Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Co-creating the Swami Persona
    #3969178 -

For the purpose of this thread, I will designate "me", "I", or "my" as referring to the author of these posts who sits typing at a computer, and "Swami" as that aspect of "me" presented to you in this forum. You may also substitute any on-screen name in place of "Swami" as the dynamic is the same.

I got to thinking about a post that JC made saying that Swami merely comes here for attention. While I do not deny that, it certainly is not limited to that; yet I rarely seek attention in "real-life" and generally prefere invisibility. Why the disparity?

Then I realized that "Swami" is a co-creation of the author plus the members of the community. When I first started posting, I was meek and unassuming - and ignored. I changed to various personas until I hit on the Swami you know and love/hate today. Basically, member feedback steered me to create that which they found most amusing, interesting or controversial. Is Swami a facade or a false personality? Neither, but external feedback "taught" me to reinforce certain qualities of my being and suppress others.

Think this is B.S.? When a man is dating a woman and she says, I really like it when you wear a suit, the man will wear suits more often. If the man says that he likes the women to wear less make-up and she wants to please him, she will wear less make-up. While these examples are superficial, it also applies equally to deeper behaviours and choices. This is why we ALL act differently with a family member than we do with a lover or a friend or a boss.

In summation, I only partly take the blame/credit for Swami. You are all equally culpable. :strokebeard:


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Swami]
    #3969209 -

I agree that an individual's persona does not represent 100% of who that person is, and can be highly influenced by external/social pressures.

However I must say...every person has the power and the responsibility to choose to be whoever they want to be. Just because people tell you/influence you to be a certain way does not mean you must, or should be that way. Every time you do, say or think something, there is an act of will involved (if you believe in free will)...and those things put together make up your persona.


--------------------
--------------------------------------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: DadeMurphy]
    #3969270 -

Swami said:
For the purpose of this thread, I will designate "me", "I", or "my" as referring to the author of these posts who sits typing at a computer, and "Swami" as that aspect of "me" presented to you in this forum. You may also substitute any on-screen name in place of "Swami" as the dynamic is the same.

I got to thinking about a post that JC made saying that Swami merely comes here for attention. While I do not deny that, it certainly is not limited to that; yet I rarely seek attention in "real-life" and generally prefere invisibility. Why the disparity?

Then I realized that "Swami" is a co-creation of the author plus the members of the community. When I first started posting, I was meek and unassuming - and ignored. I changed to various personas until I hit on the Swami you know and love/hate today. Basically, member feedback steered me to create that which they found most amusing, interesting or controversial. Is Swami a facade or a false personality? Neither, but external feedback "taught" me to reinforce certain qualities of my being and suppress others.

Think this is B.S.? When a man is dating a woman and she says, I really like it when you wear a suit, the man will wear suits more often. If the man says that he likes the women to wear less make-up and she wants to please him, she will wear less make-up. While these examples are superficial, it also applies equally to deeper behaviours and choices. This is why we ALL act differently with a family member than we do with a lover or a friend or a boss.

In summation, I only partly take the blame/credit for Swami. You are all equally culpable. :strokebeard:




Truth as the story teller (you), fiction as the story told (Swami)

A history got a main character, and some bi-characters.. If we all talked as the main character of our story, and let the bi-characters do their own talking, as the main character of their own story's.. well..  co-creating reality as fiction? 'could that be' adequate to say? :wink:


if we all talked as the main character of our story, and let the bi-characters do their own talking, as the main character of their own story's..

so.... the Swami Persona, you are as the main character of your story, as you said, intervene to the Swami Persona we create as the bi-characters of our story.. :smile:

so 'really', we do not know each other, we are each other, in knowing  who we are, not..  :P


--------------------


--------------------
Disclaimer!?

Edited by Gomp (03/25/05 03:07 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Swami]
    #3969273 -

Very insightful swami!

I am working on a 3 fields of consciousness theory I will post soon that this supports, which is encouraging to me as so far, I can't find any flaws in it to tweak it out. (but I know many will help me find the flaws to work out if it has them :wink:)

I want to ask you one thing or make note of something regarding your insight. Based on its dynamics, we can choose to wear the suits that bring positive attention or the suits that bring negative attention right? We know what brings what based on feed back. If we have a choice for what sort of attention we receive and learn from feed back what volume of it manifests from what choices, why not choose what suit brings the greatest volume of positive attention, simply because, its the most pleasurable to experience?

