"Crisis of the Republic" and Pathocrats - An Exercise in Discernment

[Angelo]

Hi everyone,

Firstly, thank you for all of the responses, there are few forums with as much thoughtful commentary as this one.

The issue with regards to the 'tainting' of children, as someone here put it, is a hot topic and one that is very near to my life, and thus by default an area of great concern and evaluation for me.

I understand and believe that the energetic interplay between couples at the point of conception is both highly relevant and highly important. The situation of morality to me is not a floating system of values, but a matter of intimate personal intention. It is not my request that everyone subscribe to a singular and set moral code, rather, I see the moral fiber within each individual as the 'tablet' that each must be guided by. It is this moral fiber that I believe is increasingly lost, or confused, amidst a sexual media content which exists without proper context.

It cannot be said that sex in and of itself is the indicator, but rather the intentional experience underlying the act. If there is little or no heart connection and higher emotional interplay between partners, and instead a void of self satisfaction, I sense the 'space inbetween' becomes filled with another component altogether.

Is this scenario of a 'space inbetween' one that should concern us? I believe that it should. It should because it draws parallels for us in various other social settings. This 'space inbetween', where true reciprocation is voided, is a space where we can find pretension, and in other words, the great 'lie'.

If we do 'choose' to engage, then the engagement itself reveals a great deal about our motivations. It reveals to us our intentions and agendas, if we have any, or are honest enough to recognize them. We can feel this quite clearly with sales people or aggressive individuals as a whole, a feeling of being assaulted or being confronted with an agenda which is not a reciprocation of our humanness. The space which is opened up here - the fake nod, the smile which is not real, the 'oh really' that's not sincere and so on....all of which is pretension and fallacy. How much of our actions are actually sincere reciprocations of human value and meaning? How much of our social interaction is real soul to soul communication?

In the arena of sexual intercourse this 'space inbetween' is much more pronounced, for the reciprocation that is being insinuated by the physical, emotional and spiritual intercourse that is elicited in the act itself, is in fact the groundwork for the indrawing of life essences. If during sexual intercourse either partner, perhaps even both, takes upon themselves the sole purpose of physical satisfaction, without regard to the fact that 'life' may be created, there can be found already an unconscious element which is being cast.

In the natural environment animals come together to create life, there is no doubt, they innately carry out their purpose and function. In the human sphere this is not always the case, and this difference, as far as I am concerned, provides a great insight into human social capacity. This very same capacity to socialize in a 'meaningful' way separates those who are soul communicators, and those who are seeking to gain above all else.

It was said by a commentator here that the psychopathic individual can be found in only small numbers, though I can't agree that their effect on society and culture as a whole is reflective of their actual numbers. It seems to me that the sway the psychopathic mentality holds over the minds and hearts of the many is great indeed, and dare I say, the driving force for much of what we call the 'progress of society'. When the tendency to psychopathy is sold and encapsulated for distribution in a veneer of respectability and a package claiming high nutritional content, and sells well, than we can safely say that psychopathic tendencies are widespread, and in fact, quite appealing.

~

When children are conceived, can it be that the level of awareness that exists within the adults themselves is indeed reflected into the new life?

This is really the question.

Then what of free-will and all of that? Right?

Is our understanding of free-will accurate?

Is there a soul component to be found in the psychopath? If so, what has happened that this soul fragment has become stuck in a state of devolution?

I wish to remind everyone that the true eastern doctrine of re-incarnation only included the 'self-realized' or those individuals that recognized themselves as fully aware sovereigns. The other doctrine of re-assimilation, or unconscious re-entry, is the karmic cycle bearing upon the rest of humanity, to differing degrees.

This individual life produces attachments, or worldly fixations that if overcompensated act as strong centers of gravity for re-entry and thus karmic cyclation. This re-entry is not so much a conscious choice, but a karmic lesson, a required soul lesson. The soul itself, as far as I am concerned, always has free-will in seed, though whether or not it can manage to exercise that free-will and grow its potential is another question. And this brings me back around.

When conception occurs, is the soul limited by the genetic/etheric construct endowed it by its parents? If the 'suit' has limited capacity for empathy and intuitive heart logic, will that environment really be conducive to a soul that is beyond that particular experience? I think there is the assumption among many that 'all must come to good'. But what about, 'things will go the way they are chosen to go'?

If a soul or soul fragment enters into a suit that proves very materially dense (psychopathic), does it not by default require that experience?

Is this not Just?

At some point in space/time the soul has chosen its path. Its not for us to define the rightness or wrongness of its choice is it? I see that the task is to provide a culture where psychopathic tendencies can be safely quarantined, amidst knowledgeable and realistic human beings, who are no longer overrun by naive world views. Who can see their task as the remediators, or more 'religiously', the redeemer's of those 'asking', from a soul level, to be given the truth and thus brought back to consciousness over successive lifetimes.

The richness of such free-will, for all involved, is clearly evident, though it requires that we each become realistic in our outlooks so that we can see things as they are, not as we think they should be, or as they 'ought to be'.

We don't hate the psychopath, we don't hate the android, for they do provide us with great challenges and gifts. For the choice they have made, somewhere along the line, has forced us to get serious about our true roles. They have urged us to look with attention towards our fleeting life, from which, we can affect widespread remediation. They have given us a chance towards a universal deepening and understanding of how best to balance the struggle which now confronts our world.

Though until we can see it 'as it is', and not 'as we want', we will falter. We will lose their gift, and they will conquer us.

And in this, both sides will lose...

 

[Fifth Way]

We don't hate the psychopath, we don't hate the android, for they do provide us with great challenges and gifts. For the choice they have made, somewhere along the line, has forced us to get serious about our true roles. They have urged us to look with attention towards our fleeting life, from which, we can affect widespread remediation. They have given us a chance towards a universal deepening and understanding of how best to balance the struggle which now confronts our world.

Though until we can see it 'as it is', and not 'as we want', we will falter. We will lose their gift, and they will conquer us.

And in this, both sides will lose...

Agreed in deed. As I said earlier in this thread:

I always wondered about the final meaning of Evil.

Is it not to bring out the Best in Good?

 

[Laura]

It cannot be said that sex in and of itself is the indicator, but rather the intentional experience underlying the act. If there is little or no heart connection and higher emotional interplay between partners, and instead a void of self satisfaction, I sense the 'space inbetween' becomes filled with another component altogether.

Is this scenario of a 'space inbetween' one that should concern us? I believe that it should. It should because it draws parallels for us in various other social settings. This 'space inbetween', where true reciprocation is voided, is a space where we can find pretension, and in other words, the great 'lie'.

If we do 'choose' to engage, then the engagement itself reveals a great deal about our motivations. It reveals to us our intentions and agendas, if we have any, or are honest enough to recognize them. We can feel this quite clearly with sales people or aggressive individuals as a whole, a feeling of being assaulted or being confronted with an agenda which is not a reciprocation of our humanness. The space which is opened up here - the fake nod, the smile which is not real, the 'oh really' that's not sincere and so on....all of which is pretension and fallacy. How much of our actions are actually sincere reciprocations of human value and meaning? How much of our social interaction is real soul to soul communication?


In the arena of sexual intercourse this 'space inbetween' is much more pronounced, for the reciprocation that is being insinuated by the physical, emotional and spiritual intercourse that is elicited in the act itself, is in fact the groundwork for the indrawing of life essences. If during sexual intercourse either partner, perhaps even both, takes upon themselves the sole purpose of physical satisfaction, without regard to the fact that 'life' may be created, there can be found already an unconscious element which is being cast.

