|
|
| Next: WTD: Three Stooges Rarities |
| Author |
Message |
Bill Reid External

Since: May 09, 2009 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 12:10 pm Post subject: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? Archived from groups: alt>movies>kubrick, others (more info?) |
|
|
To get back to the topic of this newsgroup, tenuous
connections to Kubrick movies in "Buffy The Vampire
Slayer", I just noticed something in last night's episode
of the latest Joss Whedon abortion "Dollhouse".
The idiot plot of the show is that there is this "secret"
facility that makes agreements with people who have "legal
problems" to allow their memories to be wiped out and replaced
with other people's memories and personalities to allow
them to perform "services" for paying clients. After five
years of performing these "services" with dozens of different
personalities, I guess the idea is that they get their original
personality back and their "legal problems" are magically
solved.
DUMBEST PREMISE EVER!!!! This is clearly a case of
absurd brinksmanship by Whedon rising to the challenge of
coming up with a more ridiculous plot than "Buffy The Vampire
Slayer"...
Now during their five year "contracts" with this facility the
"dolls" are given code names which are the words the military
uses to communicate letters of the alphabet: Alpha, Bravo,
Charlie, etc. In last night's episode, the main character of the
show, a "doll" code-named "Echo", was kidnapped by a "rogue
doll" code-named "Alpha" who had previously escaped and
was sabotaging the operation from the outside.
So I hate to have to point out the insanely flimsy connection
to Kubrick, but there it is: in "2001", murderous rampage by
the computer was set in motion by "his" misdiagnosis of the
failure of the AE-35 communications antenna controller. Get
it? AE!!! And when the astronauts discuss the problem with
NASA, the mission control drone specifically refers to the "Alpha
Echo" unit.
Of course, there also seem to be some overtones in
"Dollhouse" that seem to mirror Kubrick's consistent theme:
the inability of man's intelligence to control his destructive
animal instincts. In the case of "2001", a fatal mistake was
made in programming the "HAL" computer: they gave him
"human emotions" to "make him easier to talk to", leading to
similar consequences as the "human reliability program" to
prevent accidental nuclear attacks in "Dr. Strangelove".
In "Dollhouse", the technology to remove and insert
personalities into human bodies appears to have been
undermined by the mistake to make an insane psychopath
a "doll": the "Alpha" doll's "legal problems" were that although
he was a super-genius, he had a nasty habit of disfiguring
people's faces with a knife.
But there is an even stronger theme in "Dollhouse" that
is much more similar to "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" and is
not strongly shared by Kubrick: an existential search for
identity and meaning. At the end of last night's episode,
after returning to the "Dollhouse" after being kidnapped
by "Alpha", "Echo" says her real name, "Caroline" before
going to sleep for the night...
---
William Ernest "No More Than 20 Million Personalities, Tops" Reid |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don Stockbauer External

Since: Apr 16, 2007 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 12:10 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 9, 10:15 am, "Bill Reid" <spamf....TakeThisOut@happyhealthy.net> wrote:
> To get back to the topic of this newsgroup, tenuous
> connections to Kubrick movies in "Buffy The Vampire
> Slayer", I just noticed something in last night's episode
> of the latest Joss Whedon abortion "Dollhouse".
>
> The idiot plot of the show is that there is this "secret"
> facility that makes agreements with people who have "legal
> problems" to allow their memories to be wiped out and replaced
> with other people's memories and personalities to allow
> them to perform "services" for paying clients. After five
> years of performing these "services" with dozens of different
> personalities, I guess the idea is that they get their original
> personality back and their "legal problems" are magically
> solved.
>
> DUMBEST PREMISE EVER!!!! This is clearly a case of
> absurd brinksmanship by Whedon rising to the challenge of
> coming up with a more ridiculous plot than "Buffy The Vampire
> Slayer"...
>
> Now during their five year "contracts" with this facility the
> "dolls" are given code names which are the words the military
> uses to communicate letters of the alphabet: Alpha, Bravo,
> Charlie, etc. In last night's episode, the main character of the
> show, a "doll" code-named "Echo", was kidnapped by a "rogue
> doll" code-named "Alpha" who had previously escaped and
> was sabotaging the operation from the outside.
>
> So I hate to have to point out the insanely flimsy connection
> to Kubrick, but there it is: in "2001", murderous rampage by
> the computer was set in motion by "his" misdiagnosis of the
> failure of the AE-35 communications antenna controller. Get
> it? AE!!! And when the astronauts discuss the problem with
> NASA, the mission control drone specifically refers to the "Alpha
> Echo" unit.