Maybe for some, its not pleasurable? Thats another area of discussion, you know like how some take pleasure in pain.

Wearing suits also reinforces our resources and networks to co-create with. iIf we draw negativity all around us, our networks and resources will be negative and help us to co-create a downward spiral that takes away from us. If we draw in positivety all around us, our net works and resources will help to create an upward spiral that gives us more.

That said, I often wondered why you chose to go more for the negative attention? Can you think back to when you were first putting stuff out there how it went that you seemed to get more response and a higher volume of attention when being in the negative?

I also wonder if it worked out that way because at the time, there was simply a higher volume of negativity here so it had the greatest pool to draw from. That's where the rest of the board comes in as your co-creaters of swami. It also took the polarised positive types to create the label and separation in a subjective awareness of negativity.

I noticed a negative controversial bent here at S&P does get way more attention then it would at other spirituality message boards. They have a greater pool of positive types and so positive posts get greater attention and negative posts get ignored.

If you have any comments on all of this, I would be interested to here them.

And yoo hoo all, I'm not doging S&P by saying it has a larger pool of negativity then other spirituality message boards. I am here way more then at any other because I suppose, what positivity does come out of here, seems greater or is experienced as being greater because of the contrast. At the other boards, there is rarely any contrast and so all of the positivity becomes a flat wash to experience after a while.

Maybe I just haven't yet learned how to appreciate it full time yet.:tongue: maybe I just like that I experience this place to at least have some sense of both polarities being represented here, and the contrast. I personally feel more balanced in this space then in one over polarized to right.  What will happen when the space here balances out, (and I have been noticing it doing that over the last months) Will this board in balance become a flat wash or super sweet because of the perfect blend and contrast?

That's another topic I guess, sorry if I went off, I was just inspired here! thanks for sharing swami!


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3969316 -

A negative attitude is part of every "counter-culturish" subculture. It's what holds it together as well as what divides it. United in opposition, divided in proposition. On a similar note, a female friend of mine once explained why she has so few female friends "it's the whole 'cult of suffering' thing that alot of girls do... they bond through bitching and complaining..."

Balance is the key to any social dynamic.


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Swami]
    #3969321 -

Hi.

I think it's great that you've decided to analyze this situation...

but I also think that your reason was a cop-out.

It's like this...

Say a fellow is bored, so he picks on an innocent bystander with a funny haircut. He's hurt, but 10 other people surrounding are laughing their asses off. Basking in the attention of the 10 others, the fellow decides to step it up a notch and rub the guy's face in the dirt.

Now... to say that this fellow is not fully responsible for his own actions just because 10 other people supported his actions is a complete cop-out.

The truth is, that individual is fully responsible for his own actions. If he did not want to do what he did, he would not have done it.. crowd or no crowd.

Giving into the temptation of attention instead of standing your ground based on what you think is right is not something that I would expect you to support, Swami...

I give the originator a 95% responsibility factor at the LEAST.

So "equally culpable" seems a stretch to me... if anything, it sounds like you're just trying to justify your own actions by displacing a large portion of the blame.

Hope this isn't too offensive.. it's really not meant to be. Just calling it as I see it.

--

P.S. Again, I'm really glad that you've decided to turn your microscope upon yourself for once... I think it's incredibly healthy and shows great potential.  :heart:  :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3969350 -

I want to ask you one thing or make note of something regarding your insight. Based on its dynamics, we can choose to wear the suits that bring positive attention or the suits that bring negative attention right? We know what brings what based on feed back. If we have a choice for what sort of attention we receive and learn from feed back what volume of it manifests from what choices, why not choose what suit brings the greatest volume of positive attention, simply because, its the most pleasurable to experience?
I was watching a TV show on the controversial college basketball coach Bobby Knight. He was abusive, mean, ill-temepered and foul-mouthed (non of which i condone), yet he was extraordinarly successful in winning championships. When questioned about his abrasiveness, he pointed out other great leaders in the military, sports and politics who were of a similar nature.

Did Jesus try to "get along" and win favor from the people? No.

