The phenomenon of fragmentation

[Jack River]

3 hours ago, Faceless said:

I appreciate your interest in this thread and find your post as a contributor into some clarity on this thread??...

We may want to remember that we are trying to make this thread of value to the reader as much as possible. There are parts of your post in which i understand and others which is an unclear as to the intention. 

As far as this part of the post I think we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. Before we go into how the “individual” and “the society” are abstractions and the result of fragmentation, I think we may want to first be concerned with with fragmentation as the “individual”. After all we can’t go beyond what we have not begun. This seems reasonable yes?. 

The old, psychological knowledge; (the accumulation of limited-partial experience), encounters the that which is new, (experiencing’s that are again partial-limited).

So static content of the past, (thought-self), which is also accumulated knowledge, meets new information. But that psychological knowledge doesn’t actually meet new information. It distorts the new to protect what is old. Psychological knowledge or (the past knowledge of the me) is selective, bias, mechanical. Psychological knowledge (the self), seeks security in its own movement/content. It continues to do this because it is caught in that pattern and doesn’t see it. It’s a conditioned pattern, and because of that it is not seen that this is caused by the notion that the experiencer is separated from the experience, thinker separate form the thought, and so on. As long as this is not observed as a fact or truth, we continually fragment. We fragment-divide because we are confused being caught in this incoherent pattern, and because that pattern is unaware of itself there is this mechanical tendency, (compulsion to secure psychological needs). 

 

Are we all meeting on this part? 

 

Psychological registration, psychological recollection, psychological response-projection ...The birth of the self. Experiencing is perceived in fragments due to the limitation of experiencing as there can only be a small percentage of what one can be consciously aware of at once...We know that. And yes it is a channeled conscious attention or what I call concentrated attention. Or otherwise known as spotlight attention. And indeed the self is selective, it picks and chooses between fragments. That being another example of psychological knowledge choosing between the opposites, or divided action.

Can we see that this is the result of fragmentation? This “unneeded data” is an example of the self clinging to its bias. The self being identified with its content...Identification implies that; identity with what has already been, or attachment to that familiarity. 

Fear, the self, (psychological knowledge), identification, with the content of (experience, knowledge, memory), bias-prejudice and the mechanical attachment to its content, all being a movement of fragmentation, (perpetual, self feeding, divided action).

...as is to change pre-conceptions is also a movement of fragmentation. A movement of the chooser or otherwise know as dualistic movement born of contradiction. 

Are we meeting here??

The self is so subtle isn’t it. Sneaky sneaky indeed?

Excellent post dude. 

 

[now is forever]

3 hours ago, Jack River said:

Men and women? We are talking about the  division that divided thought causes. All of this gender talk is just another example of clinging to psychological knowledge as faceless had posted about. For some reason gender was brought up. Very strange to all of a sudden bring up gender. Boy-girl who cares

i don’t identify psychologically as a male. Then I wouldn’t be able to commune with my surfer girl friends. Little “me’s” are all all the same, a movement of thought that seeks security in itself. 

yeah that’s a division of thought causes. you think they are you but they are not if you never took their perspective.

something ringing? strange?

[Jack River]

7 minutes ago, now is forever said:

yeah that’s a division of thought causes. you think they are you but they are not if you never took their perspective.

something ringing? strange?

I don’t know. My friends wouldn’t even bring it up. It’s ok. This talk between us is kinda funny. Let’s just not contaminate the thread anymore. 

Maybe you can make one about gender division and possible models to solve it in argument.  

Edited September 4, 2018 by Jack River

[now is forever]

 

On 31.8.2018 at 7:16 AM, Faceless said:

And that same inward movement of fragmentation is expressed outward born of this false notion that “the individual” is fundamentally seperate from the society, in which we invent abstract ideals and so on to solve fundamental problems that arise within that society. The fact is disorder, (the fact), is constantly evaded by seeking security in the abstraction that thinks will bring about order, by the intellect, in the form of analysis. But just as analysis cannot bring about order in the relationship with ourselves, so the same the application of analysis as applied on political science to bring about order in relationship between (man-woman) kind. 

This outward disorder, (corruption in society) is merely a reflection of the inner disorder of “the individual”. And vice versa....

The individual is the reflection of the society, and the society is an expression of the individual. 

@Jack River am i polluting? sorry that’s not my intention! i‘m just talking about fragmentation... i guess it’s very much about gender division, too.

you realize what you are trying to do? want me to shut up?

Edited September 4, 2018 by now is forever

[Jack River]

There are girls and boys..there is not girls thought and boys thought. Thought is thought. Girl or boy doesn’t matter. I think the point is to go into understanding the individual and to work our way to how that gets expressed in society. 

[now is forever]

5 minutes ago, Jack River said:

There are girls and boys..there is not girls thought and boys thought. Thought is thought. Girl or boy doesn’t matter. I think the point is to go into understanding the individual and to work our way to how that gets expressed in society. 

so what are we doing right now?

