'Technology Has Outstripped Our...

'...knowledge of self.'

I am quoting Shirley MacLaine here from over 35 years ago.

And I think even she makes the point later on somewhere, and that I would re-state here too - well, but whose fault is that? It's not 'technology's' fault, or the fault of so-called 'AI.' It's our own fault - for those of us who have been caught up in the whirlpool and continue to allow it to remain that way.

What do we have in our bag today?
The human being is like a
bag, or a person with a bag.
There's all kind of stuff in there...

Yet there are some really fundamental preconditions that make for that situation ever developing at all: there are tons of people for whom the only way they can achieve a personal sense of security, or internal security, is permanent cynicism. That way they never have to risk being seen or revealed as actually foolish - for example, when they are engaged in relating to other people individually.

If they do that at all, it is furtive, hidden -, never to be revealed widely.

And they give over their own moral responsibility, so they presume, to science, or technology, or the external authority of a religious institution and to 'dogma.'

And of course by far the biggest issue being that they do not even risk themselves to their closest - or seemingly closest next human soul and almost always, equivalently, not even to themselves.

So it's all pretense.

Mounted on a public platform of 'science' or 'rational behavior' or of course simply 'practical skepticism...'

And it's absolutely brilliant, how humans carry on, because they are so convincing!

When you talk to them about what they believe, they tell you straight lies, that they know are based on falsehoods, and they swear black and blue they 'believe' it all. And on that level of necessitous social lying, they do believe it.

So this whole 'for the minute' edict about human empathy - coming from this pathetic Spielberg latest thing, really proceeds from a groundless assumption; namely that all humans and all human cultures on the planet are roughly-speaking, you know, more-or-less... ...the same.

Spielberg wants you to have
empathy.
Empathy with what, though? 
In the clear waters, you can 
see, what trouble is in there!
There's Gin in there.
And you can't even see it!

The only thing that is the same with them, is that they are (mostly) all lying, except the lies are different here and there, and sometimes wildly and widely different.

In no sense at all is that true (that humans are one monolithic creature you can 'empathize with' generically or generally) within the scope of internal psychologies and intellectual mechanisms - regardless of the fact that human beings appear similar in bio-mechanical make-up, and sinusoidally as a surface moving 'object.' 

They are not similar or even alike broadly, neurologically or spiritually, and I have a lot of difficulty thinking they are at all similar 'consciously' - meaning inside what they claim is their personal consciousness.

The human race is nowhere near comprehending what it means to have 'knowledge of self.'

Ask anyone to 'describe the Self.' You will get fifty thousand different answers.

In Islam - so that's already 2 billion human 'souls' - this is (the Self) 'a slave.' And it is happy to be a slave to an unseen, non-human, non-physically relatable 'Being,' that is not material; at all.

In Silicone Valley, this (the human Self) means the minion of the Almighty 'AI.'

To the Vedic Scholars this Self is entirely distinct to what Buddhists want to say. To the humanist scientists I have no clue what they are describing and I don't really care to know.

So how are you going to force an 'empathy' for things totally contradictory to whichever 'standard' position on the self you or your social-cultural/religious programming is dictating to you and that you 'claim' to 'believe' is true about yourself.

This is a real place.
In Antalya.

In some instances, nay frankly it's all of them except most don't admit it - they will even put a knife to your throat if you deny their perspective with any degree of intensity or seriousness. Thus we all become endlessly jocular. I know I certainly do.

Just look at the large numbers of commentaries on the internet right now 'reviewing' this Spielberg disaster: the first thing it has revealed to me, is just how absolutely lacking in actual personal material first-hand experience, thus knowledge, of ET Aliens, all of these people are exhibiting!

And yet all of them have been in the public's eye for decades talking about the subject in many cases - what did they ever really know?

Yes - so-and-so met such-and-such military guy, who said his friend Joe's first cousin worked at Area 51...

??

I said I was involved formally with the Unit under Thomas C Schelling of the US Defense Science Research Board's actual engagement with ET's.

Nobody ever contacted me from anywhere. Heck, yeah sure I have met Stan Deyo - he thinks I am a 'Men-in-Black!' LOL

Everyone (almost everyone) I knew also from the real organisation/s - are all deceased, or 'disappeared.'

