Temple Illuminatus

MUCH ADO ABOUT EVERYTHING (An Epistemologist's Approximation)

MUCH ADO ABOUT EVERYTHING (An Epistemologist's Approximation)


Whatever you may believe, we may also believe with you, regardless of whether you believe this may be true or whether you believe this can even be possible.

We choose to believe in Everything.

As we see it, all contradictory, paradoxical, or mutually exclusive beliefs are equally believable, equally possible, equally real.

Consequently, if all things are equally real then this includes the possiblity that nothing is real.

If you are ready to put this article down, please do, this article may not be for you.

However, if you are at all intrigued by what we are trying to say, we shall try to get on with 'Everything'.

Everything cannot be what you believe it to be, and yet, at the same time, Everything must be what you believe it to be.

It can't be any other way, and yet it must be many other ways.

If Everything seems confusing, try Certainty.

We came to Everything through Certainty, but once we arrived at Everything Certainty seemed to vanish; if Certainty hasn't entirely vanished or not we can't say with any sort of certainty today.

Everything has been a comfort to us lately, and yet we remain discomfitted in spite of Everything.

So what use is Everything?

Perhaps Everything simply exists for it's own sake and has no use.

Or perhaps Everything is universally useful.

It could be either way or any number of other ways you care to think about it.

It is, after all, Everything.

Everything can always be whatever it is not, even when it is not.

All arguments in favor of Everything must be tautological arguments simply because there can be nothing beyond Everything; Everything can only be self-referential by default, and yet Everything includes all that it is not, and therefor some non-tatuological arguments for Everything must also exist.

Everything is funny that way.

Consequently, to have meaning, one must, perhaps, reduce Everything to Something very specifically limited.  If so, then perhaps Meaning must always require Limitation.

Popular Limitations tend to describe What Is So, and What Ain't So.  Such Limitations become too detailed for anyone to agree upon the details, so it is presumed by a lot of people that a lot of other people all presume to know What Is So, and What Ain't So, and to agree with themselves and with each other about it all, including the things they cannot know or just plain choose not to know.

What Is So, and What Ain't So are of course different for each person, as what each person learns is unique to themselves.

So to presume anyone knows What Is So, and What Ain't So and can agree with anyone else about What Is So, and What Ain't So is a huge stretch of the imagination, a stretch that perhaps too many people choose to stretch each day, as so many people commonly presume to agree with each other about What Is So, and What Ain't So without ever checking to ensure they really do agree.

Kinda scary huh?

That is why we choose to believe Everything both is and is not so. 

Getting down to specifics where things may be described by What Is So, and What Ain't So can be scary, but when we let out the throttle and stop being so specific we can relax and enjoy Everything more.

Or not, as you like, or not, ad infinitium...

There is certainly a lot of Everything, Everything has more than enough room for all of your own particular points of views, and more.

Being broad minded about Everything helps of course, its hard to fit Everything into anything narrower, but we suppose it can be done.

And of course, if being broad minded about Everything does not help, you can always be more narrow minded, if that helps, but we prefer not to scare ourselves by living in the dark.

In case you were wondering, our discussion of Everything has not been a pointless exercise, even if you suspect it has been.

For one thing, we enjoyed writing it, and such pleasures are never a fruitless exercise, any pleasure is worth consideration if not action.

For another thing, it's a often a pretty good idea to shake up whatever we may choose to believe we may know about Everything, we never know what we may learn if we accept that we can never know anything with any Certainty.

One further odd note:

Certainty is used to give us courage in the face of the unknown.

And yet Certainty can be frightening in and of itself.

C'este la vie!


Enjoy...

Namaste

Love, Grigori Rho Gharveyn, et al...

 

Views: 48

Comment

You need to be an initiate of Temple Illuminatus to add comments!

Join Temple Illuminatus

Comment by Grigori Rho Gharveyn on December 28, 2015 at 11:09pm

heyyo Redbeard Blueeye!  (if'n you have yer eyes on in here)...

sorry we dropped out of communication here nearly a year ago.  Can't ever seem to stay awake as long as we might like.  Fortunately we eventually start waking up again; lets hope we can stay awake longer this time...

Alas we kinda just burn out a lot...

c'este la vie, and free feel to share anything on yer minds, as manythink as ye must....

(doublethink is simply not enoughthink, lol)...

Enjoy!

Comment by Grigori Rho Gharveyn on January 27, 2015 at 4:54am

Ah, thanks for the explanation Redbeard Blueye,

We guess we are something of a 'natural' for double-thinking.