>
> Of course, there also seem to be some overtones in
> "Dollhouse" that seem to mirror Kubrick's consistent theme:
> the inability of man's intelligence to control his destructive
> animal instincts. In the case of "2001", a fatal mistake was
> made in programming the "HAL" computer: they gave him
> "human emotions" to "make him easier to talk to", leading to
> similar consequences as the "human reliability program" to
> prevent accidental nuclear attacks in "Dr. Strangelove".
>
> In "Dollhouse", the technology to remove and insert
> personalities into human bodies appears to have been
> undermined by the mistake to make an insane psychopath
> a "doll": the "Alpha" doll's "legal problems" were that although
> he was a super-genius, he had a nasty habit of disfiguring
> people's faces with a knife.
>
> But there is an even stronger theme in "Dollhouse" that
> is much more similar to "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" and is
> not strongly shared by Kubrick: an existential search for
> identity and meaning. At the end of last night's episode,
> after returning to the "Dollhouse" after being kidnapped
> by "Alpha", "Echo" says her real name, "Caroline" before
> going to sleep for the night...
>
> ---
> William Ernest "No More Than 20 Million Personalities, Tops" Reid
There is yet another Dollhouse reference to Kubrick. Go to Cuero,
Texas and eat at the Dollhouse Cafe. You'll see a reference to Kubrick
on the 2nd table to the left as you walk in, right where I scratched
his name on it.
- Don |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 2:56 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
Of course the idea of people strapped to a chair and being
reprogrammed has been a common motif.in films and TV --- ACO didn't
start the motif, but definatley had a hand in propagating it.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don Stockbauer External

Since: Apr 16, 2007 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 5:25 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 10, 1:21 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
<hundredmillionlifeti....TakeThisOut@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1ab23e3d-afbd-4c86-a033-a11107fe6e74@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> On May 9, 10:15 am, "Bill Reid" <spamf....TakeThisOut@happyhealthy.net> wrote:
>
> >
'Everything Is A Reference To Kubrick!!'
Yeppers.
Everything is.
Only one issue, though. Kubrick never realized something.
"Intelligent XT's communicate, not travel." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 7:38 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 10, 5:25 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 1:21 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
>
> <hundredmillionlifeti....RemoveThis@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:1ab23e3d-afbd-4c86-a033-a11107fe6e74@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com....
> > On May 9, 10:15 am, "Bill Reid" <spamf....RemoveThis@happyhealthy.net> wrote:
>
> 'Everything Is A Reference To Kubrick!!'
>
> Yeppers.
>
> Everything is.
>
> Only one issue, though. Kubrick never realized something.
>
> "Intelligent XT's communicate, not travel."
I have to disagree Don. Mobility is nobility.
Rather not have a bunch of Stationary Squids running the world...
through the fillings of their teeth.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Sun May 10, 2009 7:51 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 10, 7:38 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 5:25 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 10, 1:21 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
>
> > <hundredmillionlifeti... DeleteThis @fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:1ab23e3d-afbd-4c86-a033-a11107fe6e74@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com....
> > > On May 9, 10:15 am, "Bill Reid" <spamf... DeleteThis @happyhealthy.net> wrote:
>
> > 'Everything Is A Reference To Kubrick!!'
>
> > Yeppers.
>
> > Everything is.
>
> > Only one issue, though. Kubrick never realized something.
>
> > "Intelligent XT's communicate, not travel."
>
> I have to disagree Don. Mobility is nobility.
>
> Rather not have a bunch of Stationary Squids running the world...
> through the fillings of their teeth.
>
> dc- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hello...
http://www.thealmightyguru.com/Humor/Images/HelloCthulu.jpg
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don Stockbauer External

Since: Apr 16, 2007 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 5:44 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 10, 9:38 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 5:25 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 10, 1:21 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
>
> > <hundredmillionlifeti... RemoveThis @fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:1ab23e3d-afbd-4c86-a033-a11107fe6e74@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com....
> > > On May 9, 10:15 am, "Bill Reid" <spamf... RemoveThis @happyhealthy.net> wrote:
>
> > 'Everything Is A Reference To Kubrick!!'
>
> > Yeppers.
>
> > Everything is.
>
> > Only one issue, though. Kubrick never realized something.
>
> > "Intelligent XT's communicate, not travel."
>
> I have to disagree Don. Mobility is nobility.
>
> Rather not have a bunch of Stationary Squids running the world...
> through the fillings of their teeth.
Hi, Mr. Kelp.
All I'm saying is that interstellar travel is WAY more difficult than
interstellar communication. It just seems to me that that's the way
civilizations go, when they do this they form a galactic neural net,
just like the neural net being formed worldwide here, or the neural
net riding on top of your brain, etc.