I agree. My experience as a hypnotherapist indicates that "attachments" can be facilitated during sexual intercourse where the intent is not loving and giving. This goes back to what Cayce said about "self-aggrandizement." The C's also commented on this as follows:

Q: On many occasions you have said that the ideal thing is to have perfect balance of physicality and ethereality. This has been said on a number of occasions. Now, I don't understand how it can be that gratification of a physical body can be the mechanics by which one is entrapped? Is it not gratifying to look at something beautiful? Is it wrong, sinful, or a form of a fall, to look at beauty, to hear something beautiful such as music, or to touch something that is sensually delightful such as a piece of silk or the skin of a loved one? These various things that the human being derives pleasure from very often elevate them to a spiritual state.
A: Possession is the key.
Q: What do you mean?
A: In STS, you possess.
Q: That's what I am saying here...
A: If you move through the beautiful flowers, the silk, the skin of another, but do not seek to possess...

So of course there is an element of this "indrawing of elements" that you speak of. But is that necessarily the "attractor" for the soul of the child being conceived? Is it not possible that this "gap" is related strictly to the energies of the individuals involved in the act and not so much to do with the nature of the soul being born in terms of controlling its possibilities?

Certainly, an incoming soul would be influenced by the environment in which they are raised and that environment is largely created by the parents. But I think that the issue of genetics has a lot more to do with this than the issue of "intent or influences" of the parent's spiritual state at the moment of conception.

In the natural environment animals come together to create life, there is no doubt, they innately carry out their purpose and function. In the human sphere this is not always the case, and this difference, as far as I am concerned, provides a great insight into human social capacity. This very same capacity to socialize in a 'meaningful' way separates those who are soul communicators, and those who are seeking to gain above all else.

This example makes a certain poing. Indeed, the act of conception among humans must be similar to the creation of life among animals - an act that produces certain genetic recombination. Those genetics then would "emanate" a certain energy form/structure that would either "fit" a particular incoming soul or not. The rest would bear more directly on the environment of rearing than the actual "soul selection" process.

It was said by a commentator here that the psychopathic individual can be found in only small numbers, though I can't agree that their effect on society and culture as a whole is reflective of their actual numbers. It seems to me that the sway the psychopathic mentality holds over the minds and hearts of the many is great indeed, and dare I say, the driving force for much of what we call the 'progress of society'. When the tendency to psychopathy is sold and encapsulated for distribution in a veneer of respectability and a package claiming high nutritional content, and sells well, than we can safely say that psychopathic tendencies are widespread, and in fact, quite appealing.

Agreed. And they accomplish this by their "special psychological knowledge" and their "special nature" that enables them to manipulate so easily and well. They are truly like in infectious pathogen that seeks to use its host to reproduce itself in massive numbers... regardless of the effect on the health of the host.

Is there a soul component to be found in the psychopath? If so, what has happened that this soul fragment has become stuck in a state of devolution?

So far, we have come to the idea that there are different types of psychopaths, including a "souled" variety that may very well be "possessed." But the run of the mill psychopath, like the Organic Portal, does not have the individuated soul potential, but rather has a "fragment" of a "group soul" as its animating essence.

I wish to remind everyone that the true eastern doctrine of re-incarnation only included the 'self-realized' or those individuals that recognized themselves as fully aware sovereigns. The other doctrine of re-assimilation, or unconscious re-entry, is the karmic cycle bearing upon the rest of humanity, to differing degrees.

Which essentially is a different way of describing Organic Portals.

This individual life produces attachments, or worldly fixations that if overcompensated act as strong centers of gravity for re-entry and thus karmic cyclation. This re-entry is not so much a conscious choice, but a karmic lesson, a required soul lesson. The soul itself, as far as I am concerned, always has free-will in seed, though whether or not it can manage to exercise that free-will and grow its potential is another question. And this brings me back around.

When conception occurs, is the soul limited by the genetic/etheric construct endowed it by its parents? If the 'suit' has limited capacity for empathy and intuitive heart logic, will that environment really be conducive to a soul that is beyond that particular experience? I think there is the assumption among many that 'all must come to good'. But what about, 'things will go the way they are chosen to go'?

If a soul or soul fragment enters into a suit that proves very materially dense (psychopathic), does it not by default require that experience?

Is this not Just?

But there seems to be some mixing of concepts here. What is not being emphasized is the factor of genetic recombination in relation to what you refer to as the "seed of free will." It is also not clearly delineating the differences between soul pool incarnations and individuated soul incarnations.

Q: (L) But isn't the nature of a person determined by their
soul and not the physical body?

A: Partially, remember, aural profile and karmic reference
merges with physical structure.

Q: (L) So you are saying that particular genetic conditions
are a physical reflection of a spiritual orientation?
That the soul must match itself to the genetics, even if
only in potential?

A: Yes, precisely.

Q: (L) So a person's potential for spiritual advancement or
unfoldment is, to a great extent, dependent upon their
genes?

A: Natural process marries with systematic construct when
present.

Q: (L) Well, if that is the case, and the aliens are
abducting people and altering their genes, can they not
alter the genes so that higher level souls simply cannot
come in?

A: Not incarnative process, natural biological processes.
Incarnative involves strictly ethereal at 5th density and
lower, and thus is enveloped in triple cycle "veil" of
transfer which is impregnable ay any means. However, any
and all 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th processes can be
manipulated at will and to any degree if technology is
sufficient.

This "triple cycle veil of transfer" seems to refute the idea that the state of the parents during conception can influence the nature of the attracted soul, that the "seating of a soul" is very much a combination of aural, karmic, and biological processes, and the biological processes are what is contributed by the parents. Certainly, some of the "karmic" processes are involved in the parent selection issue, but it seems that the parent "state" issue is of little or no significance.

However, there is an issue of psychopathy in relation to genetics. I've recently been reading quite a bit about sexual predators. What strikes me is that most of these types are psychopaths... the whole sexual predation issue is truly psychopathic. From a review of Anna Salter's book:

Psychologist Anna Salter has been studying sexual offenders and their victims for more than 20 years. What she has learned in countless hours of interviews with sexual predators - from respected community leaders to clergymen and trusted family friends - will shock and outrage readers. What motivates sexual abusers? Why are so few caught? Drawing on the stories of abusers, told in their own words, Salter shows that sexual predators use sophisticated deception techniques and deliberately rely on misconceptions surrounding them to evade discovery. A man who raped more than 90 people tells how he fooled authorities by inserting elements of truth into his story. As recent reports of abuse by priests have shown, abusers often lead double lives in their communities. Two girls repeatedly raped in front of each other told Salter that their assaulter was "still moderator of the town meetings". Arguing that even the most knowledgeable among us can be fooled, Salter dispels the myths surrounding sexual predators and gives us the tools to protect our families and ourselves.

What is MOST shocking from her research is the incredible NUMBERS of rapes that such psychopaths are able to accomplish. They are literally like traveling impregnation machines.

I think that it is THIS kind of violence that is at the root of the problem and even the supposition - or myth - that "sexual attitude" at the time of conception can determine the type of individual soul that is attracted. It seems that is may have nothing to do with parental attitudes in the ordinary sense, and a great deal to to with traveling psychopathic impregnation machines. The more women an psychopath can impregnate, either by deception or by violence, the higher the probability that the number of genetic psychopaths will be the result. Because, of course, due to the laws of genetic recombination, it is not always certain that a psychopath will be born from the union of a psychopath and a normal human with soul potential. This activity only increases the possibility.