Holding contradictory beliefs is rough, but we think most people do so, albeit usually non-consciously.  Being aware of having contradictory beliefs can be a problem at times, but it's often necessary to hold many competing beliefs until they can be evaluated, selected or rejected.

We have done a lot of channeling, but unlike Melchizedek we cannot claim any source entities' names.  If Thoth is among the entities we have channeled, we cannot say one way or another, but we do receive a lot of stuff regarding ancient Egypt.

One thing we believe we have learned about channeling is that the channeler is stuck with their own vocabulary and cultural conditioning which can alter whatever might be intended by the entity being channeled.  Consequently, it is important to examine the channeler's conceptual limitations and cultural biases to help interpret what they claim to be saying on behalf of whatever entity they may speak for.

With regard to ancient Egypt, we are quite sure we existed there in various incarnations, but it was a much different sort of civilization than humans from contemporary western cultures may be prepared to understand.

As we seem to recall, all 'people' in the ancient Egyptian civilization were members of a vast collective consciousness.  There were millions of individual bodies but only a single shared mind.  Each body had a unique history with memories related to its own experiences, but no sense of being an individual person set apart from the collective.  A sense of possessing a separate individual consciousness or ego may not have evolved until much later; closer, perhaps, to 3000 bc or so...

All 'people' participated in all the experiences of all other people.  Concepts such as privacy and personal property were unthinkable; all property, including all people, belonged to the collective whole.  Distribution of food, goods, and weapons, etc, was focused upon the best lineages to produce leaders and heroes who required the best nutrition, tools, etc, in order to function at peak performance, but these superior members were still parts of the collective whole, no one resented their special privileges because everyone experienced them even though not everyone's body received them.

'Slaves' dined upon a pharaoh's meals in their perceptions even if their own meals were only bread and water.

Whatever could be experienced by any physically separate body was experienced simultaneously by all.

Two things changed this, size and complexity.  Eventually it became more efficient to 'house' parts of the collective consciousness in separate forms for specialized work such as metallurgy, or apothecary; the reservation of physical assets for individual specialists emerged and helped begin the descent from a collectivized civilization to an individualized society capable of making war with itself.

No texts or hieroglyphs were necessary until the descent into individuation began and information became more compartmentalized rather than being universally shared.  Likewise no monumental structures were required until individuation threatened to end the collective mind.

The pyramids, etc, were raised to help preserve their histories and cultural identity, and to help maintain the focus of their group mentalities against the diversification that was undermining their collective identity.

Or so we seem to remember...

Enjoy!

Comment by Grigori Rho Gharveyn on January 25, 2015 at 8:34am

Hmm...

1984, we read it long ago, so we forgot much, alas.  We might want to read it again if you are offering "new world order or old world chaos" as an example of doublethink from the book.

We are pretty sure that not all cyborgs are tyrants, but perhaps some of their paradigms appear tyrannical.  How do we support 10 billion people on Earth?  We'll have that many in 50 years if it all doesn't collapse along the way or trigger WW3.  It will take some pretty precise engineering and management to keep that many folk happy and healthy.

As for the whips of religion and government, add one more, organized crime, which these days may include nearly all large corporations.

Dunno Melchizedek and not drawn into their work by a quick search in Google.  We still have issues with authority figures, so Christianity running things sounds like a bad idea, unless we are talking some very esoteric form of Christianity that is comfortable away from bible thumping, proselytizing, and ruling humanity.

Gotta be careful about these tv shows, they don't produce them without some deep purpose, a purpose deeper than advertising dollars, to be sure.  Without seeing the program ourselves we can't be sure what you refer to by "square grid layed out with radioactive aluminum".

One thing, destroying the grid products won't destroy the grid.  We would say that if there are indeed radioactive aluminum squares, that these squares were attracted to be present along these grid intersections and the lines that radiate out from them.

Of course geometric radiation and atomic radiation are very different entities, and we can't trust some folks not to get them confused.

In any event, until the new world order marches in, there can be no planetary agreement regarding whether destroying these square grids layed out with radioactive aluminum should be attempted.  Sounds risky; where we gonna dump the radioactive waste for one thing?  Would some of it get into the atmosphere?

If David Icke were to be believed then we suppose he might say that the whole purpose of destroying the aluminum squares is to try to interfere with the aliens plans for the emergence of a new world order, whatever that may really be.  However, Icke also says the aliens are converting our atmosphere to suit themselves, so maybe someone wants these squares destroyed in order to aerosolize the radioactive aluminum and distribute it across the planet.

As for Thoth assisting with one of these grids or squares, can you please elaborate?  We've no idea where to look for info on that, Crowley is a very difficult read for us.  But then we have trouble with anything resembling a manual or textbook.

