Terence McKenna

[petar8p]

Isn't he stage green? 

Not to dismiss that any of what he's saying would bring upon a massive positive change in society, but I just saw he's mentioned at @Leo Gura "Spiral Dynamics Stage Turqoise Examples Mega-Thread."

Also, could someone with a heavier background in Philosophy break this down for me: 

"At the core of the Western anxiety about boundaries is something that we are very proud of. We believe we invented; we call it the ego. Sometimes we call it the Democratic individual. We say no eastern society could have produced this. We took this from the Greeks, we perfected it through the Romans, we brought it up through the medieval period, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes and all those folks fixed it up for us in the 18th century, Thomas Jefferson ironed out the wrinkles and the modern America is the shining example of what you can do when you impover the ego, the citizen, the individual."

I don't get really what he's saying as I don't know crap about history and philosophy so it would be very appreciated if someone explained this. I'm also specifically interested in his mentioning of John Locke, because I found the guy very interesting as he was advocating for empiricism, which has showed to be the most valid way to discover relative, scientific truths, but I don't in any sense have a whole picture of him and his political stances.

Thanks.

[Zigzag Idiot]

13 minutes ago, petar8p said:

"At the core of the Western anxiety about boundaries is something that we are very proud of. We believe we invented; we call it the ego. Sometimes we call it the Democratic individual. We say no eastern society could have produced this. We took this from the Greeks, we perfected it through the Romans, we brought it up through the medieval period, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes and all those folks fixed it up for us in the 18th century, Thomas Jefferson ironed out the wrinkles and the modern America is the shining example of what you can do when you impover the ego, the citizen, the individual."

To me, he's pointing out how proud we materialists of the west are in regard to individuality backed up by the thinking mind. Descartes - I think, therefore I am.

This is an identification with mind instead of an experience of being.

 

To articulate using a quote from Almaas-

An Important Difference Between the Mind and Being

These fantasies, beliefs and misinformation actually accompany almost all internalized object relations to some extent. Internalized object relations are rarely true representations of actual events or relationships. One’s memory traces include all kinds of ideas, fantasies and images that never had an objective reality. Another source of extraneous material comes from the psychic processes of organization and integration themselves. These processes modify the original object relations as more impressions are internalized. This is necessary for the integration of object relations units of various affect and content. This extra material, whether it is attached to actual memories of object relations or consists of pure fabrications, cannot be absorbed into Being. This is an important difference between the mind and Being. The mind can absorb and identify with any psychic material it believes to be true. It does not have the capacity, on its own, to discern what is objective truth and what is not. In other words, the mind can be deceived, even by itself. Being, on the other hand, is pure reality. It is the actual stuff and consciousness of truth, and cannot be deceived. It does not try not to be deceived; it is simply truth by its nature, a self-conscious medium made of pure sensitivity. Any falsehood, that is, anything which is not the objective truth of what actually happened in past interactions which produced a particular object relation, is felt in comparison to Being to be dull, gross and distasteful. When one is in contact with Being, these falsehoods are felt to be lifeless, thick and heavy veils in comparison to the luminosity of Being.

I view Terence as moving into second tier in adolescence basically. Just my opinion though.

I don't know anything about John Locke.

Hope this has made some sense,,,,,, Thoughts anyone,,,,?

[Zigzag Idiot]

 

 

[Zigzag Idiot]

 

 

[Zigzag Idiot]

 

 

[Zigzag Idiot]

 He mentions a counterintuitive "precondition for experiencing the Cosmic giggle" which I take roughly as being in the flow and it sounds like what Almaas refers to as basic trust. It may sound like a stretch but as a state of consciousness, it's very similar it seems. IME

Basic Trust Enables You to Completely Stay with Experience

As we have seen, when you are trying to make something happen, you are not trusting the natural order; you don't trust that Essence itself will manifest in the way it is needed. The first point of departure from this trust is always a rejection of the now. To apply the perspective of basic trust, of true will, you must have the complete confidence that staying completely with what you are experiencing in this moment, will result in what needs to happen, without your having to think about a certain outcome. When the confidence is there, your awareness of exactly what is happening in you will allow you to see that your organism will do the best it can in the situation. Your mind, however, doesn't allow that complete Presence in the now; it thinks it knows what is best for you, but of course it knows only what has happened in the past, and can lead you only in ways conditioned by your history. 

Diamond Heart Book Two, pg. 118

 

[Petals]

a short and beautiful video.

[Zigzag Idiot]

• Bells Theorem      
•   The Overmind as God?         
• The most objective of The disciples- The Apostle Doubting Thomas 
• Possibility of evolving beyond religion,,,

[Zigzag Idiot]

I guess my understanding of enlightenment  is of the soft version.,,,,

 

Fardow - Word Terence made up as a kid meaning the embarrassment you feel when someone else fucks up.

" The room was awash in fardow.

