ORGANELLE

∞ There are those beings to which terrestrial bees are analogous… yet they connect not flowers, but minds. And not merely minds, but worlds… throughout all of time…

… and our minds are half their children…

∞ “I think we have the ideas of birth and death inverted: our human birth appears to me to be like the entrance into an exceptionally confusing and staggeringly layered array of bardos (dream-gaps). Whereas death is the sudden penetration of the veils that we are, in life, enveloped in. And so we may hope, then, to penetrate those veils whilst yet alive… and this, it seems to me… is the origin and purposive character of those ways of knowing and relation we speak of as ‘religions’.”

— an anonymous informant

∞ “I began to become painfully aware that our common ‘communications’ methods were not only not methods, and did not result in communication; they were explicitly assaulting the faculties that belonging, intelligence, and communications emerge from and for. In simpler terms, our ‘technologies’ are anti- they begin by assaulting and compromising our minds and bodies, and the resulting disabilities then ‘require’ the ‘new technologies’ like a drug-addiction or urge towards self-harming.

By and large, we are ‘no longer communicating’ at all, we are simply displaying the symptomatic responses to machine-relations that deliver the opposites of their promises, and then compel us to erase the origins and purposes of our intelligence and humanity, in preparation to inhabit an ever-more-self-impoverishing set of ‘prey’ roles.

More than 90% of human sense and intelligence is entirely non-verbal. It is not encoded or communicated in text, and the purposes for which we generate text and recordings, in modern contexts, are, primarily, so lethal that even brief exposure to them will have catastrophic developmental impacts that will expand explosively over ‘population time’’.

— an intelligence agent

∞ “Their species comprises the only local organ of expression for an array of intelligences they have become entirely divorced from. Their minds have gone rogue in the aftermath, and attack themselves and nearly everything else that moves. But the originary assets and potentials are intact, and, indeed, advanced. They await an appropriate catalyst.

Their self-generated apocalypses may seem to comprise the necessary crucible of awakening; unfortunately, the price will be most of the anciently conserved ecosystems of Earth. Ironically, without the underlying intelligences instanced by those ecosystems, their own minds will be deprived of their roots and structure, and will collapse. So will their cultures. Into standing waves of uncontrollable atrocity.

Their minds were forged in symbiotic union with nonhuman intelligences. They will not be corrected without the common re-establishment of such relations, and that depends upon the survival of the remaining ecosystems of Earth, because those are the transport and focal organ required for the relationship to arise or be sustained.”

— overheard overhead

I found this discussion informative and useful, granting that the respondents are, primarily, 2. But there’s nearly no sophisticated discussion on this topic, and this is, at least, an example of relatively insightful and thoughtful discussion on a topic that is presently extremely contentious, confused, propagandized and generally dangerous.

Eric Weinstein (the problem with language):

“So the problem is you have got a totalizing death cult with all the safeties off the gun for some subset of people, and then we’re going to have this conversation about are we going to be fastidiously accurate in which case it’ll take 17 hours and nobody will want to watch it.

Or is somebody going to say, you know, do the conservative thing to say, well, there’s some… something’s going wrong with Islam and then you’ve got all the collateral damage of reasonable normal people who are, you know, a vice president for inventory at some company uh who happens to go to the mosque and he’s thinking, like, what does this have to do with me?

And then you have got the weird issues about the sympathies; where you’ve got sympathies for completely insane positions from completely moderate people including, now, generically, college students are up for people firing automatic weapons into Portapotties having no idea who’s inside… is a mother, you know, nursing a child inside the Portapotty… who cares?

And to say I stand with Palestine and show a hang glider for black lives matter… think about all the Black Lives Matter signs I saw. Throughout the entire George Floyd thing… I was saying don’t support Black Lives Matter.

Now Black Lives Matter was a piece of Genius called declarative marketing. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of it… so we had products in the 70s called Gee Your Hair Smells Terrific or I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter… was the name of the product.

So the name of the product is called Black Lives Matter … how can you disagree with that? You know, so, Save the Adorable Puppy Dogs is what I would call a terrorist organization if I had to. Because how can you disagree with Save the Adorable Puppy Dogs?