While I feel that neither extreme applies to me, we all culitvate our personas to give us the greatest reward whether that be external reward, intellectual honesty, friendship, amusement, learning or whatever.

That said, I often wondered why you chose to go more for the negative attention? Can you think back to when you were first putting stuff out there how it went that you seemed to get more response and a higher volume of attention when being in the negative?
I, er Swami, negated many falsehoods that were presented time and time again because I think erroneous information is dangerous. Is that a negative trait? What is your criterion?

I noticed a negative controversial bent here at S&P does get way more attention then it would at other spirituality message boards. They have a greater pool of positive types and so positive posts get greater attention and negative posts get ignored.
You will have to explain more clearly. Is the popular New Age saying that "the Universe is a safe place" a positive thing even though reality clearly says otherwise? Or should we acknowledge the evil in the world? While you would do everything to protect your daughter, if you paint a totally rosy (positive) picture of the world, you will do her a great disservice by leaving her ill-prepared to deal with the harsh realities of a sometimes predatory society.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: JacquesCousteau]
    #3969422 -

Now... to say that this fellow is not fully responsible for his own actions just because 10 other people supported his actions is a complete cop-out.
Are you talking reality or a non-existent perfect world? Are you going to deny ever being influenced by peer pressure or feedback from those around you?

So "equally culpable" seems a stretch to me... if anything, it sounds like you're just trying to justify your own actions by displacing a large portion of the blame.
See? By making a dubious and controversial hypothesis, I got a response from you futher stimulating me to make future controversial statements...


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Sclorch]
    #3969425 -

Sclorch said:
A negative attitude is part of every "counter-culturish" subculture. It's what holds it together as well as what divides it. United in opposition, divided in proposition. On a similar note, a female friend of mine once explained why she has so few female friends "it's the whole 'cult of suffering' thing that alot of girls do... they bond through bitching and complaining..."

Balance is the key to any social dynamic.


I'm the same way having and preferring male friends to female friends for the same reason. Could be another reason why I prefer it here as it's mostly male and you guys tend to be more solution oriented where women tend to like to dwell within their issues.

(I'm generalizing I know)

Could be that it came from not having any real status power in the older days for getting noticed and feeling important and so their issues got them attention amongst each other and gave them a sense of importance to each other and it became a feminine trait passed down, like learned behavior.

Invisibility at times can have its advantages and virtues and it's important to sometimes become invisible and just observe. Yet all in all, we are not here in life to not be here. This is a plane designed and created for experiencing and realizing ourselves through action IMHO. If we don't some times step forward and act, what will the ones taking time to observe have to watch and study?


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Swami]
    #3969930 -

Okay, you replied to 3 questions I asked, thank you, and asked me some in return. Here goes;

In the case of the mean and abusive coach, he had a goal and it was to win. He found a method that helped him to achieve his goal of winning games. Being mean and abusive served the goal of winning. Fine. If your goal all along has been to win arguments, then I can see why you would take a mild model approach from someones method for winning.

However, you said that the goal here at S&P was just to become visible and having people pay attention to you.

You must also have a belief tied into this that winners get paid attention to and loosers don't. Related to S&P, you decided that the way to be a winner was through philosophical debate. Fine.

If you look at this picture, swamis actions when getting attention as a debater have been self serving. That's where the negativity comes into play. For you to win, someone has to loose.

Negative numbers and energy occurs when we take away from positive numbers and "energy". If you post here looking to win and be a winner, you have to take away postive numbers from others to create the winning amount of numbers for yourself.

In doing so, you are also creating a wake of losers behind you in the process. You get to feel good and the ahhhh of victory and experience the adoration, while the other now endures a sense of loss and disapproval from the crowed that was not there, until you came in to take from them so you could win.

Many do that here from time to time including me.

Maybe everyone does to varying degrees.

Maybe some never have.

Some, always or some times or most often go for the win win, they come here to give positives they have to those who are in the negatives. Those people get attention too and you have in that way sometimes, when you come in to give and share some winning ways you have discovered. Others who read are filled with positives from you and everybody wins. You can be paid attention to doing this by giving to people something they want. You can be worthy of others attention by having something of value to offer them for free.