Now - maybe it's possible that the Monolith Makers had developed mass
teleportation and could put all their stuff here that way.
Or hell, who knows, maybe they did travel interstellarly.
My bwain hurts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 3:43 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 11, 5:44 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 9:38 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 10, 5:25 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 10, 1:21 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
>
> > > <hundredmillionlifeti....TakeThisOut@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > > "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:1ab23e3d-afbd-4c86-a033-a11107fe6e74@s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> > > > On May 9, 10:15 am, "Bill Reid" <spamf....TakeThisOut@happyhealthy.net> wrote:
>
> > > 'Everything Is A Reference To Kubrick!!'
>
> > > Yeppers.
>
> > > Everything is.
>
> > > Only one issue, though. Kubrick never realized something.
>
> > > "Intelligent XT's communicate, not travel."
>
> > I have to disagree Don. Mobility is nobility.
>
> > Rather not have a bunch of Stationary Squids running the world...
> > through the fillings of their teeth.
>
> Hi, Mr. Kelp.
>
> All I'm saying is that interstellar travel is WAY more difficult than
> interstellar communication. It just seems to me that that's the way
> civilizations go, when they do this they form a galactic neural net,
> just like the neural net being formed worldwide here, or the neural
> net riding on top of your brain, etc.
> Now - maybe it's possible that the Monolith Makers had developed mass
> teleportation and could put all their stuff here that way.
>
> Or hell, who knows, maybe they did travel interstellarly.
>
> My bwain hurts.- Hide quoted text -
>
When one talks about something "forming" such as a "neural net" I
believe this is short sighted. In infinity everything has already
been "formed." If only a small percentage of potentialities are
being used this does not mean that something new is required. The
mechanism is already built. The evolution of computers and
technological advances in communciations has nothing to do with
this...honestly. Even the big bang or collapse of a universe is
transient.
The mechanism to achieve what you are seeking has nothing to do with
computers, mechanical things, neural nets or even a local, transient,
universe.
The "computer age" is temporal and just a transient age like anything
else. Nature already has everything built in and this even transcends
past present and future., It just requires people to work on their
own self, be enlightened and in unity in real life and that is the
hardest part. It can't happen without human effort and overcoming the
negative karma a group of humans share.
People tend to resist becoming enlightened and in fact try to block
hearing about or practising to awaken the inherent law already within
them-which they have to do together.
This is what is meant by the expression, "good by the inch, evil by
the yard." In fact the process of attaining enlightenment, means
refuting the transient and revealing the true.
One CAN glimpse how it works through practice. One must face
propagating the law of the universe to others to change their own
individual karma. It's unavoidable. Anything else is just theory and
wishful thinking.
six difficult and nine easy acts
[¤»Ãø¤E©ö] (Jpn rokunan-kui )
The six difficult acts are
(1) to propagate the umiversal law
(2) to copy it or cause someone else to copy it,
(3) to recite it even for a short while,
(4) to teach it even to one person,
(5) to hear of and accept it and inquire about its meaning,
(6) to maintain faith in it.
The nine easy acts are
(1) to teach innumerable sutras other than the mystic law
(2) to take up Mount Sumeru and hurl it across countless Buddha lands;
(3) to kick a major world system into a different quarter with one's
toe;
(4) to stand in the Summit of Being Heaven and preach innumerable
sutras other than the mystic law;
(5) to grasp the sky with one's hand and travel around with it;
(6) to place the earth on one's toe-nail and ascend to the Brahma
Heaven;
(7) to carry dry grass on one's back into the great fires occurring at
the end of the kalpa without being burned;
( to preach eighty-four thousand teachings and enable one's
listeners to obtain the six transcendental powers;
(9) to enable innumerable people to reach the stage of partial
enlightement and acquire the six transcendental powers.
By citing these impossible feats as "easy," Shakyamuni is
emphasizing the extreme difficulty of embracing the universal law and
teaching it to others in a time when people's capacity is low, and
when they have little seeking mind and embroiled in low grade negative
karma.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 4:20 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
"After I have passed into extinction, if there are those who wish to
offer alms to my complete body, then they should erect a great
tower.' That Buddha, (Shakyamuni butsu speaking about Taho Butsu)
through his transcendental powers and the power of his vow, insures
that, throughout the worlds in the ten directions, no matter in what
place, if there are those who preach the Lotus Sutra, this treasure
tower will in all cases come forth and appear in their presence, and
his complete body will be in the tower, speaking words of praise and
saying, Excellent, excellent!"
