Remedy Roundtable 01- with Joe Atwill, Bill Joslin, Ryan Gilmore and Jan Irvin – “Navigating the world of Sophistry” – #205

Share

GM_205
This episode is our first edition of Remedy Roundtable, titled: Navigating the world of Sophistry.

Released on Wednesday, August 06, 2014, and was recorded on Monday, August 04, 2014.

In this series we’ll be have an international team with the Joe Atwill – the author of Caesear’s Messiah, who’s been on many times before; Bill Joslin from Canada – whom we introduced a few weeks ago with our video Meditation: Deconstructing Nonsense; and also Ryan Gilmore – host of Inside Out Asylum, in the UK. Both Joe and I are in Southern California.

Joe Atwill’s websites:
www.caesarsmessiahdoc.com
http://caesarsmessiah.com/
http://caesarsmessiah.com/blog/

Ryan Gilmore’s website:
http://insideoutasylum.com/

Trivium Education
:
www.triviumeducation.com


Send Bitcoin donations for this episode to
:
12EQTDMzU5mxtEd8ZfyrHrxABZi3jtaCCo

Please make other forms of donations here:
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/donate/

Donations. This episode is brought to you by:

Fouzi
Dylan
William
M&A

BTC:
1GmTf7

  20 comments for “Remedy Roundtable 01- with Joe Atwill, Bill Joslin, Ryan Gilmore and Jan Irvin – “Navigating the world of Sophistry” – #205

  1. Arneu X
    August 7, 2014 at 1:10 am

    Great show. Enjoy listening to all you guys speak. Look forward to the next one!

  2. el
    August 7, 2014 at 11:39 am

    i loved it.

    if u speak truth, have a foot in the sturrip.

    • forky
      August 7, 2014 at 2:40 pm

      Haha! Nice to hear from you El :)

      It was great. I sent this one to a few friends/relatives who think I’m a nut haha…

      Kiss ya,

      Forky

  3. Hank Chinaski
    August 7, 2014 at 9:40 pm

    First time commenter, great show. Intrigued by (and grateful for) your research, Jan.

    I think you referenced a document (?) which supports the notion that Alan Watts was Huxley’s very first recruit into the MK Ultra program, I wonder if you have link to this? Also I’d be interested to see the extent of the evidence connecting Esalen. And have you found anything on Joseph Campbell, or have any thoughts on his possible involvement?

    • August 8, 2014 at 10:31 am

      The letter I read is from “Letters of Aldous Huxley” a book, the letter is dated Oct. 1952.

      Please see the brain database. They were all Esalen, including Campbell. I haven’t flushed Campbell out entirely, but he sure fits the agenda.

      • Craig Bickford
        August 17, 2014 at 3:21 pm

        Speaking of your Wasson/MK-ULTRA brain database, I have tried twice in the recent past to get your database to load into my trial version of The Brain software. It can’t seem to load it. I had this problem when I had it installed on an older build of my PC last year before it died, and I was having trouble at that time as well but I think that could have been an issue with the software or my OS (their tech support hasn’t too helpful incidentally, which kind of pissed me off, I guess I need to buy the full version to get real support, LOL).

        I’ll fire off an email to their support people again if I can’t get it too function, or possibly I could send you an email if you have had any experience with this particular error.

  4. Marc Jantzen
    August 8, 2014 at 1:03 am

    Every time I try to share this on facebook the share button disappears when I’m hovering over it so I can not click it. Bugger! Any way insightful round table, great work Jan.

  5. Darren
    August 15, 2014 at 6:16 pm

    Jan;

    I could have sworn you mention James Lovelock but I’ve scanned it twice and can’t seem to find the reference.
    Would you please point me to the location (time) in the podcast when you mention him and/or quote what what said.
    Thank you.
    I appreciate the help.
    Darren

    • August 15, 2014 at 6:17 pm

      Hmmm, I don’t recall either. But he’s up in the brain database.

  6. Eddie Duke
    August 16, 2014 at 12:58 pm

    Hi Jan,
    I could not find the comments on the Rogan podcast episode 528 where he mentions you or your work. Do you know what time frame it took place?