 

[Angelo]

Hi Laura,

Thanks for the response.

You said this:

This "triple cycle veil of transfer" seems to refute the idea that the state of the parents during conception can influence the nature of the attracted soul, that the "seating of a soul" is very much a combination of aural, karmic, and biological processes, and the biological processes are what is contributed by the parents. Certainly, some of the "karmic" processes are involved in the parent selection issue, but it seems that the parent "state" issue is of little or no significance.

To be quite honest I'm not sure what to make of the 'triple cycle veil', I haven't discerned yet what in actuality is being spoken of here. I do however agree with the assertion that the 'spiritual genome' merges with the material genome.

C's wrote:

Q: (L) But isn't the nature of a person determined by their
soul and not the physical body?

A: Partially, remember, aural profile and karmic reference
merges with physical structure.

Q: (L) So you are saying that particular genetic conditions
are a physical reflection of a spiritual orientation?
That the soul must match itself to the genetics, even if
only in potential?

A: Yes, precisely.

The material genome has in-built capacities and limitations that act as attractors for specific entities based upon an entities required experience. The human instrument itself is determined by the physical and energetic interplay of the parents, including of course the inherited traits passed on as lineage. In fact, it is common that a soul will invariably incarnate repeatedly, or quite often, in the same family or genetic pool that best reflects its expression, or required learning environment.

I see that the interaction between parents is not an isolated event, but a merging of millions of years of genetic memory. This makes for a complex interaction to say the least. In this regard it should be noted that each lineage carries unique etheric constructs and hence emotional and mental capacities. For the sake of clarity - 'etheric constructs' in fact refers to the intricate web of associated belief systems that exist as an overlay upon the physical body. This overlay is like the lens, or perceptual locust of the genetic substrate, through which the entity perceives.

Every lineage or combination therein has a unique perceptional bias, and the blending of etheric constructs leads to novel windows of entity interaction. And it is here that the issue of intention and sexuality comes to the fore. At the moment of the etheric merge.

I do believe that there are lineages now, especially now, that have become so fixated in a specific perceptual orientation, which is reflected materially in the genome itself, that the lineage is incapable of expanding its perceptual orientation without external aid. This situation is why I find the concept of remediation, or redemption, very valuable.

~

The question of psychopathy is an interesting one. What determines the definition of 'psychopath'? And I know we can pull out the ponerological script or what have you, but in a very pragmatic sense I think we can evaluate amongst ourselves in all honesty that psychopathic tendencies are not hidden from sight under the veil of the 'other' but exist even within ourselves. Can it be that the psychopathic tendency is the common result of an etheric field, or belief matrix, which is increasingly disassociated with life at the level of meaning. Who here can claim total emancipation from ridiculousness? Who here can claim to be free from all forms of psychosis and neurosis? If we ask in truth and listen with an honest ear I think it becomes quite apparent that we are all dealing with a genetic maladaption and etheric imprint which is highly irrational and distorted.

We have been, as a species, interrupted in our 'natural' development, it has thus become an important facet of our growth to recognize the fact, and to remediate our condition. This remediation, or one facet of this remediation, can and does take place in the arena of sexuality. If, through the 'in-drawing of life' we can work against the factors of self absorption and dedicate ourselves, with full attention and intention, to bringing forth a life that has greater capacity than we do, we are in fact doing a great service in the name of selflessness towards the etheric 'up movement' of the indwelling entity.

If we carry out the opposite act, and bring forth life in a manner most would suggest to be the 'normal mode' of things, without attention, awareness and dedication to that which moves in the ethers, than we are simply opening a gate without developing a context, and without any 'screening' at all. This can be likened to throwing open a dimensional portal without keying in the coordinates as to where you want it to open. Dangerous indeed, no?

I do believe that the psychopathic tendencies which have been described in such detail in this forum are in fact very common in various degrees among the general population. I do believe that the corporate media's memetic dispersion of worldviews and ideological platforms is wearing thin the human capacity for foundational discernment, and that even the rebel causes, the alternative options and anti-war campaigners and so on, for the most part suffer from a deep disconnect from the fabric and reality of perceptual engineering.

As an example, below is a quote where Rudolf Steiner describes a simple method of social distraction, for Steiner was not taken in by the promises of the workers's revolution of his time. Here he analyzes the battle cry of the proletariat, "Workers of the World, Unite!" and shows its paradoxical nature, a message which so confused human understanding that its adherents would follow it blindly. A perfect example of today's anti-establishment rhetoric as promulgated by the alternative media.

Steiner: For what does this slogan really mean? It means: Nurture antipathy, as proletarians, against the other classes, nurture something similar to hate as single individuals, and then to unite, which is to say, love one another. Unite your feelings of hatred, develop love of your class - a love for comrades of a common class - born out of hate. Love each other out of hatred! . . . If I may use so paradoxical an expression, something actually exists in the nature of an anti-method that uses our own modern way of thinking to veil the sway of our instinctual life, making it especially vulnerable to attack by the Ahrimanic beings I have been describing.

I use the above to highlight the methods of distraction that can only effectively find room to spread and proliferate, when confronted with a human psychology that is already deeply dysfunctional and without proper meaningful context.

~

In designating the importance of human sexual relations on the indwelling soul, I do feel very strongly that even the most simplistic of self absorbed sensations does indeed create a 'space in between' that is illusory and thus opportune for 'fragments' seeking 'shelter' in the folds of human ignorance.

We are, through our sexual intentions and relations, exponentially increasing these folds, through un-attentive self satisfaction, or conversely ironing out the genetic discrepancies by consecrated ourselves with loving attraction to our partner and understanding the importance of context on the etheric environment and its value to the indwelling entity.

Laura you wrote this...

What is not being emphasized is the factor of genetic recombination in relation to what you refer to as the "seed of free will." It is also not clearly delineating the differences between soul pool incarnations and individuated soul incarnations.

In the animal kingdom all species exist within soul groups, there are no individuated souls. In the human sphere of interaction, which borders on the animalistic and the 'divine' I sense that soul groups, if they exist, take on a different form. I tend to think of the hive mind, the collective merge of souls who at one point may indeed have been individualized, as an increasingly integrated group think. This generally occurs through very strict hybridization and breeding processes which can be seen amidst very specific human groupings, see Israel, which breeds out through successive generations any individual sense of direction or group opposition. This amalgam of souls into a homogenized hive mind, wherein thoughts are shared and sentiments are broadcast globally is indeed in many ways a reversion back to a group soul apparatus.

As far as the above is concerned, and I do find it very relevant, it is not directly aligned with the purpose of my original dialogue. Which was that the psychopathic tendencies found within humanity as a whole, can either increase, or decrease, according to our approach to human relationships, and sex in general. This equation is not 'everything', but I do perceive that the window of sexuality provides us with very insightful glimpses into our psyche, and more specifically, into the nether regions of our unconscious impulses. Through attention and awareness I see that we can in fact influence and design the context in which life is generated, and that it can be done in such a manner that unconscious elements are dissipated, thereby clearing away a layer of genetic density for the incoming soul.

A gift if you will.


In Truth and Love,
Angelo

 

[Mr. Premise]

Angelo,

There is all the difference in the world between a psychopath, a person who is incapable of ever developing a conscience (that is the working definition, you may not think they exist defined that way) and those with psychopathic tendencies. By definition a tendency would mean you have some potential (at least) empathy.