You know, one of the really big problems to do with having anyone from the old days actually turn up and volunteer anything in a big way - is that politically, a lot of things have 'moved on.' The US Government is not in a position to admit things, for example, about the criminal dictator, Harry Lee, and people nowadays will simply not admit that any of it (which are, the facts!) are or can possibly, be true. Except they are true. It's intrinsic to many Cold War and post-WWII political 'things,' that none of this 'we have Alien tech' stuff, can really come out. Partly because absolutely, those who really did have actual 'engagement' and official programs involving such 'beings' totally left the government framework altogether. And for good reason. Same reasons they would have right now today for 'keeping in the background.' 

Last night I was myself up in a 'UFO' - what most of you all call a 'UFO' anyway -  and the pilot in there was showing me how he was able to shoot a 1 centimeter long, oblong object floating in Space. From probably about ten Space miles away.

I don't know.
I've never seen an Alien
or a UFO.
Have you?

...So it is not easy for me to 'talk to (all that many) people' about real stuff!

LOL

Oh it's real all right.

And yes I know what's going to happen to the 'IRGC.'

So what. The news cycle moves every 24 hours and it jerks around from one speculation to the next, impatient for 'key events' to be officially and publicly announced.

And everyone's got a focus on 'the problem' and who is at fault; who to blame for anything/everything. 

You - I mean actual you you - will graduate from the next sucker to the 'AI' Allah, or the last sucker to the just plain medieval Allah Allah or the Byzantine Bureaucracy's 'Jove/Jehovah' the second you move from looking around for someone to blame, and looking at 'all the problems,' and talking to the next person about how cynical you are and what the problem is today...

...to how you yourself have found a solution to something, anything, that actually concerns you personally.

Look, let's be real here.

You only really care about you. I want you to care about you.

When you start caring about you, and you do stuff for yourself that gets you to where you will be really and truly internally satisfied without lying to yourself - then, regardless of that Shirley MacLaine thinks then you will 'begin to start' being beneficial to others - I am saying that at least you will exist at all. And then that becomes worthy of protecting.

And unless you reach that place, why are 'the Gods' giving a damn about 'you' anyway?

You cannot say to a God, a Divinity with All-Knowledge of the World, and of other sentient life-forms:' I am happy and thankful (IE 'to you, Oh Divinity!') - when you are lying, to yourself and thus then necessarily also to them.

You lie to a God and see what happens. I challenge you.

This is a human-made thing.
Any good? What do you think?

So the typical nut-job MFA and 'science graduate' must necessarily permanently feign cynicism, because they simply cannot afford to tell the truth in case they got found out 'if' there were such a thing as a real 'Divinity!' ...All of their wives and 'romantic partners' are in exactly no different of a position as the 'Divinity' of which I was just now speaking!

You know, a long time ago, there was this thing in the Medieval 'hamam' culture of Antalya (is from 'Anatolia' of course, and is a city in Turkey now) - where they used to make steam, big huge swathes of mist and steam, and primarily, color it with dyes...!

And only then afterwards, infuse it with scented oils. Or rose petals, and so on, whatever.

The point was that they believed in the Djinn (Genies), and they held that these sent little animal-like beings into the unseen space nearby to a person (unless they were right there themselves...), to disrupt or influence the decisions and the mind-state of that person.

But the Medieval Turkish hamam wizards, also thought that, well -, virtually that one frequency, could not be sustained in the presence of a conflicting or sufficiently different other frequency. It was in fact from these kinds of thoughts (mostly people like Ibn Haytham; he writes about it in those actual terms) that Newton ever got his ideas about the spectral components of visible white light - and of course proved it using his glass prism.

And so, the hamams had two processes - one where they just plain filled the place with colored mist, and some claimed they were able to 'see' strange Djinn-world 'animals' flee from that colored mist. And the other where the person perceived themselves as surrounded by a specific colored mist - and then they sensed, felt or 'suspected' if there was some dissonance, as it were, in any region in the mist. And then this dissonance after a while, left.

Put it this way - I tell you all of that, to tell you this: do stuff for yourself.