We’re deranged by language. We’re not watching things in mainstream context that would make us sick to our stomachs.

And we are becoming infused with a radical ideology through the Democratic party—that is as if it was liberalism-adjacent—like you’ve got radical left-wing death cults that want Revolution for the oppressed that have a seat at the Democratic table, at the same time that somebody like Sam or myself, traditionally a Democrat, is completely unwelcome and you know my claim is that you’re seeing an echo of this madness of jihadism inside mainstream American campuses.”

“I have been a computer technician since around the mid 1980’s, primarily specializing in Apple tech. As you can surmise, I am now getting on in years, however, I still help people when the opportunity arises. Over the years I noticed that I had a preternatural sense of how to solve user-level and sometimes system-level problems. Often, my first guess after receiving modest or no information was accurate, and I nearly never encounter a problem I cannot solve.

We have all heard the stories of those who bring their malfunctioning cars to mechanics only to discover that »while at the mechanic’s shop the problem cannot be reproduced. There are a complex array of reasons for this phenomena, but some of them are almost certainly nonordinary: i.e. the proximity of a mechanic causes the equipment to function differently.

No rational person believes this. But they should…

Today, I got a call from a scientist I work with who has a great deal of trouble using computers. He can do QM math in his head, but cannot navigate a user interface. He called to assert that, after trying for a long time, he could not attach a document to an email. He knew I would help him as I often do. Strangely, once I was on the phone with him, the process went perfectly and he had no trouble. I found this fact interesting. My mere presence on the phone with him appeared to resolve a problem that he could not navigate.

Is this nonordinary? In this case, it certainly could be accidental, but I’ve had many similar situations where merely showing up … changed the equation, and the machine began to function as expected again.”

— an anonymous informant

It’s not that we actually have two distinct minds. Indeed, the mind cannot tell us what it is at all, though we exert every effort to compose sophisticated models and language about such matters. If the mind cannot declare to us its own nature and identities… how vastly more impoverished are words?

Am I my words? Through these symbols I make, can you know me? Something of my thoughts, intentions… purposes, perhaps.

So it is not as if we formally have a dreaming mind and a waking mind. But I will speak as if this is a useful perspective, for I think it is, even though actual matters are not amenable to mere descriptions.

The dreaming mind has many fascinating qualities. I have tried, over many years now, to gain insight into their nature and appearances. I have struggled to acquire some insight around what occurs when we sleep. And how it differs from my consciousness whilst awake.

The differences are profound and myriad.

But for the moment I will concern myself with two: identity and declaration.

For the waking mind, any object »is that object. Any being »is the one we name. Words become … not merely pointers (as they should be) but something more severe. We easily confuse them with complete knowledge of their referents. Of what they should point toward, inviting us to explore. Sometimes, they still do this, but by and large, we use words only when we have learned to ignore what they refer to. The word ‘sparrow’ tells us nothing of the bird, its people, its ways of life. Or any specific sparrow in a living situation. Yet we think, if we know the word, we know ‘what’ a sparrow is. Because we can say: organism, bird, sparrow.

The dreaming mind is not like this at all. It doesn’t care for words or names, and carefully avoids declarations… it avoids language altogether. We may remember exchanges of communication in dreams, and even ‘remember’ the exact ‘words’ and their sequences. But this is not (usually) what is happening in the experience of dreaming at all. In fact, if this begins to happen in a dream, that dream will soon give way to waking.

In a dream, a person is rarely »the person we later recall them as having been. Identity itself is ambiguated, purposefully, by the dreaming mind. So, too, what we may later remember as linguistic exchanges. Ever try to read in a dream? If you remember attempting this… what happened?

Language is unlike the dreaming mind’s way of being. This way does not merely value ambiguity, it thrives on it. Explicit identities, explicit roles and ‘declarations’ are not entirely missing from the dreaming manifold, but their otherwise deafening volume is vastly … and intelligently … creatively … reduced. And replaced with something else. Something we have few useful words for. Ambiguity doesn’t really capture it. It’s a kind of cognitive freedom.

Freedom from determination. Suspension. Floating.