As for malevolent aliens, we have enough of those in our public schools; we used to be a malevolent alien as we recall... perhaps we still are?

Totally uncivilized, some of 'em…

We are caught between the mutually attractive poles of order and chaos.  Personally, we prefer chaos, except where it may interfere with the general welfare of life on planet Earth, and beyond.

From our personal points of views we know we will achieve that 10 billion humans high-water mark and that then the global population will finally level off.  We’ve seen it happen, and we are satisfied it’s a good thing.  Peace, plenty, and a universe opening up as we step out to the stars.

So we will encounter plenty of aliens, and no doubt they all have schemes for some sort of grand universal order or chaos thingy.  We’ve also seen where aliens congregate by the millions or billions to dicker, clique, and mediate; it's pure cacophony if you have your ears on in there.

Anyways...

As far as we are concerned, our teams have successfully infiltrated the new world order elitists and will throw a nearly bloodless coup at the last moment before everything can go bat-shit crazy.  We would prefer an entirely bloodless coup, but David Icke and his friends are arming and training to shed blood; alas, the armies of the elitists they hope to put down are much better armed and better trained.  Fortunately, we expect them to join our coup.

Even more fortunately, we will win, but our ‘win’ will be by a consensus of the global population with no one excluded from participation or given the wrong voting materials.  Yeah we have to scan pretty deep to get the more reluctant folk to participate, but they will, and from some of our points of views, they already have.

The real power comes from all people, it always has.  Power was collected and abused by tyrants, and even democracies still abuse it, like our own good old USA.  Democracy is too often just a tyranny by an ad-hoc majority against their various minorities.

But that will change, as so much already has.

 

Enjoy!

Comment by Grigori Rho Gharveyn on January 23, 2015 at 6:11pm

Hi Redbeard Blueeye,

We see you fly the flag of what might be our favorite tarot.  We gave a lot of psychic readings with dear old Thoth, but Thoth is more than a tool for reading, Thoth assists with magick as well.

Regarding Orwellian terms, we are familiar enough with newspeak, but do not recall doublethink.  Is doublethink from a different dystopian dream or did you coin it yourself?

As applied to much ado about everything, we are definitely not speaking newspeak.  We aren't out to eliminate any words, concepts, avenues of thought, or neighborhoods of beliefs.  

Doublethink, as we imagine its meaning to purport, might be closer, but not close enough to Allthink, which might be part of what we were aiming for; alas someone may have already coined allthink for some different purpose and meaning.

We were thinking of this piece about everything as a sort of filter, similar to most things we write.  The filter is to see who can follow our thoughts with enough interest to get in touch by responding.

But there is a deeper purpose than simply filtering, and that purpose is to loosen up a reader's self-imposed limits on their own thoughts and perceptions, to get readers to relax their whatisandwhatain'tsos a bit.

More than a few arguments have ended in bloodshed if not decades of warfare over whatisandwhatain'tso. A person might never know when their expressed beliefs have cost them a job promotion, or have marginalized them in their favorite social circles.  whatisanwhatain'tsos have ended romances and broken up families.

Our philosophy might be 'with everything to argue about, why argue about anything?'.  Or maybe not.

Perhaps we just want folks to consider a wider range of possibilities than they are habituated to believe in.

Or perhaps we only hope to find a friend or two.

Who knows?

We certainly do not know, and if we did, would it ever really do anyone any good?

Enjoy!

Have questions?

Need help? Visit our Support Group for help from our friendly Admins and members!

Have you?

Become a Member
Invited Your Friends
Made new Friends
Read/ Written a Blog
Joined/ Created a Group
Read/ Posted a Discussion
Checked out the Chat
Looked at/Posted Videos
Made a donation this month
Followed us on Twitter
Followed us on Facebook

Donations

Please consider a donation to help with our continued growth and site costs

Connect

Visit The Temple
on Facebook:

....

Blog Posts

PAIN!

Posted by Rosey on October 19, 2017 at 7:06pm 0 Comments

DIVINE LOVE OF YOU!

Posted by Rosey on October 18, 2017 at 9:43am 1 Comment

The Spirituality of Pets

Posted by Cian Rhys on October 18, 2017 at 4:30am 0 Comments

FLEET OF LIGHT!

Posted by Rosey on October 17, 2017 at 7:01pm 0 Comments

PAINTING OF PASSION!

Posted by Rosey on October 16, 2017 at 7:28pm 2 Comments

A Beginner’s Guide to Metaphysics

Posted by Cian Rhys on October 14, 2017 at 2:16am 0 Comments

~~this months awareness~~

 

© 2017   Created by Bryan   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service