When people here are telling you that you have options and choices for how you go about being seen and paid attention to here, that's what they are talking about. Some may give you a thumbs down for using the take away method to get attention when you could be using the giving method for it and creating winners here instead of losers.

If you think of yourself as a team coach swami, and S&P your team, and winning is important to you, then I would think you would be looking to create winners out of the members, not loser's. If just you win, that's selfish.

Now we get to Jesus. Jesus was not selfish. His goal was to give light and to bring his light into the world for others to see with.  Yes, he did not compromise his truth in his goal either. When people told him to hate the tax collectors, he stayed true to his goal and loved and accepted them as his brothers. When people told him to stay away from the lepers, he stayed true to his goal and healed them with the power of his love and light. When people told him to stay away from the crazy and insane because they were possessed by demons, he would help them to be healed.

Jesus left winners and benefactors of his presence in his wake.

If you are going to use Jesus as an example of staying true to yourself well then, look at what his goal was and how he accomplished it. It was to bring light into this world he said and to give of himself and his light so others could be in light with him as his equals. He went for the win win.

Yes,  we do cultivate our own actions for reward. Reward can be sought for just the self at the expense of others and reward can come from affording others from your wealth so they can share in it with you.

There are times, the swami persona comes here and gives of his wealth and affords it to others. Some times, you give of your winning strategies and afford them to others and every body wins and all are rewarded in that including you if you achieve a sense of fulfillment from helping to fill others with your light.

There are times you come here and give of your wealth in humor, and when it is not used to take away from someone making them to look like a foolish looser, everybody can be filled with laughter and everybody wins. All are awarded with laughter and you get the sense of fulfillment that comes from filling others with laughter and joy. If the laughter comes at the expense of another, then it was a take away, a negative and you created a looser on your own team.

It's your choice if you want to come here as a taker or giver as it is all of our choice to make when we come here. We are free to choose. I think many here see the potential in you to be more giving and affording and creating of a winning team. When they see you taking and creating losers for self gain, yes, they frown. Do you care?

I've done it sometimes and when I reflect on it, I don't feel good about myself for having made that choice. That's why I asked if it felt good to you, because I know it doesn't feel good to me. I feel good when I can give of myself to others and create win wins.

I am human as are you, what can we do but forgive ourselves if we care and work to mend what we have shreaded in haste and make better choices in the future.

Regarding the topic of protecting people from the evils and harsh realities of this world, that's a subjective thing to me so I can't really comment on that but I do share with the board how I deal with it and how I deal with it is different from you sometimes. I won't deny you your right to share how you deal with as I don't want to be denied mine.

Everyone should be allowed to speak and share freely here and be heard.

Sometimes, we all may talk as if our ways are the one and only right way and I think that's where any of us can turn others off to our messages. You don't get heard or paid attention to when you turn people off to you.

I think the diversity of those differences we share is important as it adds to the over all perspective on life offered here that people can draw from to suit and serve themselves.

My apologies if this was long, I just wanted to be thorough so you would understand my commentary best. That's all this is, comments. Take em for what they are worth to you. I am not asking you to change swami. if you are wanting a change of pace or MO, then, I am giving you feedback to make new choices with, thats all. I appreciate your presense here anyway it comes. :sun: :heart:


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3970665 -

The best of all leaders is but a shadowy presence to his followers.

Next comes the leader they love and praise;
Next comes one they fear;
Next comes one with whom they take liberties.

When there is not enough faith, there is lack of good faith.

Hesistant, he does not utter words lightly.
When his task is accomplished and his work is done
The people all say 'It all happened to us naturally'.

-Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu


--------------------
I am what Willis was talkin' bout.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Swami]
    #3970750 -

In summation, I only partly take the blame/credit for Swami. You are all equally culpable.

I deny any responsibility for Swami's persona. It was like that when I got here.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
    #3971472 -

gettinjiggywithit said:
Could be that it came from not having any real status power in the older days for getting noticed and feeling important and so their issues got them attention amongst each other and gave them a sense of importance to each other and it became a feminine trait passed down, like learned behavior.


This is a definite possibility.  I wonder if this has been studied much by psychologists and sociologists... hmmm

Quote:
This is a plane designed and created for experiencing and realizing ourselves through action IMHO. If we don't some times step forward and act, what will the ones taking time to observe have to watch and study?