"This Many Treasures Buddha has taken a profound vow, saying, 'When
my treasure tower, in order to listen to the Lotus Sutra comes forth
into the presence of one of the Buddhas, if there should be those who
wish me to show my body to the four kinds of believers, then let the
various Buddhas who are emanations of that Buddha and who are
preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions all return and
gather around that Buddha in a single spot. Only when that has been
done will my body become visible.' Great Joy Preaching, I will now
gather together the various Buddhas that are emanations of my body and
that are preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions."
Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
thought--completly)
This cannot be more clear.
"....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
there some special trick?"
Ah........ya their is.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don Stockbauer External

Since: Apr 16, 2007 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 9:10 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 11, 6:20 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> "After I have passed into extinction, if there are those who wish to
> offer alms to my complete body, then they should erect a great
> tower.' That Buddha, (Shakyamuni butsu speaking about Taho Butsu)
> through his transcendental powers and the power of his vow, insures
> that, throughout the worlds in the ten directions, no matter in what
> place, if there are those who preach the Lotus Sutra, this treasure
> tower will in all cases come forth and appear in their presence, and
> his complete body will be in the tower, speaking words of praise and
> saying, Excellent, excellent!"
>
> "This Many Treasures Buddha has taken a profound vow, saying, 'When
> my treasure tower, in order to listen to the Lotus Sutra comes forth
> into the presence of one of the Buddhas, if there should be those who
> wish me to show my body to the four kinds of believers, then let the
> various Buddhas who are emanations of that Buddha and who are
> preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions all return and
> gather around that Buddha in a single spot. Only when that has been
> done will my body become visible.' Great Joy Preaching, I will now
> gather together the various Buddhas that are emanations of my body and
> that are preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions."
>
> Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
> thought--completly)
>
> This cannot be more clear.
>
> "....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
> there some special trick?"
>
> Ah........ya their is.
Well, kelpzoidzl, we all have our beliefs, and we all like our beliefs
and we wish everyone else would adopt them. I personally believe in
constructivism. You start out with elementary particles and Nature
via the metasystem transition creates complex systems. That is my
belief. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Cosmic Gnome External

Since: May 12, 2009 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 7:10 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
"Don Stockbauer" <donstockbauer DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8f4779bb-6e52-40a3-afc9-32af68ba6fad@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On May 11, 6:20 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> "After I have passed into extinction, if there are those who wish to
> offer alms to my complete body, then they should erect a great
> tower.' That Buddha, (Shakyamuni butsu speaking about Taho Butsu)
> through his transcendental powers and the power of his vow, insures
> that, throughout the worlds in the ten directions, no matter in what
> place, if there are those who preach the Lotus Sutra, this treasure
> tower will in all cases come forth and appear in their presence, and
> his complete body will be in the tower, speaking words of praise and
> saying, Excellent, excellent!"
>
> "This Many Treasures Buddha has taken a profound vow, saying, 'When
> my treasure tower, in order to listen to the Lotus Sutra comes forth
> into the presence of one of the Buddhas, if there should be those who
> wish me to show my body to the four kinds of believers, then let the
> various Buddhas who are emanations of that Buddha and who are
> preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions all return and
> gather around that Buddha in a single spot. Only when that has been
> done will my body become visible.' Great Joy Preaching, I will now
> gather together the various Buddhas that are emanations of my body and
> that are preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions."
I see. (raising pipe).
>
> Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
> thought--completly)
And then write endless streams of mindless, obscurantist gibberish ('deep
thought')?
>
> This cannot be more clear.
It's very clear.
>
> "....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
> there some special trick?"
A special trick to getting Altzheimer's Disease? You could, alternatively,
induce a persistent vegetative state [Dave Bowman can assist in this regard,
as you gradually slip into thought paralysis while singing 'Daisy Daisy' as
Dave shuts down your neural mappings] or simply relapse into a permanent
coma [maybe here try cryogenic or suspended animation]. But then the
self-appointed preachers of terminally atrophied non-thought will have
nobody left to preach to and will instantly sink into paranoid psychosis as
they imagine they are now God..
>
> Ah........ya their is.
"Well, kelpzoidzl, we all have our beliefs, and we all like our beliefs
and we wish everyone else would adopt them. I personally believe in
constructivism. You start out with elementary particles and Nature
via the metasystem transition creates complex systems. That is my
belief."
