Comments on: Of Animism and Animorphs http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/ se wo were fi na wosan kofa a yenki Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:58:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Discerning Spirits (The Anthropik Network) http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-28057 Discerning Spirits (The Anthropik Network) Thu, 02 Nov 2006 17:10:12 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-28057 [...] We do not instinctually limit that empathy just to human forms; human children are natural born animists who extend their empathy to everyone and everything, equally to other human beings as "inanimate" objects. In our alphabetical civilization, we must beat this natural tendency out of our children. Humans must be trained to listen only to human voices; without that training, we naturally listen to the whole world, and assume that trees and stones and brooks have as much to say as people. Abram relates many profound examples of how humans communicate with non-human things in the world, what they usually call "spirits," and we usually mistake through the lens of our own cultural heritage of dualism as superstitious, essentially anthropomorphic forms. [...] […] We do not instinctually limit that empathy just to human forms; human children are natural born animists who extend their empathy to everyone and everything, equally to other human beings as “inanimate” objects. In our alphabetical civilization, we must beat this natural tendency out of our children. Humans must be trained to listen only to human voices; without that training, we naturally listen to the whole world, and assume that trees and stones and brooks have as much to say as people. Abram relates many profound examples of how humans communicate with non-human things in the world, what they usually call “spirits,” and we usually mistake through the lens of our own cultural heritage of dualism as superstitious, essentially anthropomorphic forms. […]

]]> By: speedbird http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-23113 speedbird Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:52:05 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-23113 And I thought it was just me, losing my mind. Truly gnarly post. Well done. Vicky - My take is that they're actively hiding from us, and that they're hiding because they're scared. Yes, the scary ones are black. Creeped out now. Gotta go... And I thought it was just me, losing my mind. Truly gnarly post. Well done.

Vicky - My take is that they’re actively hiding from us, and that they’re hiding because they’re scared.

Yes, the scary ones are black.

Creeped out now. Gotta go…

]]> By: Vicky http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22675 Vicky Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:08:03 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22675 Have you noticed that in most books about magic, most people cannot see magic/ magical creatures? A unicorn could be walking down a crowded street next to the main character and he or she is the only one who notices anything unusual. It is then explained that most people only see what they expect to see. I thought of that when I read the left brain - right brain article that Ran Prieur posted the other day. http://seedsofgrowth.com/have-you-tried-turning-it-upside-down Have you noticed that in most books about magic, most people cannot see magic/ magical creatures? A unicorn could be walking down a crowded street next to the main character and he or she is the only one who notices anything unusual. It is then explained that most people only see what they expect to see. I thought of that when I read the left brain - right brain article that Ran Prieur posted the other day.
http://seedsofgrowth.com/have-you-tried-turning-it-upside-down

]]> By: Adrian http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22658 Adrian Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:17:19 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22658 A brian stem is of course similar to a brain stem, but more of a party animal A brian stem is of course similar to a brain stem, but more of a party animal

]]> By: Adrian http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22655 Adrian Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:15:05 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22655 We are all at our root, reptillian. The brian stem, the earliest part of or evolved brain being that, shared by all humans the images created by the brain in trance state are likely to be in a common range once you have escaped all the higher mammalian and human lobe images. All parts of our evolution inform and live with us, and all parts will see themselves as the complete picture. The 'frontal' pictures of the human 'ego' structure are in constant danger of being overwhelmed by the deeper, stronger images and identities of millions of years of evolution, that's why we have such a powerful capacity for denial, a useful tool for the 'progressive' instincts of ego but a blinding fallacy when the ego believes it is the only locus of identity. We are all at our root, reptillian. The brian stem, the earliest part of or evolved brain being that, shared by all humans the images created by the brain in trance state are likely to be in a common range once you have escaped all the higher mammalian and human lobe images. All parts of our evolution inform and live with us, and all parts will see themselves as the complete picture. The ‘frontal’ pictures of the human ‘ego’ structure are in constant danger of being overwhelmed by the deeper, stronger images and identities of millions of years of evolution, that’s why we have such a powerful capacity for denial, a useful tool for the ‘progressive’ instincts of ego but a blinding fallacy when the ego believes it is the only locus of identity.