I like the bolded parts best. :wink:




Oh how the volleying has intrigued me... but I'm staying out of it for matters of efficiency.  When Swami and Jiggy have exhausted themselves (more or less), I'll butt in with my two cents.
*bites tongue*


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Swami]
    #3971736 -

Swami, I have not read thru the whole thread yet, I am just responding to your original post for the time being.... 
.
.
Swami, you are who YOU are - and THAT is why people follow you....  What you write, or how you choose to do so is not really a good indicator of charactor as much as your creativity....    A creative person does what they do, it is their personallity that shines thru - ALWAYS, and THAT is the essence of "importance" that *should* be seen....  If it wasn't, we would all be throwing away all of our brown spotted bananas because they "look" bad....  We ALL know what may well be behind EVERY brown spotted banana peel, a freshly ripe essence of that very being....   
.
And that kinda~ applies, because we are ALL fruits.....!  :tongue:  Or, maybe nuts....?  :lol:  :shrug:
.
Either way you look at it, it is all good.....  Love to ya~ Swami.....!    :heart:


:sun:


By the way SWAMI, I originally first came to S&P out of curiousiity of why everyone was talking about your ban....  So in essence, it was thru you that helped me to become what I have "become" today as I write this....    :crying:  For that I owe a lot of gratitude to you, especially in my sometimes harsh treatment that I chose to dish out to you in my past....  It was very undeserving to say the least....    I hope that you will become more "visible" here....  I do miss how you used to stir everything up.....!    Aint NUTHIN wrong with a good SWAMI-Style stirring now and again....!  :grin:    Be yourself for YOU, be creative for YOU....  Do it for you man....    Respect....  :heart:  :peace:
.
Together we grow, together we grow strong, from each other, from each other to lean upon....  :laugh:  :heart:


--------------------
Uni-VersALL      MasterPeace
eMotive  :sun: Divinity NowThere Infinity :sun:  eMelody

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Zekebomb]
    #3971743 -

Zekebomb said:
In summation, I only partly take the blame/credit for Swami. You are all equally culpable.

I deny any responsibility for Swami's persona. It was like that when I got here.


[Hindi svm, master, swami, from Sanskrit, being one's own master, possessing proprietary rights. See s(w)e- in Indo-European Roots.]

:confused: :thumbup: :heart:
:sun:


--------------------


--------------------
Disclaimer!?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Sclorch]
    #3971771 -

Now I will leave swami out of this thread, sorry, but keep in theme with the topic of the inner push to make ourselves visible, related to what you brought up about your girlfriend and what I said in reply about men and women.

It cam to me because last week I saw a show on women inventors. I can't remember what date we became allowed to have their inventions patented, but catch this all, there was also a time in American history where women inventors, (one invented Kevlar btw) were not allowed to have their inventions patented. They had to have them patented under their husbands names. Lets couple that with the right to vote.

If through a period of history, women were not allowed to become visible, recognized, paid attention to, or made important through their intellect, what else did they have but to do so through their emotions or physical attractiveness.

I personally don't think women are any less intelligent nor that men are any less capable of feeling. I think it has just become learned behavior for one to get noticed through their emotional issues and one through the intellect.

Of course, that is all changing and equalizing out now for the better of both sexes and society. Balance between the two is important IMHO. The intellect wants to look at the logistics involved when planing and trouble shooting and the emotions want to look at the impact the plans will have on how they will be to experience, not what they will accomplish.

I don't know if psychologists have studied or looked at it from this view.

I will now become invisable and return you to the co-creation of swami!


--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: eMotionALLmotion]
    #3971792 -

The idea of having to take responsibility for oneself is an... odd idea in that there is no set way that one has to respond. "Take responsibility for your actions" is a phrase that baffles me, as it implies that we must remain accountable for the action in question. The reason this baffles me is because each action produces a chain of cause and effect that will trail off into the end. How much responsibility is one to take?