A psychopath, therefore, is defined as one who cannot be redeemed.

So the question is, do you think everyone has the potential to be redeemed? If so, have you examined why you are invested in that?

I have another question as well. Do you have children? IMO, how a person treats their spouse after the child is born will have a much greater effect than how one feels about one's spouse during conception. And given the discussion of genetic potentials, I don't think we should flatter ourselves that we in one moment can have such an effect on a life.

But what you have given us is a hypothesis that could be tested rigorously with questionnaires and a large, longitudinal study following the resultant babies throughout their lives.

Don

I do believe that the psychopathic tendencies which have been described in such detail in this forum are in fact very common in various degrees among the general population. I do believe that the corporate media's memetic dispersion of worldviews and ideological platforms is wearing thin the human capacity for foundational discernment, and that even the rebel causes, the alternative options and anti-war campaigners and so on, for the most part suffer from a deep disconnect from the fabric and reality of perceptual engineering.

Angelo

 

[Angelo]

Don,

I'll begin with the last.

I have another question as well. Do you have children? IMO, how a person treats their spouse after the child is born will have a much greater effect than how one feels about one's spouse during conception. And given the discussion of genetic potentials, I don't think we should flatter ourselves that we in one moment can have such an effect on a life.

I don't have children of my own, but I have raised children. In regards to the 'one moment' comment, I think what is being done here is the slackening or loosening of context. Is it probable, that a couple that goes to the lengths of treating the moment of sexual intercourse as a profound experience of mutual respect, love and potential, would, the moment they 'disembark', become somehow dysfunctional caregivers?

As I reiterated above, this facet which is sexuality is only one facet, but is no less crucial or unimportant than the home environment after the fact. I'm weary of dissecting one component and saying that this one component is more important than another, I see it as a continuum which exists in totality, and that the beginning, the moment of conception, is to be considered no less. The conception is something which in itself does not exist within a vacuum, but is found situated upon a real relationship, one that may or may not be 'prepared' for conscious creation. So even in this I see preparation.

~

The question of conscience and whether or not an individual without a conscience can be 'redeemed' is a question I am now seeking out. Its a question that is simmering in the crucible of patience. I can't say for sure as of this time, but I can express my intuitions.

In my eyes, without too much elaboration here, the remediation of psychopathic individuals is not so much about the redemption of the individual themselves, but rather the understanding of the mentality that accompanies them and the de-construction of the human social fabric that breeds them. Which over successive generations would lessen their numbers and nullify their impact. As of this time, the tendencies which are psychopathic in nature, which exist in most of us to differing degrees, are the building blocks of future android memes that are indeed, as you say, without conscience. So the redeeming aspect here is how we approach ourselves, and how we approach a deeper understanding of the human being and its liabilities, as well as its potentials in so far as we can see a world free from illusory etheric components.

So the question is, do you think everyone has the potential to be redeemed? If so, have you examined why you are invested in that?

What is your direction here? What do you mean by invested?

 

[Mr. Premise]

I think I understand better what you mean by redemption. But redemption usually refers to individuals.

As for whether a moment of conception done with love and respect and intent to make a beautiful new life can be derailed after the child is born, it absolutely can! The couple's relationship can easily be disrupted by a new child and begin to show more symptoms of disfunction. In fact, that might be the norm.

By 'invested' I mean you seem to keep coming back to your point, which means that it is important to you and that it is important that we see exactly what you mean by it. I didn't mean it in a negative way. But there also seems to be a downplaying or dismissing of the concept of psychopath as someone who cannot be redeemed.

Don

Don,

I'll begin with the last.

I have another question as well. Do you have children? IMO, how a person treats their spouse after the child is born will have a much greater effect than how one feels about one's spouse during conception. And given the discussion of genetic potentials, I don't think we should flatter ourselves that we in one moment can have such an effect on a life.

I don't have children of my own, but I have raised children. In regards to the 'one moment' comment, I think what is being done here is the slackening or loosening of context. Is it probable, that a couple that goes to the lengths of treating the moment of sexual intercourse as a profound experience of mutual respect, love and potential, would, the moment they 'disembark', become somehow dysfunctional caregivers?

As I reiterated above, this facet which is sexuality is only one facet, but is no less crucial or unimportant than the home environment after the fact. I'm weary of dissecting one component and saying that this one component is more important than another, I see it as a continuum which exists in totality, and that the beginning, the moment of conception, is to be considered no less. The conception is something which in itself does not exist within a vacuum, but is found situated upon a real relationship, one that may or may not be 'prepared' for conscious creation. So even in this I see preparation.

~

The question of conscience and whether or not an individual without a conscience can be 'redeemed' is a question I am now seeking out. Its a question that is simmering in the crucible of patience. I can't say for sure as of this time, but I can express my intuitions.

In my eyes, without too much elaboration here, the remediation of psychopathic individuals is not so much about the redemption of the individual themselves, but rather the understanding of the mentality that accompanies them and the de-construction of the human social fabric that breeds them. Which over successive generations would lessen their numbers and nullify their impact. As of this time, the tendencies which are psychopathic in nature, which exist in most of us to differing degrees, are the building blocks of future android memes that are indeed, as you say, without conscience. So the redeeming aspect here is how we approach ourselves, and how we approach a deeper understanding of the human being and its liabilities, as well as its potentials in so far as we can see a world free from illusory etheric components.

So the question is, do you think everyone has the potential to be redeemed? If so, have you examined why you are invested in that?

What is your direction here? What do you mean by invested?

 

[Lucy]

...due to the laws of genetic recombination, it is not always certain that a psychopath will be born from the union of a psychopath and a normal human with soul potential.

Geneticists consider some inhereted traits to be 'dominant', and more likely to passed on than others...although this is in potential rather than being certain. Such as brown eyes predominating over blue eyes. It may usually or more often be the case, but is not always the case. It is certainly possible for two blue eyed parents who carry certain recessive genes to have a brown eyed child.

I've been wondering if OP and/or psychopathic genes could be dominant in the same way. So that even if one parent is a normal human being...or an individuated soul in potential...and the other is an OP or psychopath, then there is a greater possibility of the two of them conceiving a child who inherits the OP or psychopathic genes than the 'normal' genes. But, it would stand to reason that this would not be certain...or always the case.

This leads me to some questions:

For an essential psychopath (defined as a failed OP).to be born, must one of the parents be an OP in order to provide the necessary genetic recombination?

Could OP-genes be recessive in some people?

Do the possibilities/potentials of certain recessive genes being present in genetic recombination mean that two individually souled parents could, at least theoretically, give birth to an OP because one or both of them has an ancestor who was an OP?

And finally, could non-OP producing genes be recessive? With our mixed/tainted gene pools, is there any possiblility of two OP's giving birth to a non-OP?

Since it seems OP's do seem to pop up in predominantly souled families now and then, I'm thinking that, except for the last question, all of the above are very 'possible'. But, the last one, "Can two OP's have a souled child?" has me stumped.

 

[Angelo]

I'm fairly well read as regards this forum, and the general world conceptualizations that find voice here, so I feel as though I can comment to some degree about OP's. Though my comment will be aligned somewhat differently perhaps. The difference can be presented very succinctly in five words.

We are all organic portals.

