Re: An Integral Psychology

From: Floss (
Date: Fri Dec 22 2000 - 16:11:40 MST

----- Original Message -----
From: Samantha Atkins <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2000 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: An Integral Psychology

> Jason Joel Thompson wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Franklin Wayne Poley" <>
> >
> > > Are there any people on this list who believe they are not the
> > > but rather they are the thought?
> > > FWP
> >

> > What value do you believe is to be found in making the distinction?
> In some states I am the thinker, thought, that thought about, that not
> thought about, that which questions what I think I am, that which you
> may think is you "instead of" me. So? And no, I didn't put
> psychotropics in the wheaties.
> - samantha

There is some kind of feedback loop going on here; to reduce oneself to a
single perspective (thinker or thought) feed (bootstrap) into one of them.
I have found value in becoming (taking on the belief that I am) thought: it
is easyer to learn - you are manipulated thus by 'the thinker'. But then
emerging once more as the thinker one realises 'the thinker' was really just
a thought of the thinker.
If you want to find out what's going on here then I suggest it involves
doing mathematics with infinite sets - to my knowledge noone has agreed
'how/if' these behave - to my instinct mutual awareness of the patterns
which emerge enable growth.
samantha lied about the wheaties - existing as one of her thoughts has
strange and diverse effects.
Be careful what you think,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:39 MDT