Not only that, but one must also define what is and what is not responsible. Does responsibility imply the need to face the consequences of one's actions? Does responsibility imply that one must fully consider how others feel? Because, of course, if everyone was responsible for their own actions (which, of course, means their own thoughts and feelings), one would not need to consider how another will feel. :lol:

We are entirely a product of our environment, that which we interact with. Of course, we develop the ability to have the experience that we can act, and can consider our actions before-and-after-hand, and that this happens distinctly from the environment. What one thinks and how one acts is simply the interaction between the accumulated experience this person has had, the way the mind and the decision making programs have been formed from this experience, and the situation that is presented in the here and now moment. There is no thought or action that is chosen by an all-knowing, distinct being that transcends cause and effect and has an infinite understanding. You can't take someone who has no understanding of the dynamics of the universe and the far-reaching ramifications of their actions, slap them upside the head and say "Be responsible, stupid!"

Someone calls someone else a "fuck-head" when someone else accidentally drops a case of pickles. Is the person who uttered "fuck-head" being responsible? Yes! They are responding to the situation in the best manner that they could conceive in that moment. If there was another manner in which they could have acted in that moment that would have better suited the moment and who they were in that moment, then they would have. Action happens as a constant flow from which there is no distinct chooser who can completely consider their actions free from time and that moment.

Is Swami to act as some Enlightened super-being? The truth is, if we could fully consider all consequences of our actions and be responsible for those actions, we wouldn't act in the first place. The man that gives the Swami archetype its being presented this forum a pretty maleable, undefined surface, and the interactions that it took part of in this forum gave this surface its form. THE ATTITUDES THAT PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN TOWARDS SWAMI, IN EFFECT, CREATED SWAMI.... for the most part. Dude had his say in it as well, but it seems as if he allowed the character to come into its own, which is more in line with what God would do than anything.

So ja, next time you are at a play, and there is an evil character that is wrecking havoc on the other characters, get on stage and scold the actor portraying this evil character for not taking responsibility for his actions. :lol:

There are a world of people acting as they do with their own intentions, and from their perspective, they are being as responsible as they ever could be. Don't construe this as meaning that it doesn't matter how one acts, just recognize this truth for what it is. :wink:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: fireworks_god]
    #3971809 -

FUCK-HEAD....!?  You almost made me drop a half full bowl of pistachoi nut shells when I started laughing from reading the "fuck-head" part of your words....!    :lol:

Cause and Effect.....!  Apparently, laughing is not ALWAYS a good thing....  :wink:


:sun:


--------------------
Uni-VersALL      MasterPeace
eMotive  :sun: Divinity NowThere Infinity :sun:  eMelody

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: eMotionALLmotion]
    #3972022 -

It's hard to break out of stereotypes because people come to associate the stereotype as your true identity and it's considered unnatural to act otherwise. You can speak honestly to me at least, I just see you as an undefined person. I'm happy for you that you had this realization. :smile: All this time I thought you were playing a particular angle, trying to convey to us a particular lesson...when in reality you were trying to convey it to *yourself*! lol Well, anyways, you are now angle-free in my book...

*waves magic wand*

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Co-creating the Swami Persona [Re: Swami]
    #3972067 -

In summation, I only partly take the blame/credit for Swami. You are all equally culpable.

Amazing. At least take responsibility for being the "class clown" instead of blaming the class for laughing at your antics.


--------------------
Anxiety is what you make it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Creating reality - does God really help?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Swami 3,782 47 03/08/03 01:31 AM
by The_Clash_UK
* Do we create our own Afterlife?
( 1 2 3 all )		 EgoTripping 3,257 47 06/03/04 12:25 AM
by Strumpling
* The Return of Swami
( 1 2 3 all )		 Swami 4,469 45 11/14/03 07:22 AM
by Deiymiyan
* Swami's Spirituality Class - Exercise #2 Swami 509 2 11/17/03 06:56 AM
by kaiowas
* swami, may i come take your challenge?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 truekimbo2 7,348 99 10/23/14 02:35 AM
by OrgoneConclusion
* Swami/Shroomism relations
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 LearyfanS 6,430 68 03/20/02 07:32 PM
by Swami
* Swami
( 1 2 3 all )		 Anonymous 3,208 48 07/10/02 01:12 AM
by MAIA
* your mind COULD be creating reality
( 1 2 3 all )		 Moonshoe 7,381 47 07/17/04 03:04 AM
by Source

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,735 topic views. 0 members, 369 guests and 27 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.