I'm not quite sure of how the terminology or meaning of the OP came about as it is represented here, but I find good reason to cast out some alternative options. In my previous posts I made mention of the image that each individuated consciousness enters into the physical domain through a portal, and that this very particular entrance is oriented and organized according to the constitution of the incoming entity. The two way reciprocation of spiritual amalgam, or the motion of being (general characteristics) of the entity consciousness, and the genetic and etheric constitution provided by the earth environment creates the parameters and scale, through which a portal into the 'other side' is opened. It is through this portal, each designed as a unique configuration, that we as entities, or souls, entered into physical being.

In this way, we are all organic beings, for we are all a composite of sentient soul and earth essence. This sentient component, through our astral linkage, literally holds open a portal to the spiritual world, making each and everyone of us an 'organic portal' and 'channel'.

The next assessment than is this. Into which 'spiritual' domain do we channel our frequency, and from which spiritual domain do we derive our core identity.

In the realm of spirit there are vast conglomerates of energy that can be considered self serving, and thus, the idea of the 'organic portal' as it pertains to psychopathy may indeed be derived from a partial knowledge of this spiritual landscape.

Though this does not dispel the error I sense, in accordance with what I know and in contrast with what is described so often in this forum as an 'organic portal' as a being of psychopathic nature. For as I tend to agree that all genetic/etheric lines carry within them psychopathic traits, I don't feel as though the blanket statement which is the 'organic portal' is an accurate device to describe a very specific spiritual orientation.

~

There is a belief, among certain african tribes, that the birth of a human being actually takes place in the mind of the father. That during the period of 'conception' the father has the very important role of developing and conceptualizing the portal identity through which life will emerge. In this way it was very important to the tribe that very specific qualities be emphasized so that the incoming life would be of benefit to the group dynamic as a whole. Also in this way, the more profound the conceptualization, or more accurately, the more incisive the fathers ability to conceptualize and develop insight, the more 'advanced', as a tribal member, the child would be.

It is known already that the mitochondrial DNA is passed down through the mother, this line of constancy is what keeps the genetic line stable. The father on the other hand brings forth a genetic adaptability which is the seed of change and diversity. This seed brings change to an otherwise static system and exists not only as a physical form but also as an ethereal seed conception in the mind. This is a very important line of thought.

It has been said among the Toltecs that women can indeed create life without the male energy, though the result of this system of energetic reproduction would bring forth only clones undifferentiated from one another. Here it is seen that the mother provides the matrix of constancy and fixation, or the fractal web, which allows the fathers departing seed to germinate the unfolding of this constancy, giving it motion and 'fluidity'.

The father provides diversity, the mother constancy.

In this context, the questions asked previously take on a much different characteristic. For I see quite clearly that it is not the genetic code that is so fixed as to determine human processes, but that human understanding is the causal motive force that is in reality orchestrating the genetic code. And even more heretical, that the traditional roles of male and female are actually based to a large extent upon energetic facts and not on an illusory struggle between male and female.

Here is a quote on imagery:

Imagery has been considered a healing tool in virtually all of the world's cultures and is an integral part of many religions. Navajo Indians, for example, practice an elaborate form of imagery that encourages a person to "see" himself as healthy. Ancient Egyptians and Greeks, including Aristotle and Hippocrates believed that images release spirits in the brain that arouse the heart and other parts of the body. They also thought that a strong image of a disease is enough to cause its symptoms.

....

Affirmations and visualizations are used by athletes everyday. It has been suggested by experts such as Dale Carnegie, Robert Schuller and Steven Covey to elicit peak performance in individuals. Athletes use visualization to enhance their performance, sometimes without realizing it. A golfer may form a mental map of the fairway, imagining precisely where he will place the ball on each shot;....

http://holisticonline.com/guided-imagery.htm

The above example has been scientifically verified, especially in regards to athletes, in that visualization techniques do indeed shape potentials. Now the question of universal applications and the ethical and moral implications of what is best 'imaged' is best saved for another time.

With this line of reasoning I would suggest that psychopathy is not so much a genetic pre-determined process but an evolving and changing social dynamic which can spread like a disease through the minds eye of humanity. Can two psychopaths produce a child that is capable of heartfelt motivations? Well, what are these two persons thinking and feeling, what are they conceptualizing as they bring forth 'life'?

I feel very strongly that we are all borderline psychopathic, in that the culture that greets us everyday is a constant weight and threat to our more innate spiritual assertiveness. If we are overtaken by the dominant memes and world concepts of our time as they assuage our spiritual restlessness, we do in fact densify our very selves, we do in fact reorder our genetic structure. And in the same way, the process unfolds in an upward manner the more we as individuals can find our true center of sovereignty and spiritual ethnicity and ethical foundation.

The battle over the conscience of humanity is not well confined to the realm of genetic determinacy, but more comprehensively to the realm of human belief systems, human values and human awareness. We are all under the threat of illusory etheric constructs, we can all, no matter how spiritually inclined we feel, give voice to ideologies which are not our own, which unbeknownst to us, color our world and shape that which we wish to create, whether what we create be a painting, or a child.

 

[ark]

I'm fairly well read as regards this forum, and the general world conceptualizations that find voice here, so I feel as though I can comment to some degree about OP's. Though my comment will be aligned somewhat differently perhaps. The difference can be presented very succinctly in five words.

We are all organic portals.

In the same way it could be said that we are all atoms. But that kind of general statement does not carry any useful information. Information comes by classification. Also note that the ideas that "find voice" here are most definitely not "general world conceptualizations."

I'm not quite sure of how the terminology or meaning of the OP came about as it is represented here, but I find good reason to cast out some alternative options. In my previous posts I made mention of the image that each individuated consciousness enters into the physical domain through a portal, and that this very particular entrance is oriented and organized according to the constitution of the incoming entity.

The problem is with the definition of "consciousness". In a sense a tree can have a consciousness. Or a Windows PC can have another kind of consciousness. The OP issue has to do with a much more subtle problem, namely that of a "soul".

The two way reciprocation of spiritual amalgam, or the motion of being (general characteristics) of the entity consciousness, and the genetic and etheric constitution provided by the earth environment creates the parameters and scale, through which a portal into the 'other side' is opened.

You did not define what a "portal" is. A door in a room is a portal. You did not define "etheric". Alcohol is an etheric substance.

It is through this portal, each designed as a unique configuration, that we as entities, or souls, entered into physical being.

Now, you say "we". A computer can also be taught to say 'we". But there is a difference between a computer and a dog, for instance. There are different kinds of "wes". The devil is in the details.

In this way, we are all organic beings, for we are all a composite of sentient soul and earth essence.

You did not define "soul". Without a definition, a processor in a computer can be considered it's "soul". But the problem of a soul is a different one. We are having in mind here different kinds of 'souls".

This sentient component, through our astral linkage, literally holds open a portal to the spiritual world, making each and everyone of us an 'organic portal' and 'channel'.

The point is that some channel life, while others channel death. Some want to "give", while others want to "take". The devil is in the details.

The next assessment than is this. Into which 'spiritual' domain do we channel our frequency, and from which spiritual domain do we derive our core identity.

A machine channels it's program. The devil is in the details.

In the realm of spirit there are vast conglomerates of energy that can be considered self serving, and thus, the idea of the 'organic portal' as it pertains to psychopathy may indeed be derived from a partial knowledge of this spiritual landscape.

Psychopathy is one thing. It is a rather well described category. Organic portals is a hypothesis, of a different kind. There is no direct or simple relation between the two.