[Jack River]

6 hours ago, now is forever said:

6 hours ago, Faceless said:

This post above has to do very much with the thread..

THE PHENOMENON OF FRAGMENTATION. 

Its not an attack on an “individual”...it’s a fact that is produced by that phenomenon. 

There is value in your participation here. We are not one opposed sides. That is an illusion of division-fragmentation. We are together I t this, if you want to be, friend. 

you are basically saying it’s difficult because the division of women thinking and men thinking.

 

[Jack River]

2 minutes ago, now is forever said:

so what are we doing right now?

I don’t know what your  doing

Edited September 4, 2018 by Jack River

[now is forever]

@Jack River the same as you... pressing buttons.

 

i just know that i‘m doing it. (what doesn’t mean i took the role of every woman in that)

Edited September 4, 2018 by now is forever

[Jack River]

 what is happening!! Lol 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Jack River

[now is forever]

On 31.8.2018 at 7:16 AM, Faceless said:

Control implies division, the controller and the thing to be controlled; this division, as all division, brings about conflict and distortion in action and behavior in relationship. 

 

This fragmentation is the work of thought, one fragment trying to control the other parts — call this one fragment, the controller, which tries to control “apparent parts” of thought. 

This false division followed by action, (divided action), is limited action and the mischief maker.

 

@Jack River you understand that in yourself? it’s impossible to communicate on a deeper level if you are not aware of how you are trying to not communicate, because you got the answer already figured out for yourself.

could also mean from my perspective addressed to you:

i understand that in myself. it’s impossible to communicate on a deeper level if you are not aware of how you are trying to not communicate because you got the answer already figured out for yourself.

or from your perspective:

do i understand that in myself? it’s impossible to communicate on a deeper level if i‘m trying to not communicate because i got the answer already figured out. did i?

 

is there any possibility to be wrong if we think we are right?

Edited September 4, 2018 by now is forever

[now is forever]

so what is false division and what is natural division? where are the boundaries of division?

a different person doesn’t turn into us just because we decided the person is same as us. only by deciding we are the same as them we can learn.

the problem is not the fragments alone. it is our disability to make sense out of them, btw it’s our disability to see others without preconception. preconception is also not knowing to not know and being blind to it.

Edited September 4, 2018 by now is forever

[now is forever]

On 1.9.2018 at 9:09 PM, Faceless said:

 

On 1.9.2018 at 11:35 AM, now is forever said:

fragmentation is not only a problem of the i and the controller of the i. it is also a problem of the we and the controller of the we.

Yes. Due to not seeing there is only control or the (positive-negative) movement in motion, and not really a division between the controller and the controlled. 

Control arises from that division not being seen through actually. 

 

 

[Faceless]

4 hours ago, now is forever said:

btw it’s our disability to see others without preconception. preconception is also not knowing to not know and being blind to it.

Indeed... 

Biased/prejudice;  the nature of self-thought.

Not understanding and being aware of thought is quite dangerous. 

[MarkusSweden]

19 hours ago, Faceless said:

Has nothing to do with gender. We are speaking about division in general. Playing the opposition game has had its day. Just another game of fragmentation. 

Fragmentation/division is caused by the false notion of the movement of time. Without time(which doesn't exist) all other factors/variables that cause fragmentation dissolve. Time is the key factor here. 

You see?

[Faceless]

16 minutes ago, MarkusSweden said:

Time is the key factor here. 

Registration, recollection, response-projection in accordance to that movement of thought. 

Non-proprioception of Division = Identification-time

Psychological registration, recollection, responses-projection, being one and the same movement of (time-fear) as the self. 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

(Thought-self-time), seeks security in that which is familiar. What is familiar is its own content, which is what constitutes the self. The self is its content. An example of self feeding loop. 

The movement of time is that accumulation of content, (experience, knowledge, memory),  in which the fragment of the self identifies with. 

To identify implies a resistance to what is not familiar, and ultimately a movement of fear; to resist what is, to what should be in accordance to what has been. An example of thought-self and it’s mechanical nature, which is expressed in the form of bias and prejudice action. 

The fragment of self seeking security in its own movement of thought-time. 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Faceless

[now is forever]

so is it of any meaning to take up the original discussion? or is it just an oracle not to be solved? btw not to be falsified?

time-fear? are you kidding me? @Faceless sometimes it sounds like nonsense. i‘m asking myself if you understood all of what you where writing there in the firstplace.

[Faceless]

To identify with an idea, being that which is accumulated in time(the past), also implies the self seeking security in thought. Time as the i seeking security in its own movement.

The self doesn’t notice that the idea, and itself, “the i”, are actually one and the same movement of time-(psychological becoming).

[Faceless]

(Time-thought-fear-psychological time), does sound like nonsense to one who is limited by conditioned reaction-response, pre-conceptions(bias-prejudice).

This is to see through the narrow veil of experience, knowledge, memory, as the i.

Which is to see through conditioned eyes. 

Having a holisic insight into the whole of thought sees all of thought as one unitary movement. 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Faceless