rhyee wrote:
Mattrose wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/user/soundlessdawn
This is the "Bob Neveritt" of the synchromysticism world.
BOB: "... a radio play entitled Who's Forgotten Furry Lint? (a Bob Marshall production), and the author of Phatic Communion With Bob Dobbs. (Perfect Pitch Editions, 1992)..."
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=130830191286&topic=17516Bob Dobbs
Thank you,
Bob. Followed the link and read. There was a link offered at the bottom
of that first page that I followed to an interview with you at rockcriticsarchives.com
(
http://bit.ly/eZsJMX).
One of the few times one may encounter Bob speaking in plain terms about his
approach to teaching /guiding. Bob, again, thank you.
I wanted to take an excerpt from that interview (the date isn't given...it's timeless? haha),
Quote:
[Edited format for readability]
...
Bob: [laughs] Yeah, learning is painful. I mean, there's that old line,
when you're laughing you're learning; but when you're in PAIN you're learning. Nowadays you have
so many distractions and things to fill up your time, it's painful to sit still, maybe hide away for a week,
and read something in depth, and really try to figure it out, because a lot of experiences you've missed
over that week; you've been out of touch if you think you need to know what's going on.
You've missed the collective experience of people reading papers everyday: they're processing all
this stuff and you're not part of the collective beehive mind, and probably some part of your brain,
your self, wants to be in touch.
But it's painful to withdraw from that and do some of your own homework by yourself, sort of relive
the isolated, visual book-reading experience. But I try to recommend really good stuff to read to
make that worthwhile. It's not physically torturous, but it's kind of painful, and it's WORK, it's like
weightlifting. So, you've gotta do that, and you have to...
Scott: It's painful to come to an awareness--is that what you're saying?
Or understanding?
Bob: Painful to learn to control your mind, or to see how it moves. See,
if you just merge with the crowd and do whatever you're doing, go to all the right movies, all the intelligent
stuff, you're operating on a certain rhythm and pace that is comfortable as you get used to it. It's always
uncomfortable to get out of that pace and break your routine or your habit.
All awareness is is seeing what you were doing from another perspective, so to get out of the flow
you've got to stop, and when you stop it's not necessarily that you've gone into a higher awareness
zone, it's just that you've begun to look at that other environment from a different perspective, and
that will create new patterns and new insights, and it will give you a sense of expanding your awareness;
but you can't stay in that point, you're eventually gonna have to get out of that point and go experience
some other zone and look at those two previous zones through that point.
So there's no finish line in expanding your awareness--I wouldn't even begin to say that, I would just
say that it's tough to change your routine, that it's harder to change your routine since you're living in
a world of change, so how can you make change if everything's always changing? One of the ways is
to STOP, you know what I mean, in some way, even though it's the hardest thing to do today.
Scott: Is that Bob's Media Ecology?
Bob: Yeah...
Scott: To stop?
Bob: If that works for awhile; if it becomes a habit then it isn't, you know.
But Bob's Media Ecology is taking pleasure in the work of looking at one situation through another. So that
means if you like ecology stuff you've got to read right wing and anti-ecology literature just to look at that,
you know what I mean?
Because you become a zombie with just one perspective. And as you learn more and more how any point of
view is obsolete and the society isn't even operating on that point, then you realize, well, geez, I'm gonna
have to learn to live without a point of view...and that's a problem, too, but--that's why it's so silly to have
a point of view when society doesn't even care about that anymore.
Scott: Okay...
Bob: And that's TERRIBLE for society, because no one's ever going to gain
control of the situation or implement real change, or implement going in a healthy direction. [Emphasis added]
...
SOURCE -
http://bit.ly/eZsJMXWhen I read your last statement, I remembered a subject referenced by David Wilcock, which, he said,
was a part of Chaos and Complexity Theory; this being, "complex adaptive systems".
Wilcock was applying this to explain, or describe how an economic collapse could actually result
in something much greater and more equitable than the system it was replacing.
One place Wilcock mentions this is in his article, "Radio Show -- Self-Organizing Economy" (
http://bit.ly/efpKBy).
I found a passage on complex adaptive systems that seems to counter your (at the time) position
that the dynamic you were speaking of was "terrible" for society (Of course, society "as it is" at the
moment could use a restructuring, so terrible is a matter of perspective haha).
Quote:
[Edited format for readability]
...
A complex adaptive system not only has the ability to maintain its boundaries and sustain its
own existence, but can also adapt and change itself to make it even more fit for it’s environment.
In short, it is a system that can learn. A complex adaptive system will have some form of memory,
whereby it can ‘remember’ what has happened in its history and use that information as a part of
its strategy for acting more effectively in the present.
Whether it is a bacterium sensing changes in the concentration of a particular chemical indication
food in that direction or a university professor gaining an understanding of quantum physics, the
process is still using information gained previously to be more effective in the present.
All life is made up of complex adaptive systems. Complex Adaptive systems are usually comprised of
a large number of separate autonomous agents operating in their own interests, but also co-operating
together as a whole functional unit. There is no “control centre” in charge of what happens.
There is nobody or no-thing in charge to make decisions, and yet all the decentralised decisions necessary
and all the co-operation necessary between the agents occurs. The intense and complex interactions
between the agents that make up the organism, enable a process called “emergence” where the organism
to act as one unit in a way not possible by the individual agents. [Emphasis added]
It is only when the all work together dynamically that the overall system maximises its location on the
phase space. Complexity takes what is complex and allows it to operate in simple ways.
The individual agents do not need to be intelligent for the system overall to be intelligent. The extra
co-ordinated ability comes from the relationships between the agents.
A complex adaptive system is run from the bottom up rather than top down. It is the individual agent
that determine the overall shape of the system, even though the systems imposes restrictions on the
individual agents in order that they the system functions as a whole unit.
...
SOURCE -
http://bit.ly/hm9IFxThe passage above suggests a greater, intelligent (and organic) movement above and beyond
a single "agent's" ability to influence, or alter the course / direction (roughly translated).
I'm not sure how this would apply to your statement, "...no one's ever going to gain
control of the situation or implement real change, or implement going in a healthy direction...", save
to say that a greater intelligence / process may be at work.
The individuals who might be considered as having changed the course of history / our
race received inspiration / guidance from the intelligence that oversees the forward
movement of life.
I'm not married to the concept, but would love your input...If you're so inclined.
Login
FAQ
Search