Though this does not dispel the error I sense, in accordance with what I know and in contrast with what is described so often in this forum as an 'organic portal' as a being of psychopathic nature.

Organic portals, if they exist, may be very of very kind nature. People with souls (if they exist) may behave like psychopaths. You are mixing two different categories. The devil is in the details.

For as I tend to agree that all genetic/etheric lines carry within them psychopathic traits, I don't feel as though the blanket statement which is the 'organic portal' is an accurate device to describe a very specific spiritual orientation.

Organic portals is a hypothesis, based on another hypothesis, namely the one that such a thing as a "soul" exists, and that "some people" have souls. This leaves open the possibility that some don't. Then comes the question what is so particular about "souls" and this is a very difficult and open problem. - same as the problem of the existence of a "soul".

~

There is a belief, among certain african tribes, that the birth of a human being actually takes place in the mind of the father. That during the period of 'conception' the father has the very important role of developing and conceptualizing the portal identity through which life will emerge. In this way it was very important to the tribe that very specific qualities be emphasized so that the incoming life would be of benefit to the group dynamic as a whole. Also in this way, the more profound the conceptualization, or more accurately, the more incisive the fathers ability to conceptualize and develop insight, the more 'advanced', as a tribal member, the child would be.

Well, there is a belief, among certain african tribes, that eating human flesh is beneficial. Many of them believe that old women can kill cattle by looking at them sideways, for example. For some reason you are quoting from some african tribes, skipping other african tribes.

It is known already that the mitochondrial DNA is passed down through the mother, this line of constancy is what keeps the genetic line stable. The father on the other hand brings forth a genetic adaptability which is the seed of change and diversity. This seed brings change to an otherwise static system and exists not only as a physical form but also as an ethereal seed conception in the mind. This is a very important line of thought.

There are no hard and fast rules. While there are statistical studies of influence of the genes, there are always exceptions. Moreover the relation, if any, of the genes to the "soul" is not clear, though it is hypothesized. You are just stating a different hypothesis.

It has been said among the Toltecs that women can indeed create life without the male energy, though the result of this system of energetic reproduction would bring forth only clones undifferentiated from one another. Here it is seen that the mother provides the matrix of constancy and fixation, or the fractal web, which allows the fathers departing seed to germinate the unfolding of this constancy, giving it motion and 'fluidity'.

Toltecs: "They practiced human sacrifice and the use of the "tzompantli", the rack where the skulls of the dead were hung." For some reasons you quote one thing about Toltecs while skipping the other things. Why should we care about Toltecs?

The father provides diversity, the mother constancy.

What kind of diversity? What kind of constancy? What about people that are constant in their diversity and diverse in their constancy?

In this context, the questions asked previously take on a much different characteristic. For I see quite clearly that it is not the genetic code that is so fixed as to determine human processes, but that human understanding is the causal motive force that is in reality orchestrating the genetic code.

Trees without undrstanding have genetic codes too. Their code is being orchestrated? By who or what? By the wind?

And even more heretical, that the traditional roles of male and female are actually based to a large extent upon energetic facts and not on an illusory struggle between male and female.

Why should there be any struggle between male and female? There can be harmony as well.

Here is a quote on imagery:

Imagery has been considered a healing tool in virtually all of the world's cultures and is an integral part of many religions. Navajo Indians, for example, practice an elaborate form of imagery that encourages a person to "see" himself as healthy. Ancient Egyptians and Greeks, including Aristotle and Hippocrates believed that images release spirits in the brain that arouse the heart and other parts of the body. They also thought that a strong image of a disease is enough to cause its symptoms.

Affirmations and visualizations are used by athletes everyday. It has been suggested by experts such as Dale Carnegie, Robert Schuller and Steven Covey to elicit peak performance in individuals. Athletes use visualization to enhance their performance, sometimes without realizing it. A golfer may form a mental map of the fairway, imagining precisely where he will place the ball on each shot;....

http://holisticonline.com/guided-imagery.htm

The above example has been scientifically verified, especially in regards to athletes, in that visualization techniques do indeed shape potentials. Now the question of universal applications and the ethical and moral implications of what is best 'imaged' is best saved for another time.

Sometimes visualization helps, often it does not. There are studies showing the opposite of what you are claiming that you do not quote. Visualization does not help change the external reality particularly when the visualization is orthogonal to the objective facts. Imagery may help to motivate us to do something. But there is not much mystery about that. Imagine as much as you want that the Earth stops moving tomorrow, use all the available "scientifically verified methods", and I assure you that you will fail. Get 100 of your friends to imagine with you and I can still assure you that you will fail.

With this line of reasoning I would suggest that psychopathy is not so much a genetic pre-determined process but an evolving and changing social dynamic which can spread like a disease through the minds eye of humanity.

Social dynamics is one thing. Genetic features is another thing. Both have their place. Here you mix apples and oranges.

Can two psychopaths produce a child that is capable of heartfelt motivations?

Sure. Every rule has exceptions.

Well, what are these two persons thinking and feeling, what are they conceptualizing as they bring forth 'life'?

Perhaps nothing. They can both be drunk.

I feel very strongly that we are all borderline psychopathic, in that the culture that greets us everyday is a constant weight and threat to our more innate spiritual assertiveness.

Some of us are probably borderline psychopathic. Some others are probably not. The devil, as always, is in the details.

If we are overtaken by the dominant memes and world concepts of our time as they assuage our spiritual restlessness, we do in fact densify our very selves, we do in fact reorder our genetic structure.

This may be partly true and partly false.

And in the same way, the process unfolds in an upward manner the more we as individuals can find our true center of sovereignty and spiritual ethnicity and ethical foundation.

While striving for moving upwards, perhaps we should avoid following all the wisdom of Toltecs and african tribes?

 

[Laura]

I can only add, after reading this most recent post, that I am quite dismayed to see such an intellect knotted up in nebulous nonsense that I waded through years ago and discarded because it simply did not explain the reality out there in any meaningful or helpful way.

It is only when you realize that the old stuff has lost its content and that it can never give you a real insight into reality because you are living it and have worked with it as a working hypothesis, that you come, as I have written elsewhere, to the point where you know that with all you know, all you have studied, all you have given your life to, in the end, you know absolutely nothing. It is only from this point of total bankruptcy - if you survive it - that you can actually really ASK the question. And then it must be a burning question, it must be asked with your whole being, and you must work very hard and put a great deal of energy into the question for it to increase its signal potential so as to rise above the cloud of noise that surrounds our reality. IF you can do that, there is a possibility that you just might begin to get real answers. But you will find that the universe won't just hand it to you, it will make you work for it. Your life itself will become the living dialogue with the cosmos.

On a more practical level, I would suggest a complete cessation of reading any esoteric material whatsoever and begin reading about what really happens on this planet. You are here, that's where you fit or you would be elsewhere. So best get about the business of learning what is really going on here instead of speculating about nebulous passed down, second-hand pipe dreams, or tattered survivals of sometimes useful folk wisdom or even ancient knowledge. There is no way to interpret that sort of thing without a sound knowledge base founded on facts of this reality.

Start with reading criminal cases... you know, the ones that gather all the data, all the testimonies, all the different points of view of everyone involved or observing. And know that for every criminal that gets caught, there are hundreds exactly like him that do NOT get caught. And for all of those individuals of the "criminal type," there are corresponding non-criminal individuals that make up society. You will notice that, as you read criminal cases, a certain "caricaturization" that helps you to learn pattern recognition devlops in your mind. Once you have learned to recognize the caricature in the criminal, you can recognize the pattern on ever increasingly subtle and non-criminal levels. Read Anna Salter, Martha Stout, Hervey Cleckley, Lobaczewski, Robert Hare, Guggenbuhl-Craig, and so on. Do some real research into the REAL world for a change.

