasn't explicitly about physics but that Steiner had invited a number of French physicists to the lecture and, thefefore, shaped his lecture accordingly. Max thinks it might have been:

Three Stages of Anthroposophy: Philosophy, Cosmology, Religion,
“The French Course,”
Drei Schritte der Anthroposophie.

Which he says in in the archives and can be read.

My friend Cody remembers that the lecture was only in German (back in 98) and one of the other students had translated it. Cody says that if we search here:

http://fvn-rs.net/

and use a phrase like "Paris Birth Of The Intellect" we may be able to find it.

If I have time later tonight, I will try to click into the former lectures and see if they are the ones I referred to. I'm not sorry I mentioned these lectures, but I am sorry for any annoyance in how hard it is for me to track them down.

[Soul_of_Shu]

... but I am sorry for any annoyance in how hard it is for me to track them down.

Rest assured that it's not annoyance, but rather bemusement over the reason for the pattern of cryptic, unnamed/unspecified references. I have a very curious nature—lately inclined toward exploring who, or what, constitutes the ontic nature of transcorporeal conscious agents—so would truly like to explore these references, insofar as it may shed some light on the Light ... So thanks for the link, and the suggestion for search criteria.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Btw FB ... As a therapist, if you haven't already come across it, you may be interested in a book by clinical psychologist Tom Zinser, titiled Soul-Centered Healing: A Psychologist's Extraordinary Journey into the Realms of Sub-Personalities, Spirits, and Past Lives

[findingblanks]

Well, Soul, I don't think it is a tactic or cryptic to refer in conversation to things you don't have scholarly access to or a comprehensive memory of. I quoted Steiner dozens of times in the other thread and listed which passages from which books on epistemology they were from. I did that because I have access to that information. However, if somebody in casual conversation says, "I remember reading Steiner say that in the future Karma would be more consciously shaped," I don't think they are necessarily applying a tactic. Hence, why I have found it relevant that you do experience it that way.

But, on to more fun topics:

Thanks so much for that link to that book. Looks super intriguing. I'm tempted.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Well, Soul, I don't think it is a tactic or cryptic to refer in conversation to things you don't have scholarly access to or a comprehensive memory of.

As I mentioned elsewhere, it's not just the particular reference to French physicists, or just a memory lapse, but also references to the nameless 'twin psychics', the unspecified book recommended to m_m_m, and the latest mention of Sam Harris recently speaking respectfully about a 'highly regarded idealist', again left nameless. Again, seeing no reason for it, I'm puzzled by this pattern of keeping it all so secretive, leaving us to guesswork.

[AshvinP]

Hey Soul, I'm sorry that this isn't yet definitive but since you want to read these and seem to have a bit of time, I figure you might get to them faster if I inch you along with me as my friends get back to me with ideas.

My friend Max thinks that the lecture wasn't explicitly about physics but that Steiner had invited a number of French physicists to the lecture and, thefefore, shaped his lecture accordingly. Max thinks it might have been:

Three Stages of Anthroposophy: Philosophy, Cosmology, Religion,
“The French Course,”
Drei Schritte der Anthroposophie.

Which he says in in the archives and can be read.

My friend Cody remembers that the lecture was only in German (back in 98) and one of the other students had translated it. Cody says that if we search here:

http://fvn-rs.net/

and use a phrase like "Paris Birth Of The Intellect" we may be able to find it.

If I have time later tonight, I will try to click into the former lectures and see if they are the ones I referred to. I'm not sorry I mentioned these lectures, but I am sorry for any annoyance in how hard it is for me to track them down.

I searched for what is above in English and German on the rsarchive.org and did not find anything.

It's possible that you are referring to a lecture that I am aware of, where Steiner says certain groups could harness Earth's magnetic forces in the context of a future Ahrimanic deception. I hesitate to even post the relevant sections here, because it really takes a lot of familiarity and context to understand the things he is referring to. On the other hand, I don't want to leave this as just another cryptic reference when we already have so many piled up, so I will quote a small excerpt which, if it's the one you are thinking about, should jog your memory.

...This is a secret that will be discovered. It will be an American secret of how to use the double nature of the Earth's magnetism, with its north and south magnetic poles, in order to send controlling forces throughout the world that will have a spiritual affect. Have a look at the map of the Earth's magnetism and compare it with the following: the direction of the magnetic needle, where it swings to the east or west, and where it does not show a swing. I cannot give you anything more than indications of these things, but there are spiritual beings who continuously act from a certain compass direction. One only has to place these spiritual beings into the service of earthly existence to discover the secret of the Earth's magnetism.

So this indicates that, if anything, your twin psychics are being duped by Ahrimanic beings (possibly other humans) who want to keep humanity completely attached to crude materialist desires, feelings, and conceptions of Reality, and therefore apart from the higher spiritual realms, forever.

[findingblanks]

"As I mentioned elsewhere, it's not just the particular reference to French physicists, or just a memory lapse, but also references to the nameless 'twin psychics', the unspecified book recommended to m_m_m, and the latest mention of Sam Harris recently speaking respectfully about a 'highly regarded idealist', again left nameless."

Okay, so you would like to know the names of my friends, Soul? You need to be more specific. If you would like to know their names, maybe I can help you get in touch with them? I think you understood by the context why I wasn't naming them publicly. Now for some shadow dancing: You think I'm lying. Fair! I think you are triggered by your own annoyances at me for the long thread. I don't know why or the details but I can only imagine good reasons why I may have annoyed you there a tiny tiny bit, enough for you to slowly build a growing snowball of frustration towards me. End of shadow dance.