I'm reminded of this recent parody of Husserl's phenomenology:
"However, the disagreement remains and, to get to the heart of the conflict,
let us at once examine a passage in the Seventh Meditation that has been the
focal point of the dispute:
"By referring to destitutive analysis, we must not be understood as
intending (in the sense of radical directedness-to-a-preliminary-perceived
objectivity) to imply that, speaking - as always - strictly within the
finite-infinite limits of transcendental apodicticity, the object
'part-whole synthesis' is even partially reducible to the noematic correlate
of affective suspension (in the sense of ideally intended noesis subsumed
and founded by the epoche). (7) For, although this is, of course, the case,
our concern is this realm of a fully concrete living of the a priori, is, as
we have repeatedly said, solely to lay bare the horizontal quasi-content of
this analysis' teleology. Here we may invoke Descartes' realization
(fundamentally uninformed and absurd as it was, being formulated in a
reasonable and intelligible way for the first time in our Logische
Untersuchungen and even there still lacking the proto-foundation of a full
scale synthetic analysis on the level of transcendent egologicism) that some
things (res) are hard to understand." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:24 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 11, 9:10 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba....DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 11, 6:20 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
> > thought--completly)
>
> > This cannot be more clear.
>
> > "....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
> > there some special trick?"
>
> > Ah........ya their is.
>
> Well, kelpzoidzl, we all have our beliefs, and we all like our beliefs
> and we wish everyone else would adopt them. I personally believe in
> constructivism. You start out with elementary particles and Nature
> via the metasystem transition creates complex systems. That is my
> belief.- Hide quoted text -
>
I understand what you are saying., but lets say we were talking about
hard science, where belief does not enter the picture and it's all
about total objectivity having nothing to do with "belief."
Let's say i was offering you a nice big 36" Schmidt Cassegrain
Telescope to put outside on your ranch?
Would you say, "I have my beliefs, so I don't look through telescopes,
so no thanks......." ?
Anything I refer to when bringing up buddhism, is just like that.
It's just a method of focusing the mind and stopping the mind and then
observing it. The mechanism for this is not imposed by humans or
related to beliefs. It uses nature's mechanisms not human
technology. Buddhism does not fit into the spectrum of
intellectualizing although people mistakenly (and quite ignorantly)
try to understand it intellectually or scientifically without
experiencing it.
It's just learning to stop the mind and observe it. Doing so causes
"something wonderful' to happen and a fusion with utter objectivity.
Something totally unexpected occurs.
Then the task or practice becomes trying to clue others to it.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:28 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 12, 3:33 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
<hundredmillionlifeti....RemoveThis@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8f4779bb-6e52-40a3-afc9-32af68ba6fad@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 6:20 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "After I have passed into extinction, if there are those who wish to
> > offer alms to my complete body, then they should erect a great
> > tower.' That Buddha, (Shakyamuni butsu speaking about Taho Butsu)
> > through his transcendental powers and the power of his vow, insures
> > that, throughout the worlds in the ten directions, no matter in what
> > place, if there are those who preach the Lotus Sutra, this treasure
> > tower will in all cases come forth and appear in their presence, and
> > his complete body will be in the tower, speaking words of praise and
> > saying, Excellent, excellent!"
>
> > "This Many Treasures Buddha has taken a profound vow, saying, 'When
> > my treasure tower, in order to listen to the Lotus Sutra comes forth
> > into the presence of one of the Buddhas, if there should be those who
> > wish me to show my body to the four kinds of believers, then let the
> > various Buddhas who are emanations of that Buddha and who are
> > preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions all return and
> > gather around that Buddha in a single spot. Only when that has been
> > done will my body become visible.' Great Joy Preaching, I will now
> > gather together the various Buddhas that are emanations of my body and
> > that are preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions."
>
> I see. (raising pipe).
>
>
>
> > Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
> > thought--completly)
>
> And then write endless streams of mindless, obscurantist gibberish ('deep
> thought')?
>
>
>
> > This cannot be more clear.
>
> It's very clear.
>
>
>
> > "....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
> > there some special trick?"
>
> A special trick to getting Altzheimer's Disease? You could, alternatively,
> induce a persistent vegetative state [Dave Bowman can assist in this regard,
> as you gradually slip into thought paralysis while singing 'Daisy Daisy' as
> Dave shuts down your neural mappings] or simply relapse into a permanent
> coma [maybe here try cryogenic or suspended animation]. But then the
> self-appointed preachers of terminally atrophied non-thought will have
> nobody left to preach to and will instantly sink into paranoid psychosis as
> they imagine they are now God..
>
>
>
> > Ah........ya their is.
>
Lol, not related to Alzheimers, comas, dreams, sleep, or any weakened
lifestate, beliefs, or anything hokey.
It's just a method and practice and a resulting experience. It is a
mechanism of nature, but something imposed by people's never ending
rattling brains.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:31 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
typo correction:
> It's just a method and practice and a resulting experience. It is a
> mechanism of nature, *NOT* something imposed by people's never ending
> rattling brains.
