Will 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 6 Rabelais)

Will 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 6 Rabelais)

Will 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 6 Rabelais)

Now that we have seen the sense of freedom that our opportunities to consider give us, perhaps will we have to sort it out to find out what is meaningful… And it will allow us to examine the prodigious ideas of our Doctor Robert Anthony!

« Knowing what you can count on… »

I count on star-tling you! And I ask you to consider every square millimeter of your floor!

Obviously, this is stupid! : You are not really required to do so. Just consider that you do it, it will be almost equivalent. In addition it will show you that one can consider considerations and that in this particular case it does not correspond to anything real since you will not consider your mm2!

Already, you’re bitching because there’s too many mm2 to count and you cannot count so far! Liar you!

You know very well how makes: 66.051.985.541.725.402.838.677.077.133 + 1!

It’s 66,051,985,541,725,402,838,677,077,134, and you knew it! That is why I avoid you having to write it by doing it myself!

Now that number is probably much larger than that of the square millimeters of your floor as it is the number of mm2 of the surface of the Earth’s orbit… (plus or minus 2 or 3…).

So if you know how to add 1 to this incredible number, you would have been able to add 1 to count the mm2 of your floor! Because there are ultimately only 1,000,000 per m2!

Except that it does not tell us much, and you have been wise to satisfy yourself to consider that you only considered considering counting them…

Because your floor has not been done by adding mm2 to mm2! Even if you did not attend its manufacture, you know it is made of wooden planks or tiles or simply a cement surface. So these considerations about the number of mm2 give us no interesting indication about your floor, except its surface…

Discernment or intelligence is to pick your considerations!

In fact these are two different operations. Discerning is based on differences in choosing our own considerations. Being smart is to assess relative importance to the different considerations that we can do. The inability to discern leads to confusion and the inability to appreciate the relative importance is another name for bullshit…

The consideration which convinces us that our bodies as well as those of animals, are independent and well defined, is due to the fact that we discern their physical limits and that they are mobile, in contrast to plants generally attached to soil.

We also know that they are currently digesting their last meals and eliminating what they no longer need. But we know it without really seeing it directly. What shall we choose between these two considerations? The first one since everyone seems to agree, or the second which is shared only by those few who have examined the functioning of life and concluded that the bodies we see are but local aspects of a cosmic phenomenon of assimilation of life forms (shapes) that die so that others can develop?

And these are not the only considerations that can be made about these meat scraps in motion … The Hindus (and Buddhists) believe that the body is the vehicle of the soul attached to it in this universe. Exciting, is it not? Except that it might be more accurate to say that we (our consciousness) are the passengers who obstinately follow the body that are assigned to us. But this consideration requires having examined a little more detail the nature of our bodies and our minds, which we will do further. And our consideration of bodies as processes of assimilating each other, do not take into account souls or spirits.

Considering only the first two proposals, it seems that the second concept shows more work than the first exam, and this need of examination will be our guide in the continuation of our study.

Note that I speak of examination (ex-a-miner) as suggested by the Book of Wisdom, not analysis (ana-lyse) as recommended by Descartes. An analysis means to dismantle what we are studying, and thus begin to remove the object of the study: does a gear package indicate the time any more than what its assembled state allowed to know? Still so proud to be Cartesian? Examining the stories of the body, we followed them in their operation, without destroying them, since this destruction is part of life itself insofar as it is used to build other forms of life, while an analytical murder leaves us with a corpse for an autopsy and that will not be used to build other lives until its fed to Snoopy, if he wants to eat it…

It will be time to take care of the main missing item in the speeches of Dr. Anthony, the root cause of causes, THE Principe (OF EVERYTING).

Two ways of looking at the PRINCIPLE!

We can always consider the overall of it, which is also what Saint John does as he merely says that one can find the divine Word in it! Grant him his consideration so that readers angry with religion as Doctor Anthony, may want to continue reading…

And consider it as an unsortable jumble of special opportunities! Remember that all these « possibilities » are not necessarily « manifested » as all your possibilities to be anywhere but where you are, and you might manifest by going there … as long as your current location option stops to be manifested.

But if you consider the possibility of moving, you will not need to consider the successive locations that this movement will manifest.

I suggest you do not choose between the « global » account and the detailed consideration, and keep them both in mind to see what considerations we can have that « would cover » this whole principle without getting into so much detail.

And to use what we know of the universe of which we have considered a number of things since our childhood.

This will give us a guide to bind the universe and the Principle at the base of its existence …

« Science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul »

This is a quote of my friend Rabelais which does not seem to concern our Anthony (any more than the Anglo-Saxon in general …). And twice so, first because he is the demonstration of it and then because he obviously does not care for knowledge, he is only and obviously mesmerized by action, which he sees as a manifestation, or which he thinks is a « creation » to avoid being pissed off by a vengeful god. Making it a typical kshatryia as indicated by the eschatological Hindu texts (related to the End Times) of which he has nothing to do even after having « studied spirituality »!

And to study the link between the Principle and daily experience, I propose selfishly, but because it collectively regards my fellow men, to begin by taking into account what we discovered: the fact that we are consciences, « things » that can “gather what is scattered », so that we can know, and know that we will be able to assimilate what we see of what we consider…

But it seems that we must take life as a game (and for once I agree with Dr. Anthony) then I will allow myself to make fun of you by having you hang around until number 7!


Les commentaires sont clos.