Bastian wrote:TomJansen wrote:I would like to mention
Stefan "Denaerde" his story, about his contact with people from Iarga.
[...]
My understanding is that, the Iargan people are not as far evolved than the Thiaooubans, because:
- They are no hermaphrodites
- They don't have a task or responsibility over other civilisations.
- They don't tell about the 9 categories.
- They do register consumptions and use of products and services.
But they are far more civilised than Earth people, because:
- They don't have a money-system
- They do advanced spiritual excercise (and talk about "cosmic integration")
- They have very advanced technology which they don't misuse.
Wow, I skimmed over that page briefly and I am amazed at some of the similarities between this and TP.. utterly fantastic. I really enjoyed reading it! Hopefully I will find the time later and remember to read it more fully later on.
I agree with your assessment tom, they are far more evolved than us and yet certainly not as evolved as the Thiaooubans.
To both TomJansen and Bastian:
You claim that we humans are far inferior to both TP and the people from Iarga. Yet you also claim TP to be superior to Iarga. This you cannot do since you are, as you yourself said it, inferior to Iarga and TP. How can you be inferior to both TP and Iarga and yet make statements on them, regarding the absolute favorite?? You are not in a position to do this, since you are inferior.
it is like asking a baby to vote for the elections. Do you choose this one, or that one? Either way the baby deceides, the grounds on which he deceides are ofcourse restricting, to say the least.
Because you claimed yourself inferior to both of them, you have also resticted yourself to make any other comment on either of them.
And for those who like to take it to a new level, here comes the paradox:
How can you, being inferior, make any statement regarding TP and yourself? Especially the statemant that you are inferior to them. If you indeed are inferior than them you are in no position to make that statement, since you, by that very statement, are inferior to them, and thus, following the same logic as above, you can't make that statement. The only way you can truly make that statement is by first being
equal to them, but then, if you are indeed equal, in order to determine your inferiorness, you are no longer inferior.
Shortly said, the whole process of truly determining your inferiorness to
anything destoy's your inferiorness to that particular thing. In other words, if you truly understand
why you are inferior, or better yet,
why you believe yourself to be inferior, you are no longer inferior.
The paradox is ofcourse that you cannot claim yourself to be inferior, since that claim, at least temporarly, requires you to step out of your inferiority, make that claim and then be inferior. The whole process of determining your inferiorness requires you to understand why you are inferior. And that understanding no longer belongs to inferiority but to superiority. So you can never claim your inferiority since that claim requires you to be at least equal to that which claim to be inferior to.
The only one who is inferior to anything is the one who doesn't know. But since that one doesn't know it, he will not act on it. In that way the truly inferior man, who himself doesn't know it, is infact superior to the man who does know it's inferiorness since the latter
does act on it (in a self-denying way: feeling inferior; denying it; and being inferior). However, if the latter overcomes it's inferiority-complex he will be at least equal to which he himself formerly saw inferior and to the man who hasn't yet realised it's inferiorness.
For instance, Mr. Caveman will never feel inferior to any future civilisation because he doesn't know anything other than himself and its surroundings. Because he doesn't feel inferior he behaves like a superior man. Modern man does feel himself inferior (because he deny's parts of himself, saying they are inferior and that is why he is inferior). Feeling inferior (and not accepting it) he acts differently then when he isn't feeling himself inferior. Because he can think of seemingly superior things (by first denying parts of himself, parts he believes are inferior) he feels himself inferior and starts his neurosis. So first he believed himself, or at least part of himself, to be inferior, and the consequence of that is
actually being inferior. In other words:
self imposed restrictions.
If Modern Man wishes to overcome his inferiority he must realise he isn't inferior. But the motive for realising his inferiority, by which he wishes to overcome it, is based on the believe that he is inferior. In other words, when he actively tries to overcome his inferiority, he actually
acknowledges his inferiority first, and thus starts an endless fight
with himself. That indeed is inferior. So again, first we have a believe we are inferior and then, because we are trying to deny that inferiority or to overcome it, we actually
become inferior.
But how then does one overcome inferiority?? One doesn't. If one tries one actually becomes inferior. But if one doesn't try, one only
feels himself inferior. Now, you must agree with this, feeling inferior and being inferior are two different things. So the solution is to accept the feeling of inferiority, not to fight it, or to replace it with other feelings, but to accept it. Once it is accepted a whole new world starts before your eyes (this is because a part of your unconsiousness, formerly denied, now becomes conscious since you have accepted it. This new consiousness is indeed an enrichment of your world.)
If one can accept the feelings of inferiority one is indeed superior. That is the paradox of inferiority/superiority: by not accepting parts of yourself, since you believe them to be inferior, you actually become inferior since you no longer have access to those parts (they are now in the unconsiousness.) By accepting all that you have formely denied you start a path towards unity. Unity of yourself. Once you accomplished that unity, you are superior to all who haven't.
Don't read my signature.
.