If you haven't already, try raising children and having them around you 24 hours a day and all their friends... get to know the parents of the friends of your children, observe, ask questions; contemplate the REAL world. And then, try to come up with a hypothesis that doesn't sound so silly and fails to explain the facts that real people have to deal with everyday.

That's my prescription. I hope you will take it in the spirit it is offered.

 

[Fifth Way]

EsoQuest has replied to the topic '"Crisis of the Republic" and Pathocrats - An Exercise in Discernment' to which you are subscribed.

Where didi it go?

 

[Guest]

Where didi it go?

I'm sorry, it was a long post and I needed to write it elsewhere and repost it. Here it is:

I havn't posted on this thread for a while, so I want to quote from your (Angelo's) first four posts certain points that made an impression on me, to compare them for clarification, and try understand the thread of your presentation, as well as your point in making it.

I apologize for the length of this post, but I thought it necessary to weave through all but the last post, which has been analyzed quite thoroughly.

From your first post:

This dark gravity instigates a portal of interpretation and inter-penetration, through which, forces seeking a suitable mainframe of experience can enter. These dense deposits of sexual malfeasance are ideally suited for entities seeking 'freedom' through self satisfaction and physical immortality....we now have highly evolved androids in our midst which can exhibit to a tremendous degree a highly refined 'spirituality' that is not only convincing, put penetrating in its ability to integrate the components of all schools of thought into an apparently coherent ensemble.

Here we have an idea tying "sexual malfeasance" to the generation of highly evolved androids with a convincing degree of false spirituality. I fail to make the connection between the ambiguous term of "malfeasance" and the specific quality of pseudospiritiuality of these "androids". Let's see if this is clarified in further posts.

From your second post:

...If a soul or soul fragment enters into a suit that proves very materially dense (psychopathic), does it not by default require that experience?...

Here we have another issue, namely that a soul entering into a materially dense "suite" requires that experience. Does this mean that "androids" require their experiences? Why is "material density" correlated with psychopathic potential? How can the materially dense acquire convincing pseudospiritual characteristics?

I find terms such as false spirituality, sexual malfeasance and material density as a psychopathic indicator to be contradictory and arbitrarily connected "by default" somehow.

However, let's say that you are trying to express the basic understanding that "soul" and body are mutually compatible. There is nothing new or heretical in this. What strikes me as strange are all the peripheral concepts you attach to this very simple one. As of yet, it is not clear to me where you are going with this, but you obviously seek to qualify it in a specific manner.

I see that the task is to provide a culture where psychopathic tendencies can be safely quarantined, amidst knowledgeable and realistic human beings, who are no longer overrun by naive world views. Who can see their task as the remediators, or more 'religiously', the redeemer's of those 'asking', from a soul level, to be given the truth and thus brought back to consciousness over successive lifetimes...

Excuse my extensive repetitiveness, but the phrase regarding quarantine of psychopathic tendencies amidst knowledgeable and realistic human beings strikes me as unclear. I assume you are referring to tendencies within people and not the people themselves. I can only express my take on it, especially when combined with the next one regarding the "knowledgeable" being "redeemers" for those "asking" to be given truth over successive lifetimes.

To quarantine a tendency is to insulate it without destroying or transforming it. Hence it remains imprisoned within us. So the tendencies are imprisoned in the psyches of the knowledgeable. Yet I do not consider anyone knowledgeable or practical who cannot first understand and then change the disharmonious tendencies within.

And if they cannot change them, they are not worthy of providing truth, especially if the only thing they can offer is a "quarantine". Furthermore, there are tendencies, which can be transformed, and there are psychopaths who cannot. And to quarantine them is obviously stooping to their level.

Hence, a truly aware individual could transform their own psychopathic tendencies, and spread the knowledge primarily by example, and through networking, for solutions viable in one lifetime, while these solutions would include dealing with psychopaths through the knowledge on how to refuse them the nourishment victimization provides.

Such individuals would also realize that we don't have "lifetimes". The clock is ticking. The only way to confront the current crises is through the attitude that there are no successive lifetimes available for our convenience. We need intense focus on the present, and it is downright dangerous to adopt any view (such as the one of successive lifetimes) that can weaken that focus.

From your third post:

I do believe that there are lineages now, especially now, that have become so fixated in a specific perceptual orientation, which is reflected materially in the genome itself, that the lineage is incapable of expanding its perceptual orientation without external aid. This situation is why I find the concept of remediation, or redemption, very valuable....

And yet now, especially now, there is a far greater intermixing of "lineages" than ever before. In fact, the only ones that come to mind are those where interbreeding is deliberate, such as lines of royalty. These are the exception to the rule of today's extended genetic variability.

I fail to see how this concept ties to that of remediation, especially since you were talking not of fixated genetic patterns, but of psychopathic tendencies, which are not necessarily fixated at all, but dependent on environmental circumstances, although genetics can point to where we are vulnerable regarding the triggering of these tendencies.

Are you speaking of some sort of spiritually-defined eugenics, combining controlled conception, psychic insulation of symptoms and some kind of guidance that will affect souls over generations? This seems to be a very mechanistic and long-term solution to me, if true. I hope I'm wrong, because it makes the hairs on my neck stand up.

...I think we can evaluate amongst ourselves in all honesty that psychopathic tendencies are not hidden from sight under the veil of the 'other' but exist even within ourselves. Can it be that the psychopathic tendency is the common result of an etheric field, or belief matrix, which is increasingly disassociated with life at the level of meaning. Who here can claim total emancipation from ridiculousness? Who here can claim to be free from all forms of psychosis and neurosis? If we ask in truth and listen with an honest ear I think it becomes quite apparent that we are all dealing with a genetic maladaption and etheric imprint which is highly irrational and distorted...

I rarely quote the ponerological script, as you call it. I want to understand your proposition, because it is a ready-made and rather complete proposal, a self-contained position, as opposed to an open-ended exploration.

I still don't see how this fits with genetically fixed lineages, but it seems you propose that focus be placed on psychopathic tendencies, not psychopaths. This seems to veer off from your first post where you spoke of sexual deviancy resulting in extreme vampiric/android types, veritable dark entities, who are difficult to detect.

I am sure you will say one does not exclude the other. My exploration here is rather on your point of practical focus, the actions you propose, and those seem to involve dealing with tendencies. You also seem to confuse psychopathy with psychosis/neurosis, which are completely different things. You seem to be taking focus off the psychopath as a person to be addressed, and place focus on psychological variables in all of us you consider the result of faulty conception dynamics. I see that you propose to deal with a direct issue in a very indirect manner.

I would rather say that neuroses/psychoses can often be natural reactions of a healthy individual succumbing to stress induced by psychopaths from the outside. Regarding these tendencies, genetics and conceptual conditions can indicate where the weak links in our existential chain lie, but we can figure those things out through self-observation. The practical point of focus is not on our REACTIONS per se, but on the ACTIONS causing it.

What we react to comes from the outside, but there are also internal elements, and these are our mechanistic conditionings. We react to both (in terms of psychosis/neurosis) in the same way a body reacts to a virus, to defend itself. To address the reactions as primary is to suppress the symptoms, and that is like suppressing one's immune system in the viral analogy. And to assume that control of biological causality is a solution is rather a controlling approach.

