[TROM1] Complementary Postulates - (Re: TROM Digest, Vol 144, Issue 7)
Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Pete, Thank you for your reply and suggestion. Something appears to be wrong with what Dennis said, there. The question that has to be asked is: Is Dennis right? What he said, does not make sense for me, for at least a couple of reasons that come to mind for me at this time. 1. What if you are implanted with the following postulates by beating, pounding, shouting and berating and overwhelm?: You are stupid! You are insane! You will never become anything! You are no good for nothing! What is wrong with you? Get out of here! Don't touch me! You will never become successful at anything! You are a lazy good for nothing bum! There is something wrong with you. You can't do anything right! You will never succeed! You are a loser! You can't do anything right! You need a real good beating, to smarten you up! You need to have some sense pounded into you! You are trouble looking for a place to happen! You screw everything up. Everything you touch turns to shit! You don't do anything unless I tell you! If you need to do anything, you don't do it unless you ask for help first! Or the variants: You don't do anything unless someone helps you, or is watching you. You don't do anything unless someone is watching you! You don't do anything unless someone does it for you! You are a stupid loser! You are a mistake! No one likes you! Who wants you! You are a good shit, but who likes shit? I wish you were never born! I told you many times before, not to touch it! Or the variant: I told you many times before, do not touch anything or do anything unless I tell you too! You are nothing but a problem! You stupid fool! Smarten up, or you will get another good beating! Get out of here! Get lost! Gawd are you stupid! How do you clear out those negative, blocking, disabling postulates? As I said before, any idea is only as good as it works. 2. If you can't win, or can't succeed, how do you function or compete in life? How do you get a job and hang on to it? How do you get anywhere in life? How do you form a meaningful relationship? Is a person supposed to get on welfare and hide in a dungeon or live under the bridge for all his life? Or beg on the streets? I have heard some homeless people have amassed a lot of money and bought homes and good cars by being professional beggars on the street. That is one of the "systems" that Dennis mentions, that humans have developed for getting things done. But I do not find that appealing. David On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 1:39 PM, The Resolution of Mind list < trom@lists.newciv.org> wrote: * The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org Hi David You need to read book "3 Expanding on Level 5" before you start making goals packages. In there you will find this section: "The Games Goals Now the fourth one, there?s a class of goals which are called games goals. Now a games goal has no meaning outside of games play. That is the definition; it is a technical definition of a games goal. An example of a games goal is ?to win? or ?to exploit?, or ?to play?. Quite clearly the goal ?to win? has no meaning outside of the games play. The goal ?to exploit? has no meaning outside of games play. The goal ?to play? has no meaning outside of games play. You see that? So that?s a technical definition, they?re games goals. Now the datum is that all games goals are un-erasable. They?re un-erasable. The reason why they are un-erasable is because the games goal has no meaning outside of games play, it has no complementary postulates and therefore it won?t erase." Dennis did a lot of research between 1978 when he published The Resolution of Mind and 1994 when he dictated his "Supplementary Lectures" which i transcribed to produce the additional books in the series. Sincerely Pete Mclaughlin Sent from my iPad > On Oct 8, 2016, at 7:20 PM, The Resolution of Mind list < trom@lists.newciv.org> wrote: > > * > The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org > > Pete, or anyone else, > > Got any suggestions on how to set up a junior goals package on "To Win" for L5? > > That would cover the following postulates: > > > Must not be allowed to win/Must lose > Can't win/must not be allowed to win. Must not win. > Must not be allowed to succeed. Must fail. > > > > > (The "To Know" package does not run for me.) > > > Thanks, > > David > ___________ > TROM mailing list > TROM@lists.newciv.org > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom ___ TROM mailing list TROM@li
Re: [TROM1] Complementary postulates?
* The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org Ok David When playing football or any other game you are trying to carry the ball into my end zone to score. I block you as best i can but fail and you blow past me and into the end zone. Technically i was overwhelmed but my feelings have not changed. In a couple of minutes we will both be back in the game and pushing the same postulates with the same energy. However occasionally i get so crushed by the repeated failure to stop you from getting into the end zone that i decide that it is hopeless. I can never again play this game as i am a failure as a blocker and will always lose. This last situation is what Dennis means. It only occurs when i am totally crushed into apathy at failure to block the opponents postulate and feel that i can never succeed in that game again. I agree with his pan-determined postulate that he will carry the ball into the end zone every time he tries. Your text in the chart is correct. Sincerely Pete McLaughlin Sent from my iPad > On Oct 9, 2016, at 8:28 PM, The Resolution of Mind list > wrote: > > * > The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org > > > > > Pete, > > > I am trying to figure out what the "not included postulates" are supposed to > be, because Dennis is somewhat ambiguous and confusing for me. > > > > The meaning of this quote from the book is not exactly clear to me: > > I If you’ve been following this closely you’ll have realized that >at the overwhelm level we have the semblance of a no game > situation, for there is no longer any conflict between the > postulates; they are, indeed, complementary. > > > >Does the above quote mean the following: > > (In other words, is the following correct in the way I have included the > postulates in lines 1A and 2B on my chart for my own understanding > (in small text and brackets) that Dennis did not include on the original > chart?: > Self /SDP PDP /Others /SDPPDP > 1A (MBK)MKMBK (MK) Motivator > Overwhelmed You are forced to know. /Infliction/ You have been > inflicted./You lost > > 2B MNK (MNBK) (MNK)MNBK Overt > OverwhelmPreventing from being known. /Rejection/ You rejected > the other guy. /You win > > > Again,. I want to get certainty on this: > > Does Dennis mean that the self and others postulates are also the same in > lines: 3A and 4B, 5A and 6B, 7A and 8B? > > > David > > ___ > TROM mailing list > TROM@lists.newciv.org > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom ___ TROM mailing list TROM@lists.newciv.org http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
[TROM1] Complementary postulates?
* The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org Pete, I am trying to figure out what the "not included postulates" are supposed to be, because Dennis is somewhat ambiguous and confusing for me. The meaning of this quote from the book is not exactly clear to me: I If you’ve been following this closely you’ll have realized that at the overwhelm level we have the semblance of a no game situation, for there is no longer any conflict between the postulates; they are, indeed, complementary. Does the above quote mean the following: (In other words, is the following correct in the way I have included the postulates in lines 1A and 2B on my chart for my own understanding (in small text and brackets) that Dennis did not include on the original chart?: Self /SDP PDP /Others /SDPPDP 1A (MBK)MKMBK (MK) Motivator OverwhelmedYou are forced to know. /Infliction/ You have been inflicted./You lost 2B MNK (MNBK) (MNK)MNBK Overt OverwhelmPreventing from being known. /Rejection/ You rejected the other guy. /You win Again,. I want to get certainty on this: Does Dennis mean that the self and others postulates are also the same in lines: 3A and 4B, 5A and 6B, 7A and 8B? David ___ TROM mailing list TROM@lists.newciv.org http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
[TROM1] Complementary Postulates = Love
* The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org Dennis said it: Complementary postulates = love Lester Levenson said, "I want you to have what you want even if I cannot give it to you..." I'm grateful to those here who present attitudes that send my mind into wordless incomprehension. Your comments are almost always a wonder to me because it is not what I-with-mind/ego would have thought or said. Thank you for setting a good example, and helping me see a self without mind. Is that what I am ... will be ... when I complete Level V? I'm also thankful for those on this list with the power of expression who give me impetus to make negative gains -- timebreaking, dampening compulsive contentiousness. That's partly what makes this list and everyone on it perfect (for me). colleen ___ Trom mailing list Trom@lists.newciv.org http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