And, perhaps… freedom…

From Knowledge itself.

∞ Suppose that we have brains because the world is a bit like the superposition of a brain. That is, that brains in animals represent a peculiar hypostasis of the ‘meta-brain-like’ nature of our biosphere and its developmental history. Earth is swarming with creatures with brains; the fact should be relatively obvious.

Think with me: you don’t get a glass of water spontaneously producing a diamond ring. Because the water is not (and cannot be) ‘diamond-ringy’. It doesn’t matter how long you wait, no diamond ring will ever condense from such water. But you might get salt crystals — if the water was »salty. So suppose with me that what we rather crudely distinguish and call brains, are ‘localized condensations’ of the general character of Earth, and, perhaps, timeSpace itself. Brains, then, (but first, organisms as wholes) are a ‘crystalization’ of the actual nature of timespace.

From this perspective, animals (even those with brains) are like organs in a ‘more-than-merely-brain-like’ hypersystem. The world is seen as ‘the superposition of organismal experience and relation’, and our minds are ‘instances’ of the characteristics of this relationship. It is »first a unity, and only secondarily does it have ‘parts’… just like our own bodies (also like the projections we make that become cultures).

In such a situation, what would happen if the most formally sophisticated element in this anciently evolved biorelational hypersystem went rogue? What would happen »to this element, directly and instantaneously, if it become so relationally AND conceptually confused that it started openly assaulting not only its own basis, but nearly every form of life on Earth — with invasive ecosystemic toxins, industrial byproducts, radiation, conversion to commodity, and sudden, explosive species attrition?

Imagine what would happen in your brain and body… if your neurons suddenly acquired an actively toxic relationship »with every other cell and system in your entire body. At once. And were only barely capable of »any form of relation that was not explicitly lethal or toxic?

How long would those neurons last? Is their mad idea of separation from and dominion over the entire hypersystem in any way reasonable or is it merely the conceptual flag under which they prosecute their own obliteration — and that of the entire history and source pool of life on earth. The sources of our own minds are under assault by the operational body of human ideological fictions. If something like this happened in a human brain, I doubt the organism would survive more than 15 seconds.

The term ‘disambiguation’ is getting a lot of airplay, particularly within the intellectual dark web. We are trained, particularly males, to dismiss or ignore anything that isn’t considered to be factual. This is a binary choice arrangement that is far more limited in its useful scope than we would ordinarily imagine.

Disambiguation is the process of trying to sift narratives, reports, models and descriptions in an attempt to determine their value, or, perhaps, to determine if they are ‘concocted’. I.e. dis/mis-information.

We have the capacity, however, for far more intelligent evaluatory behavior. Much of insight is not concerned with facts, but rather, with »better ways of seeing. This concern leads to the discovery of something nearly no one mentions: intelligent re-ambiguation, which resembles the forms of ‘identity information’ in »dreaming.

It is also the source of most of the genres of literature that we call science fiction or fantasy. There are ways of learning to see that far surpass those we are usually trained to employ—insight doesn’t ignore facts, but it expands its perspective beyond them… and into their origins as well…

“People seem to think their mind isn’t something they are doing, but rather, something they have. It reminds me of people who try to travel by putting shoes on. And taking them off. And changing them.

A mind isn’t something you have. It’s something we’re »doing. And we’re doing it »together, even while we are ‘alone’.

And there are ways of forming minds together so vastly beyond anything we’ve imagined as possible, that were you to experience even one of them for a few moments, it would transform your life… forever.

Minds are a form of travel. Of flight. But what we do is use them to chase abstract concepts, arguments, opinions… it’s like a dog trying to run by fiercely gripping its left hind foot between its jaws.

If minds are something we »do, then there are ways of doing this, and purposes for the doing of it together, that are far beyond anything we have seen or are familiar with. We are made of these ways and purposes. Our bodies, awareness… dreaming… is founded in these purposes.

We need only agree to recover them together… and this naturally happens. Every time. Because everything and everyone agrees with a simple purpose: let us remember our origins, nature, potentials, faculties and abilities…

together. Now.”

— an anonymous informant