]]> By: ChandraShakti http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22637 ChandraShakti Fri, 15 Sep 2006 02:05:09 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22637 Maybe it's just me, but the double helix models I've seen don't look at all reptilian. I always assumed that the connection of the reptilian figures with DNA was more of a primeval imagery than a physical imagery. Also, I first came across the connection of the reptilian figures and DNA in Harner's work. Maybe it’s just me, but the double helix models I’ve seen don’t look at all reptilian. I always assumed that the connection of the reptilian figures with DNA was more of a primeval imagery than a physical imagery. Also, I first came across the connection of the reptilian figures and DNA in Harner’s work.

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22608 Jason Godesky Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:04:33 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22608 I can't see or hear Icke's name without laughing, but I suppose it does show the enduring effect of the reptilian imagery.... I can’t see or hear Icke’s name without laughing, but I suppose it does show the enduring effect of the reptilian imagery….

]]> By: Peter http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22605 Peter Thu, 14 Sep 2006 16:50:20 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22605 David Icke is not my cuppa-tay but about a year ago I listened to one of his presentations in the background as I worked on one of my websites. Icke is into the whole belief system about the ruling elites being descendents of a reptillian race of invaders from another galaxy. As stated, I'm not into this stuff, ...but then when I look at the Bush family, I have to wonder if he could be right. Scroll to bottom here and click on the largest Icke file, to watch the video I am referring to. http://1984videos.com David Icke is not my cuppa-tay but about a year ago I listened to one of his presentations in the background as I worked on one of my websites. Icke is into the whole belief system about the ruling elites being descendents of a reptillian race of invaders from another galaxy.

As stated, I’m not into this stuff, …but then when I look at the Bush family, I have to wonder if he could be right.

Scroll to bottom here and click on the largest Icke file, to watch the video I am referring to.
http://1984videos.com

]]> By: Bill Maxwell http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22579 Bill Maxwell Thu, 14 Sep 2006 07:05:01 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22579 Hey Matt! My first instinct would be look for a fractal pattern that matches DNA. I seem to recall there is one that's easy to find but I might be recalling overlapping patterns of dimensions from TOE theory (maybe...) Hey Matt!

My first instinct would be look for a fractal pattern that matches DNA. I seem to recall there is one that’s easy to find but I might be recalling overlapping patterns of dimensions from TOE theory (maybe…)

]]> By: MatthewJ http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22575 MatthewJ Thu, 14 Sep 2006 06:02:00 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2006/09/of-animism-and-animorphs/#comment-22575 Hey Bill, Jason had the idea of DNA being the root of the lords on thefifthworld. Though it makes a certain kind of elegent sense, I am reluctant to sign on to it. If we are talking about a direct causal relationship here, where the shape of the molecule is subconsciously known by the brain and interpreted as visions, then we are missing the vital middle step: how on earth, using only physical mechanics, the brain could "visualize" a sub-cellular molecule. I just don't see the physical mechanism for this. Not that I don't believe its possible - indeed, I think it quite possible that the brain somehow <i>knows</i> about DNA. But I don't think that this can be explained using present scientific ways of looking. This idea seems like an uncomfortable blending of magic and science to me. The science (the shape of the DNA) is said to be "real", and the magic (the brain seeing the DNA) is just used to justify the science. Don't like it. I am much more inclined to say that the lords of the outer darkness created DNA in their image, or that they both come from some sort of primal double-helix-life-archetype. Anyway, likely just my resistance to genetic determinisim, and attempts at scientific demystification. Hey Bill,

Jason had the idea of DNA being the root of the lords on thefifthworld. Though it makes a certain kind of elegent sense, I am reluctant to sign on to it.

If we are talking about a direct causal relationship here, where the shape of the molecule is subconsciously known by the brain and interpreted as visions, then we are missing the vital middle step: how on earth, using only physical mechanics, the brain could “visualize” a sub-cellular molecule.

I just don’t see the physical mechanism for this. Not that I don’t believe its possible - indeed, I think it quite possible that the brain somehow knows about DNA. But I don’t think that this can be explained using present scientific ways of looking.

This idea seems like an uncomfortable blending of magic and science to me. The science (the shape of the DNA) is said to be “real”, and the magic (the brain seeing the DNA) is just used to justify the science. Don’t like it.

I am much more inclined to say that the lords of the outer darkness created DNA in their image, or that they both come from some sort of primal double-helix-life-archetype.

Anyway, likely just my resistance to genetic determinisim, and attempts at scientific demystification.

]]>