    • August 16, 2014 at 1:01 pm

      Thanks, Eddie. Here’s the link with a time stamp right to it.
      http://youtu.be/YHpbXtDtcoY?t=1h54m14s

    • Craig Bickford
      August 17, 2014 at 3:38 pm

      Jan messaged me the other day to tell me I should stop being such an internet stalker on his facebook posts and instead post my comments to his show pages. OK he didn’t actually call me a troll, that is a bad joke. Unfortunately I have been studying informal fallacies for a little while, so It’s getting harder to stay in those old habits of fallacious thinking when I am learning to spot it all around me 24/7.

      Besides a couple obvious fallacies that I noticed in Joe’s segment that Jan provided the link for, which Jan and others have pointed out in the show and in comments sections, I found this other glaring error. Now I know this is related to the axium of cause and effect, but what I’m not so certain of is whether this is in fact an informal fallacy unto itself. What I describe in my copied comments below I believe is special pleading. Please anyone feel free to correct me or add to this comment. Only by flexing our mental muscles can we become stronger and more capable of defending ourselves mentally.

      “I just realized what Rogan is doing in this interview about a few minutes into it (the edited segment you provided), he’s totally denying cause-and-effect. The section where he says that sometimes things just happen. Nothing just happens, every effect or observed phenomenon has a cause and by saying that he’s essentially denying it without specifically making a verbal denial. So sometimes things just happen except for when we are listening to him talk about conspiracies he agrees with like the hijacking of those planes on 9-11-2001, then that’s cause-and-effect.”

      • Craig Bickford
        August 19, 2014 at 3:43 pm

        When we continue to listen to Joe’s semi-rant on ‘some podcaster he knows’ (paraphrasing here) who is apparently paranoid, he invokes Operation Northwood. I am assuming he knows that this is real from the FOIA documents that were released that revealed the facts about this operation to the public. So Joe admits that documents from the government can show us what said government was up to and was planning, and that they sometimes reveal that unethical or immoral activities were or potentially are being planned and possibly executed (at least in the operational, logistical and funding stages). Joe however cannot fathom or accept (at least publicly on his podcast) how someone who has well researched information on a government conspiracy, with documentation that shows that these activities are being planned and executed (Huxley, Wasson, Bateson, the Fabians, MK_ULTRA et al.) and even has eyewitnesses who worked in high security clearance positions (Gen. Albert Stubblebine) who can confirm these statements and observations, cannot be paranoid and or suffers from some autism spectrum disorder as part of a gag reel ad hominem to discredit. This seems to be special pleading again, although in my reading of this fallacy it is usually cited in examples as having a BS reasoning attached to it, but since no one is calling Joe (not even his guest) on his error in thinking here, I am assuming it is just unstated for the purposes of my argument and it is still a invalid tactic in arranging premises for a conclusion.

        • Craig Bickford
          August 19, 2014 at 3:45 pm

          Or more accurately it would be the construction of premises instead or the arranging of them.

        • Craig Bickford
          August 19, 2014 at 4:08 pm

          I’m posting this to get some feedback. Though I characterized my response and criticism to Joe Lewis IV comment as an Op-Ed, I was actually hoping this will get him or others thinking and get some idea rolling about how to deal with trolls, disinfo guys and or psychopaths beyond the normal sticking to the facts debate tactic (which appears to be a very, very good tactic, don’t’ get me wrong), or even just calling them on their BS directly and labelling them. Hopefully someone has some thoughts about this and would like to respond on here.

          Joe Lewis IV

          Something I noticed about Rogan, he sensationalizes everything. He will act like he thinks a fighter is more threatening or in a more dire situation than it really is. You can’t blame him, he is getting paid for it. So it is natural for him to compromise his viewpoint for his goal. And yeah, his goal is just shortsighted. Too bad, because he is interesting sometimes. People who let business/money be their god, won’t get as far as those of us who are putting wisdom first.