>
> dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:47 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
"Those who have enough will and virtue will reach it. They are not
like the worldly who are crude, shallow and false, who compete and
fight over rubbish, stones, grass and sticks, falsely reasoning them
to be the precious gems. In later ages, those with a skin deep study
of this teaching will not recognize the Inspiration of the Great
Mind."
Efforts have been made in ages past to systematize it such as:
"First we excluded that which is the wrong inspiration of the mind in
terms of the Truth of Suffering, examining it in terms of sinking and
floating (a flakey mind) in this world.
Next, we excluded the views of the wisdom of the Four Truths that are
complicated, clumsy, shallow, and short sighted.
Next, there were the practices of the Four Broad Vows,
Finally, there were the ranks of the Six Identities."
The Lotus Sutra says:
"And I see the Buddha's children cultivating various practices because
they seek the path of enlightenment."
There are many methods of practice. To outline them, we will speak of
four:
Always seated
Always walking
Half seated, half walking
Neither seated nor walking
Generally called Samadhis, they control and straighten out one’s
concentration.
The Great Discourse says:
"The skillful mind abides in a single place without stirring. This is
called 'Samadhi'."
The Spiritual Realm is this single place. With proper observation one
is able to abide here without stirring. In observing the mind one
connects with these four practices to control and straighten out one’s
concentration. Therefore they are called ‘Samadhis’."
--all from Tien-t'ai of china, (6th century)
"Samadhi" refers to perfect fusion of subject and object. Thoughts,
words and theories or any ideations only get in the way and block the
experience.
No need to wait till, technology catches up and you can see it on TV.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:54 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 12, 3:33 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
<hundredmillionlifeti....TakeThisOut@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba....TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8f4779bb-6e52-40a3-afc9-32af68ba6fad@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 6:20 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "After I have passed into extinction, if there are those who wish to
> > offer alms to my complete body, then they should erect a great
> > tower.' That Buddha, (Shakyamuni butsu speaking about Taho Butsu)
> > through his transcendental powers and the power of his vow, insures
> > that, throughout the worlds in the ten directions, no matter in what
> > place, if there are those who preach the Lotus Sutra, this treasure
> > tower will in all cases come forth and appear in their presence, and
> > his complete body will be in the tower, speaking words of praise and
> > saying, Excellent, excellent!"
>
> > "This Many Treasures Buddha has taken a profound vow, saying, 'When
> > my treasure tower, in order to listen to the Lotus Sutra comes forth
> > into the presence of one of the Buddhas, if there should be those who
> > wish me to show my body to the four kinds of believers, then let the
> > various Buddhas who are emanations of that Buddha and who are
> > preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions all return and
> > gather around that Buddha in a single spot. Only when that has been
> > done will my body become visible.' Great Joy Preaching, I will now
> > gather together the various Buddhas that are emanations of my body and
> > that are preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions."
>
> I see. (raising pipe).
>
>
>
> > Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
> > thought--completly)
>
> And then write endless streams of mindless, obscurantist gibberish ('deep
> thought')?
>
>
>
> > This cannot be more clear.
>
> It's very clear.
>
>
>
> > "....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
> > there some special trick?"
>
> A special trick to getting Altzheimer's Disease? You could, alternatively,
> induce a persistent vegetative state [Dave Bowman can assist in this regard,
> as you gradually slip into thought paralysis while singing 'Daisy Daisy' as
> Dave shuts down your neural mappings] or simply relapse into a permanent
> coma [maybe here try cryogenic or suspended animation]. But then the
> self-appointed preachers of terminally atrophied non-thought will have
> nobody left to preach to and will instantly sink into paranoid psychosis as
> they imagine they are now God..
>
>
>
> > Ah........ya there is.
>
> "Well, kelpzoidzl, we all have our beliefs, and we all like our beliefs
> and we wish everyone else would adopt them. I personally believe in
> constructivism. You start out with elementary particles and Nature
> via the metasystem transition creates complex systems. That is my
> belief."
Belief really has little to do with what I am talking about. I (and
real Buddhism too) am talking about the method allowing direct
experience. It involves whittling away the beliefs and prejudices,
the restless thoughts, the passing desires in the mind.
As an experiment sit down, close your eyes and single mindedly,
OBSERVE without interferring in the thoughts or images in the mind.
Trying to stop the mind might seem impossible. It is not impossible,
but it takes practice. There are also ways to do this more
ergonomically.
When I was 13 or 14 I was lucky to be given a self-hypnosis record
from Emile Franschell the late Psychologist/hypnotist. He appeared in
the beginning of the old british Horror film in "Hypno-vision" "The
Horrors of the Black Museum"
Here he is in a clip from the beginning of the film (he was not an
actor)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCEV51nlemM
The film scared the hell out of me. I couldn't sleep for a month.