When a person is self-realized, then those other variables will take care of themselves naturally. Before a person is realized, the path of realization is ongoing and lessons are provided by children, friends, foes and everything around. Otherwise, one is simply not qualified to try to consciously control through "proper" conception, or any other mechanistic method, levels of complexity only the arrogant and ignorant approach in such a manner.

Notice that most of the great esoteric teachers in recent history never had children, or if they did, it was before they became teachers. Did they perhaps realize that even as adepts they could not guarantee who or what their offspring would be, and knew that offspring born after attainment of adepthood could distract them from their work?

An "irrational" etheric imprint is a concept that is new to me. This pattern is of a greater Nature than any human rationality, with its own complexity and aliveness. To attempt to control it is to walk in where angels fear to tread.

...If, through the 'in-drawing of life' we can work against the factors of self absorption and dedicate ourselves, with full attention and intention, to bringing forth a life that has greater capacity than we do, we are in fact doing a great service in the name of selflessness towards the etheric 'up movement' of the indwelling entity...

Who are we to decide or even comprehend what "life" has greater capacity than we do? You cannot comprehend or define something that is more than you are. To do so would be a contradiction, like animals understanding human logic, although they have none. And how do we know that our conscious interference will not resonate with energies of manipulation, reflecting our own? This is the arrogance of eugenics.

...If we carry out the opposite act, and bring forth life in a manner most would suggest to be the 'normal mode' of things, without attention, awareness and dedication to that which moves in the ethers, than we are simply opening a gate without developing a context, and without any 'screening' at all. This can be likened to throwing open a dimensional portal without keying in the coordinates as to where you want it to open. Dangerous indeed, no?...

Another word for "screening" is censoring. Awareness, dedication and attention are a matter of degree. Are you sure that real knowledge and awareness does not reach a point where we gain the wisdom that tampering with natural process is NOT wise? After all, you began posting in response to the observation that psychopaths seem to be performing their own spontaneous eugenics with their own manipulative conceptual methods. So are we to counter one form of manipulation with another, tit for tat?

...In designating the importance of human sexual relations on the indwelling soul, I do feel very strongly that even the most simplistic of self absorbed sensations does indeed create a 'space in between' that is illusory and thus opportune for 'fragments' seeking 'shelter' in the folds of human ignorance...

Controlling sexuality has always been a program of the PTB, and they have always presented many "rational" reasons for doing so. Sexuality is an expression of who we are, and by improving who we are this expression accommodates naturally in the same manner that breathing becomes deeper when we get in shape.

If even the most simplistic self-absorbed sensations have such an adverse effect, and we are not at a stage where these spontaneously adapt to our increasing awareness (of which they are a function), then you are again advocating control of the reflection to the detail, while de-emphasizing that which causes the reflection. This is folly, IMO.

Your next statement is both true and false, and as such can be misleading:

...the psychopathic tendencies found within humanity as a whole, can either increase, or decrease, according to our approach to human relationships, and sex in general.

It is true at face value, but given what you propose (the deliberate control the dynamics of conception, and sexual relationship) would actually lead to an increase in psychopathic tendencies simply because you deny the link between who we are and what we express through overt focus on the expression.

You HAVE expressed literally that you believe a loving passionate relationship will result in healthy offspring, but all you wrote afterwards bespeaks of manipulation that is quite other than free expressions of love, which needs no deliberation any more than being does.

Now here is your 4th post:

I'm weary of dissecting one component and saying that this one component is more important than another, I see it as a continuum which exists in totality, and that the beginning, the moment of conception, is to be considered no less. The conception is something which in itself does not exist within a vacuum, but is found situated upon a real relationship, one that may or may not be 'prepared' for conscious creation. So even in this I see preparation.

You may say here that the sexual component is part of a continuum, and not to be considered in a vacuum, but you ARE considering it in a vacuum by these concepts of direct interventions.

"Preparation" can be taken in many ways. The whole of the work is a preparation at every stage for the next one. According to the context of your writing, one can easily substitute the word INTERVENTION for preparation.

...[T]he remediation of psychopathic individuals is not so much about the redemption of the individual themselves, but rather the understanding of the mentality that accompanies them and the de-construction of the human social fabric that breeds them. Which over successive generations would lessen their numbers and nullify their impact.

You begin in a way I understand, but lose me a little bit regarding the "de-construction" part. This can be taken in many ways, from changing of the "system" (tried many times and never succeeded) to a spontaneous result of increased awareness in people. The only way the social fabric can transform (as opposed to de-constructed) is in a non-linear manner resulting from increased awareness. De-construction sounds like the implementation of a linear mechanistic "plan", which is what I get from all you say.

As of this time, the tendencies which are psychopathic in nature, which exist in most of us to differing degrees, are the building blocks of future android memes that are indeed, as you say, without conscience. So the redeeming aspect here is how we approach ourselves, and how we approach a deeper understanding of the human being and its liabilities, as well as its potentials in so far as we can see a world free from illusory etheric components.

I mentioned my view on these "tendencies" as natural reactions to applied psychopathic stresses from the environment and facilitated by conditioning. Hence, they are not the building blocks of android memes, which are conditioning patterns taking advantage of internal weakness that we are challenged to convert to strength.

The "weakness" IMO is not the enemy, and not the android here, any more than a tissue succumbing to disease is the enemy. Android memes propagate as the result of psychopathic manipulation, and in terms of conception, the result of rape, which can be both violent and enforced, or non-violent (physically) through other forms of seductive manipulation.

Regarding the "redeeming aspect", again you approach it through a general truth that promotes agreement, and then qualify it to a purpose of freeing the world of "illusory etheric components". This sounds like psychic surgery of sorts. At best, you deny incoming souls their lessons in doing so, for it is through LIVING that redemption is gained not through controlling the gate of conception.

Otherwise, you propose a form of eugenic manipulation at the psychic level. You go on in your next post to propose actual techniques regarding that manipulation, at least as an introduction.

Even if you only propose this as an aspect of a greater "evolutionary" movement, what you propose undermines the non-linear nature of evolution as a whole. You are sounding to me like an allopathic practitioner proposing interventions in complex organic processes of which he knows very little, although he may go to lengths to provide much "evidence" to the contrary.

The elaborate nature of your multiple posts made it difficult to clearly discern what your central proposition was, but you have been building up to it without coming outright and just saying it, although you were much closer to doing so in your last post.

As for me, I pray that such a direction as you propose never comes to pass.

Thank's for bearing with me.

 

[Hildegarda]

Geneticists consider some inhereted traits to be 'dominant' [..], a
I've been wondering if OP and/or psychopathic genes could be dominant in the same way.

if you want to look at it this way, it is probably a multi-gene trait. This means that there are a few genes, acting together, that are responsible for the phenotype, i.e., the soul-ness, OP-ness or psychopathy. Each gene is inherited independently or with some linkage. The end result is a different composite picture. This can get really complicated and can be nearly impossible to trace. But it WOULD bring the element of apparent randomness into the inreritance patterns. Which is in fact what's observed.

 

[Fifth Way]

Hmmmm and again:

Angelo has replied to the topic '"Crisis of the Republic" and Pathocrats - An Exercise in Discernment' to which you are subscribed.

Even-though Eso explained what happened with his post I cannot find this one either. Is that a coincident?