But, I’d suggest that Wright’s awareness of Gurdjieff’s work is significantly greater than Muffin’s, and therefore far more worthy of consideration.
But **Muffin **is able and willing to explain and defend his position, while Wright - and **Maatorc **- aren’t, with Wright at least having the excuse of being dead.
Discussing this with ivan astikov is a complete waste of time. And speaking of time, it’s time for breakfast (hash browns, cheese omlette, and of course bacon), so let’s just speed things up concerning ivan astikov’s babbling in this thread: deficatio ad patesco proloquium, ad ignoratio elenchi, ad homunculus, ad populum, ad auctoritas, ad institutio, and ad hominem. ‘nuff said.
Then let’s turn briefly to the last thread ivan astikov started in the Pit:
Of course the ongoing ridicule of ivan astikov should have no logical relevance to a discussion with him, but hey, this is the pit, and that bacon frying in the pan smells sooo goooood!
Fine, but I’m not cleaning up after him. And you kids are the ones taking him for a walk.
How clever; you can babble in a dead language. It doesn’t make you look big or clever, you know?
Bosstone must be your very special suck-up chum, getting 3 quotes mentioned? Do you have a crush on someone?
Pointing out the idiocy of a troll only guarantees that they will respond to each post doing so. Because such people are incapable of allowing the smallest slight to pass by unanswered.
It may be fun, it may be true, but all it does it degrade the thread into a troll-taunting session.
Don’t feed the trolls.
Interesting idea. If so, I’m not sure it’s good enough to pass the Turing test.
(Did I say the same thing in the other thread? I can’t remember; it’s like a dream. Since Maatorc only has about three thoughts, it would seem, occupying the entirety of his conscious mind, any thread in which he participates is likely to become repetitive. I feel as if, at best, we’ve all moved round one seat at the Hatter’s tea party.)
Let me try to make this as clear as possible:
Fuck yes, you idiot! We want direct links to whatever the fuck you are wanting us to read-no more fucking guessing games!
So far, as in posts 152 and 164 from 147, the right paragraph has been found and commented on, but not the specific 15 word - 65 letter sentence which underlies the myth.
There is an excellent book that refutes this whole non-sense of yours. The cover is green and the main ideas are in a page that has a number with a circle and rhymes with orange.
The soul, like the physical body, is also matter—only, it consists of “fecal” matter.
I guess this means that a “sacred marriage” is no more than a mutual exchange of pineal juice.
Stick a fork
In maatorc
[sup]You’ve already shown your troll colors to me in your last reply to me but I’ll press on[/sup]
maatorc, you lying fuck. You have been asked scores of times to present documentation of the crap you are almost spewing. For example here is a few questions that I posed in the other thread that have nothing to do with you. You ignored them even though several other posters asked you to directly address them.
I’ll give you another opportunity (the following cut and pasted from the Grail thread):
maatorc, I issue this challenge; Answer these things I ask, in sentences of your own construction. Pretty please (No answering a question with a question - your answers must be declarative).
maatorc:
Leonardo is associated with the myth because of his known connections with other occult anatomy-myth-based operations.
- State Leonardo’s known connection with other occult anatomy-myth-based operations.
maatorc:
… the Grail and other legends, without exception refer to organs, systems, and functions within the human being connected with the myth of human perfectibility.
2. Name 3 mainstream sources for this claim.
maatorc:
A ‘Myth’ is a knowledge system
I am saying the myth of occult anatomy exists
3. Where is all of this “non-secret and quite readily available literature” (that has been subjected to peer review) on the subject?
maatorc:
There is a group of people who have perfected a mental body and can function consciously while out of there physical vehicle.
4. Out of this group can you give us the name of three of them?
maatorc:
There is one-only knowledge-system-myth of human perfectibility that underlies ALL religions without exception.
5. See question 2.
maatorc:
The legend writers of such as the New Testament and the Grail were very knowledgeable of the myth.
6. How do you know this? What is your proof?
maatorc:
Bear in mind I am talking about the existence of the myth and not its truth or falsity.
maatorc:
I have no interest whatever in whether one accepts or rejects the teachings of the myth as distinct from its existence.
So you keep on saying. But you also say:
maatorc:
The myth is the most important knowledge in the world.
7. If it’s not true, how could it be more important than, say, a Stephen King novel?
And finally,
8. I understand this is not your point here but (out of curiosity) - Do you believe the myth is true? Yes or no answer only for this last one.
Hell, I’d be happy to have you answer just #4.
As they have nothing to do with me there is no need for me to comment on them.
When someone identifies Gurdjieff’s statement of the principle underlying the myth something can be said by me about it.
So this is the part where we get to point at you and laugh?
First you say you will not answer questions because they are about you and not your myth, and when I ask you questions about your myth (and not you) you refuse to respond because the questions have nothing to do with you? Nice little circle jerk you have going there.
You must be big in the sticks. Snake-handle much?
OK, answer me this: Why won’t you post the information that you feel is so vital for us to have? Give me a real answer, not a link or a riddle.
When someone here correctly identifies Gurdjieff’s statement of what underlies the myth - (See posts 152 and 164 linked to 147, where the right paragraph has been found and commented on, but not the specific 15 word - 65 letter sentence which underlies the myth.) - I can then comment on Gurdjieff’s meaning.
Because Maatorc’s whole point is to make you lose your time and rile people up for his own amusement?
That or his cookoo has left his clock for good. But I go with the first one.
No. The burden is up to you to justify and prove what you affirm. Not on us. You won’t give us homework - if you want to make a point, you have to take responsibility for it and ground it in proof.
My god - you’re optimistic. He hasn’t done that after all this time. I don’t see him starting now. (Unless you have superhuman powers, of course. You don’t - do you?)