The film had a major impact cause it was so damn diabolicial. I
delved into studying hypnosis.
A few years later coincidentally, Emile Franshell ended up working on
weekends doing stage hypnosis shows at my father's restaurant where I
worked and he gave me his brand new first LP. It essentially taught
me basic meditation and I listened to it every night before sleep. I
was lucky (karmic propensity) to get a head start.
Later I was "lucky" to accidentally get a copy of a little book from
ancient China called, "Beginner's Manual on Stopping and Observing the
mind." By Tien-t'ai (Chi-I) the 7th century Buddhist reformer.
It's not "belief" or intellectualizing, that buddhism pushes---it's
practice and direct experience.
> I'm reminded of this recent parody of Husserl's phenomenology:
>
> "However, the disagreement remains and, to get to the heart of the conflict,
> let us at once examine a passage in the Seventh Meditation that has been the
> focal point of the dispute:
>
> "By referring to destitutive analysis, we must not be understood as
> intending (in the sense of radical directedness-to-a-preliminary-perceived
> objectivity) to imply that, speaking - as always - strictly within the
> finite-infinite limits of transcendental apodicticity, the object
> 'part-whole synthesis' is even partially reducible to the noematic correlate
> of affective suspension (in the sense of ideally intended noesis subsumed
> and founded by the epoche). (7) For, although this is, of course, the case,
> our concern is this realm of a fully concrete living of the a priori, is, as
> we have repeatedly said, solely to lay bare the horizontal quasi-content of
> this analysis' teleology. Here we may invoke Descartes' realization
> (fundamentally uninformed and absurd as it was, being formulated in a
> reasonable and intelligible way for the first time in our Logische
> Untersuchungen and even there still lacking the proto-foundation of a full
> scale synthetic analysis on the level of transcendent egologicism) that some
> things (res) are hard to understand."- Hide quoted text -
Alzheimers does not make the mind stop babbling. Stopping the mind in
the yogic sense is not in any way related to vegetative states.
The weaker a person is---the lower their lifestate, the harder it is
to stop the flow of mental babble or ability to focus. One cannot do
it in sleep or a coma or when overly tired. It means total focused
concentration beyond all distinctions.
People who never accomplish it can't understand it. If it's beyond a
person's capacity they should then just take it on faith that there
have been or are some people who have done so. Just hearing about it
should be considered a stroke of luck and a rarity.
The reality is, "something wonderful" happens, when one can train
themselves to stop the mind as in single pointed, yogic meditation.
Doing so produces a result that one could never expect.
It has nothing to do with belief, mental ideations, cultural
differences, opinions, intellectualizing, etc.
---Nor does any intellectual machinations or belief systems help--in
fact that just adds to the babble.
It's as generic as fusing to total and utter objectivitiy.
People try to explain it is words. Reading words can never explain it
though. It is something one has to practice to do.
It's the least common thing, to have accomplished the Stopping of the
Mind.
From The Great Calm Observation, Volume 1, Part 4, by Chi-I
"Those who have enough will and virtue will reach it. They are not
like the worldly who are crude, shallow and false, who compete and
fight over rubbish, stones, grass and sticks, falsely reasoning them
to be the precious gem. In later ages, those with a skin deep study of
this teaching will not recognize the Inspiration of the Great Mind."
--
Parable to illustrate six stages of discovery of the principle or
called the "Six Identitities"
"1. A pauper lives in a house that has a treasure chest of jewels, but
the pauper is not aware of it.
2. When an acquaintance points it out, the pauper gains knowledge of
it.
3. The pauper starts to dig it out by cleaning out all the trash and
the dirt.
4. Upon digging it all out, the pauper gradually gets closer and
closer.
5. Upon getting close enough to it, the pauper opens up the treasure
chest.
6. The pauper takes the treasure out and puts it to good use."
Try it you'll like it. It's really that simple.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don Stockbauer External

Since: Apr 16, 2007 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 7:01 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 12, 5:33 am, "Cosmic Gnome"
<hundredmillionlifeti....RemoveThis@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba....RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8f4779bb-6e52-40a3-afc9-32af68ba6fad@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> On May 11, 6:20 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "After I have passed into extinction, if there are those who wish to
> > offer alms to my complete body, then they should erect a great
> > tower.' That Buddha, (Shakyamuni butsu speaking about Taho Butsu)
> > through his transcendental powers and the power of his vow, insures
> > that, throughout the worlds in the ten directions, no matter in what
> > place, if there are those who preach the Lotus Sutra, this treasure
> > tower will in all cases come forth and appear in their presence, and
> > his complete body will be in the tower, speaking words of praise and
> > saying, Excellent, excellent!"