So would you like me to try to put you in touch with my friends? I'd be happy to try and we can privately chat so that i know how to frame the request properly.

" the unspecified book recommended to m_m_m..."

Was it unspecified and you requested specification? Did I say that I can't remember? Please specify about this and I'll help. Shadow Dance: you are annoyed and, therefore, frame everything I say within an inner battle you're ahving but project purely onto my comments. I do that too.

But just ask about the book and I'll help as much as I can.

"and the latest mention of Sam Harris recently speaking respectfully about a 'highly regarded idealist', again left nameless."

Shadow dance. Soul, stop being a jerk. I gave a link and exactly specified WHERE you could find the information AND I made it clear you could get it FOR FREE. If I'm the tactical liar you believe me to be, why would lie and say I can't remember a name when I enthusiactially suggest to the public they listen to a cool meditation and I give a link and make sure it is free?

Continued Shadow dance: This is where you tend to come back and be more formal and low-key. Fine. But you do that because when I kindly expose your blind-spots above, it's annoying and you deal with it by coming back and toning it down. Fair enough. Very natural. End of Shadow dance.

Soul, just be direct. If you want me to listen to the meditation again and write down the names that Harris mentiones, just ask. I might say no or laugh or not, but I'd respect your honesty.

For those of you who are having private conversations about all of this with me, let me draw your attention to this as a good example. Soul is a great guy. That is obvious. I'm not a terrible person and that is fairly obvious. We each have shadows that lead us into snarky moments covered up with rational comments and requests. And we are each reacting to each other's shadow undercurrents. I recognize how this distorts my perception of Soul and work to concsciously overcome it so that I don't lose touch with how much I appreciate and like him. {Somewhat shadow dancing now} Soul just flips back and forth from a rrepresssed annoyance to a flat, low-key commentary. Nothing wrong with that. But since HE introduced the Shadow Dance, I feel free to simply slightly exaggerate his movements WHILE AT THE SAME TIME making clear that he is making very reasonable requests.

Why don't I just ignore him? I still find value in the content of the conversation and in noticing how he frames me. I'll end with his quote so we can imagine all the other framings that he might have made if he felt like he was having a breezy talk. Also, look in other threads and notice if Soul very often chimes in when people say things like, "I once read" Or "Somebody told me once..." or "I learned that...." or "There was this great book about..." Notice how often Soul eventually 'gets worried' that the person is applying a tactic. I've looked and don't see Soul ever pinning people down. Or, rather, he'll happily ask for more information.

What fun...

[findingblanks]

And, yes, to those who were wondering. I can reach a point where I feel a person's antipathy is so entrenched that I can't find any value in trying to keep a conversation going. You've seen that with some of the folks here. But I like Soul, probably for several reasons. I think it is a respect for how well he manages this site mixed with how thoughtful he is in most of the conversations, along with the fact that he offers really interesting content of his own. That he has this reactivity to me sort of hurts my feelings and annoys but, more than that, feels like an opportunity to hang in and explore the undercurrents without letting go of the surface content. That said, one of my hunches is that he might be reaching a 'tapping out' point with me here. That'll be too bad, but understandable.

[AshvinP]

And, yes, to those who were wondering. I can reach a point where I feel a person's antipathy is so entrenched that I can't find any value in trying to keep a conversation going. You've seen that with some of the folks here. But I like Soul, probably for several reasons. I think it is a respect for how well he manages this site mixed with how thoughtful he is in most of the conversations, along with the fact that he offers really interesting content of his own. That he has this reactivity to me sort of hurts my feelings and annoys but, more than that, feels like an opportunity to hang in and explore the undercurrents without letting go of the surface content. That said, one of my hunches is that he might be reaching a 'tapping out' point with me here. That'll be too bad, but understandable.

FB,

What Dana is so frustrated with, as am I, is your inability to stop playing games for one minute and post something that is actually responsive to what we are commenting. Your link takes us to a German archive of some sort, and you provide no other information on where to look. All you have to do is find the relevant lecture, translate it from German to English, and post the relevant sections here. But you cannot summon the energy to do that for some reason.

Obviously your comment above is directed at me, which is pretty hypocritical given your last comment to Dana, don't you think. "FB: Soul, just be direct." It's amazing that you could write that comment to him, given how indirect you are in asbolutely everything you write on this forum, whether it's about BK, Barfield, Steiner, Schop, or anyone else. You pretend this is just some 'shadow dancing' you do every now and again for whatever reason, but that's not true... you do it constantly and persistently in every topic you comment on. How is it even possible that, of all your many posts and claims about Steiner, Barfield, and Anthrosophy since your prodigal return to the forum, you have not provided a single reference for any of them? You provided on quote from Steiner about the French language, which was completely irrelevant to the claims you made before.

I know you are hoping that passively-aggressively ignoring my comments and throwing digs at me indirectly will keep me from "pinning you down", but I regret to inform you that it won't. I will keep pressing you for actual references to your speculative claims about Steiner, SS, or anything related, and I will keep pointing out when you fail to do so. It would probably be much easier for you to just stop shadow dancing and come up with at least ONE such reference that we can all take a look at. Your roundabout cryptic shadow dancing approach really leads no one to any better understanding of any issues being discussed (despite your claims of many people messaging you to say the opposite).