[Zigzag Idiot]

I ran across an old VHS tape of Terence that I watched many times back in the 1990's. In the last year I've developed more appreciation of him juxtaposed to the nineties. I think it's possible that the truth in this particular theory might be realized more in hindsight in the future. Maybe, maybe not.

This video is 24 minutes. The two below it are under 5 minutes in length and to the point.

My life has been an ever changing series of enthusiasms. The older I get the more I catch myself retelling a story already told.

I recommend not taking psychedelics as a given. I discovered the hard way you can't take the experience as something taken for granted. Developing the capacity for staying present in a stressful situation is imperative, IME.

 

[Zigzag Idiot]

Some of Terrences words have become quite prophetic.

 

 

[Zigzag Idiot]

 

[Zigzag Idiot]

Don't let other people do your thinking.

[Zigzag Idiot]

 

[Space Lizard]

On 11/13/2019 at 11:44 PM, petar8p said:

"At the core of the Western anxiety about boundaries is something that we are very proud of. We believe we invented; we call it the ego. Sometimes we call it the Democratic individual. We say no eastern society could have produced this. We took this from the Greeks, we perfected it through the Romans, we brought it up through the medieval period, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes and all those folks fixed it up for us in the 18th century, Thomas Jefferson ironed out the wrinkles and the modern America is the shining example of what you can do when you impover the ego, the citizen, the individual."

I don't get really what he's saying as I don't know crap about history and philosophy so it would be very appreciated if someone explained this. I'm also specifically interested in his mentioning of John Locke, because I found the guy very interesting as he was advocating for empiricism, which has showed to be the most valid way to discover relative, scientific truths, but I don't in any sense have a whole picture of him and his political stances.

I guess he's talking about where Western ideas about individualism and liberty came from, which aren't shared by most of the world's cultures. John Locke was one of the first philosophers of liberalism, which is what this philosophy is called. Thomas Jefferson established a new nation based on that philosophy. It has been very successful, but it has its problems. I'm reminded of a quote by Ken Wilbur about how the Declaration of Independence was really a declaration of egotism freed from traditional spiritual constraints. The way I see it, the USA was the first Luciferian society, based on glorification of ego, individualism and the overthrow of religious traditions.

BTW, Terence McKenna was a bit of a crackpot who probably smoked too much pot. Whatever happened to his "timewave zero" prediction of a "singularity" in 2012?

Edited January 15, 2022 by Space Lizard

[Zigzag Idiot]

1 hour ago, Space Lizard said:

I guess he's talking about where Western ideas about individualism and liberty came from, which aren't shared by most of the world's cultures. John Locke was one of the first philosophers of liberalism, which is what this philosophy is called. Thomas Jefferson established a new nation based on that philosophy. It has been very successful, but it has its problems. I'm reminded of a quote by Ken Wilbur about how the Declaration of Independence was really a declaration of egotism freed from traditional spiritual constraints. The way I see it, the USA was the first Luciferian society, based on glorification of ego, individualism and the overthrow of religious traditions.

BTW, Terence McKenna was a bit of a crackpot who probably smoked too much pot. Whatever happened to his "timewave zero" prediction of a "singularity" in 2012?

@Space Lizard You have a valid point that in my own words would be how this western individualism has snowballed into the piggish materialism and shallow mindedness that it has.

Valid point also about McKenna and his 2012 Time wave zero theory. Seems that one didn’t pan out though. Further down the road I doubt that hindsight will change much about 2012.  ,,,?

As you probably know he died around 2000. 
He’s a great orator who definitely thought outside of the box. Maybe he does gets a little windy at times and stretches the truth. Having close peers like Ralph Abraham and Rupert Sheldrake among many others should add some to his credibility.

For many, he’s fun to listen too. His nasally voice probably annoys just as many though.

[SaWaSaurus]

1 hour ago, Space Lizard said:

I guess he's talking about where Western ideas about individualism and liberty came from, which aren't shared by most of the world's cultures. John Locke was one of the first philosophers of liberalism, which is what this philosophy is called. Thomas Jefferson established a new nation based on that philosophy. It has been very successful, but it has its problems. I'm reminded of a quote by Ken Wilbur about how the Declaration of Independence was really a declaration of egotism freed from traditional spiritual constraints. The way I see it, the USA was the first Luciferian society, based on glorification of ego, individualism and the overthrow of religious traditions.

BTW, Terence McKenna was a bit of a crackpot who probably smoked too much pot. Whatever happened to his "timewave zero" prediction of a "singularity" in 2012?

He said a *LOT* of things, yet the one thing people know about him is that he's some crazy 2012er lol. You can be a genius polymath with impeccable communication style, yet make one wrong prediction (which you admit could be wrong), and all the sudden your legacy is 'just some nut job'.  When he talked about his novelty theory he's stated outright that he could be wrong about knowing the precise date of the omega - this was a speculative part of his theory.

[Wilhelm44]