>
> > "This Many Treasures Buddha has taken a profound vow, saying, 'When
> > my treasure tower, in order to listen to the Lotus Sutra comes forth
> > into the presence of one of the Buddhas, if there should be those who
> > wish me to show my body to the four kinds of believers, then let the
> > various Buddhas who are emanations of that Buddha and who are
> > preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions all return and
> > gather around that Buddha in a single spot. Only when that has been
> > done will my body become visible.' Great Joy Preaching, I will now
> > gather together the various Buddhas that are emanations of my body and
> > that are preaching the Law in the worlds in the ten directions."
>
> I see. (raising pipe).
>
>
>
> > Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
> > thought--completly)
>
> And then write endless streams of mindless, obscurantist gibberish ('deep
> thought')?
>
>
>
> > This cannot be more clear.
>
> It's very clear.
>
>
>
> > "....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
> > there some special trick?"
>
> A special trick to getting Altzheimer's Disease? You could, alternatively,
> induce a persistent vegetative state [Dave Bowman can assist in this regard,
> as you gradually slip into thought paralysis while singing 'Daisy Daisy' as
> Dave shuts down your neural mappings] or simply relapse into a permanent
> coma [maybe here try cryogenic or suspended animation]. But then the
> self-appointed preachers of terminally atrophied non-thought will have
> nobody left to preach to and will instantly sink into paranoid psychosis as
> they imagine they are now God..
>
>
>
> > Ah........ya their is.
>
> "Well, kelpzoidzl, we all have our beliefs, and we all like our beliefs
> and we wish everyone else would adopt them. I personally believe in
> constructivism. You start out with elementary particles and Nature
> via the metasystem transition creates complex systems. That is my
> belief."
>
> I'm reminded of this recent parody of Husserl's phenomenology:
Good. Glad those memes got activated again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don Stockbauer External

Since: Apr 16, 2007 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 7:05 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 12, 11:24 am, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 11, 9:10 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:> On May 11, 6:20 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Think deeply and breathe, close your eyes. Stop the mind (shut off the
>
> > > thought--completly)
>
> > > This cannot be more clear.
>
> > > "....a......gee how do I stop the mind? I keep thinking things" Is
> > > there some special trick?"
>
> > > Ah........ya their is.
>
> > Well, kelpzoidzl, we all have our beliefs, and we all like our beliefs
> > and we wish everyone else would adopt them. I personally believe in
> > constructivism. You start out with elementary particles and Nature
> > via the metasystem transition creates complex systems. That is my
> > belief.- Hide quoted text -
>
> I understand what you are saying., but lets say we were talking about
> hard science, where belief does not enter the picture and it's all
> about total objectivity having nothing to do with "belief."
Hard science is just chock full of beliefs. And an infinitude of
arguing.
>
> Let's say i was offering you a nice big 36" Schmidt Cassegrain
> Telescope to put outside on your ranch?
>
> Would you say, "I have my beliefs, so I don't look through telescopes,
> so no thanks......." ?
That's exactly what I'd say. I don't do much astronomy since I took
up a much more powerful discipline, cybernetics. Have done a few
occultations, but not as many as at one time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Cosmic Gnome External

Since: May 12, 2009 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 4:10 am Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
"Don Stockbauer" <donstockbauer.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote
>>Hard science is just chock full of beliefs. And an infinitude of arguing.
"They tried to teach my baby science":
http://richarddawkins.net/article,756,They-Tried-To-Teach-My-Baby-Scie...,The-On
> Would you say, "I have my beliefs, so I don't look through telescopes,
> so no thanks......." ?
Alex De Large has a new telescope; with it he can now view The Cat Lady's
new galaxy, a 'very important work of art':
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/41695 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kelpzoidzl External

Since: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 75
|
Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 12:45 pm Post subject: Re: "Dollhouse" reference to Kubrick? [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?) |
|
|
On May 12, 9:19 pm, "Cosmic Gnome"
<hundredmillionlifeti....DeleteThis@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> "Don Stockbauer" <donstockba....DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote
>
> >>Hard science is just chock full of beliefs. And an infinitude of arguing.
>
> "They tried to teach my baby science":http://richarddawkins.net/article,756,They-Tried-To-Teach-My-Baby-Sci...
>
> > Would you say, "I have my beliefs, so I don't look through telescopes,
> > so no thanks......." ?
>
> Alex De Large has a new telescope; with it he can now view The Cat Lady's
> new galaxy, a 'very important work of art':
>
> http://www.theonion.com/content/node/41695
So really...the Cat Lady was from this galaxy of Amazons.
dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
| |
|
|