          Craig Bickford

          (Semi-Opinion Editorial warning…This is a counterpoint to Joe Lewis IV comment, not meant as an attack but as a critique) I think it’s more than money Joe Lewis IV. He is also picking sides on an ideological battlefield which is farcical, siding with his drug hipster friends and this obsessive entheogenic cultural/doctrinaire mind set, over the objections of those who are merely trying to observe reality, find truth and expose deception. I tarted that statement up a little bit, but I don’t think it too far removed from what is happening with this guy and this (one of many) controlled opposition clique. They want the facade of intellectualism but promote subjective experience disguised as research, where they set the bounds for observed facts and reality and the rest of their New Age followers get in line for their dose of confusion (double-bind a go go). If this wasn’t the case they would at least give some time to their detractors and vet the information in a reasonable and rational manner, which Joe and that group he is covertly speaking for in this segment, makes no attempt to do. They instead offer conciliatory gestures in the form of podcasts, interviews and facebook articles (Rogan, Hatsis, Max Freakout, Pinchbeck late 2013, etc.) where they illicit near endless fallacies (Joe’s use of ad hominem, straw man, special pleading etc.) as evidence of his and other researcher’s shortcomings, and attacks from their followers in exchange for the appearance of being considerate, fair, scholarly or just consumed by fake outrage. The other side of this is the gang stalking and psychopathic troll hordes (Max Freakout) who recycle endlessly empty personalities on the internet to construct elaborate slander and libel strategies in an attempt to gas light everyone into fearful acceptance of their position. I’ve known some people who used to follow the Dead, and I know how vicious some of those people (I;m trying to avoid a hasty generalization here) can be if you don’t fit into their pre-designed mold or peer pressure fabricated personas. It borders on proto-psychopathy (Hatsis?) in my unprofessional and untrained opinion, and at the very least presents as personality disorder and or narcissism (Max Freakout). These are the kind of pathological people you want to have on your side if you are trying to convince people that up is down, and down is up. While I agree with the conclusions Jan and others have made in the past that some of the debating will eventually yield fruit in the form of converts who have decided to at least read the research and citations and make up their own minds, there is still an urgent need I think to be on our guard and call out the trolls, agents and or psychopaths when they show their true colors. I don’t mean engaging in counter slander, or stepping up the verbal conflicts with well designed and inappropriately unqualified diagnoses (like I am guilty of just doing), but at the very least to call them on their bull shit and stop acting like these guys are, for the most part, useful idiots or are in it for the money and fame only. They are all grown ups and know exactly what they are doing. I’m not sure coddling them will help them or us when it comes to understanding and knowing the world around us, it only serves to further confuse and disillusion those who are on the fence. What that alternative is, I don’t know yet.

          • Stephen
            August 19, 2014 at 7:42 pm

            Hi Craig, I wanted to respond to your comment because I agree with you that this is an area which needs to be discussed, but is not often. Regarding the likes of JR, I’ll mention when I first saw Jan and he were “friends” and Jan did a podcast with him as a guest, I was a bit surprised. I knew JR from TV shows and UFC, and his “comedy” act. I did not however have any idea that he spoke about entheogen, McKenna, Iso chamber, Altered states kind of stuff. I figured that this was just too weird and JR had to be faking it, or something. He could not be into this stuff (ie: Jan’s work on MK ULTRA) and be on TV at the same time. It was just not possible for me to believe otherwise. Then after a while JR had Jan on his podcast, and for me the obvious was proven fact after listening to that painful interview/attack. It was all a set up to discredit and ridicule.

            I’ve observed later that JR was acquainted with Alex Jones on some youtube clips. Jones consorts with some other comedians, like Doug Stanhope. I don’t trust the likes of Jones at all. I’m going off on tangents, but my point is I never trusted JR. He’s an actor, he played the part of open minded truth seeker. Until it was time to stick to his script he will be your friend, anyone’s friend. Maybe he is smart and maybe he is stupid. My guess would be stupid. You said: “They are all grown ups and know exactly what they are doing.” But I don’t know if that is true. I do know that most of the people I encounter have no interest in facts. They have some interest in some facts, but other ones, not so interesting to them. Facts in general are a mixed bag for them. Some they will accept, some they will ignore and others they will violently rebuke. People’s lives are a huge distraction for most. They cherry pick facts and other stuff to build up their reality and they will fight you about it, if you push to far in another direction.

            My guess would be that people like JR argue the way they do not because they are sophists, or sophisticated at all, but because it works for them just fine. JR is not trying to convince the GM audience of anything, he’s trying to keep his audience, and they are not very sophisticated, for the most part. All those guys, unlike Jan, who built up careers and persona’s based on this fallacious, psyop, couter-culture, coming from Huxley, McKenna, etc. who will never admit that they were wrong about it, either really believe what they are spouting, don’t care but want the cash and celeb status, enjoy rubbing elbows (cyber elbows) with JR and his ilk, or maybe they are in on some plan or other, or maybe even THE plan. But it’s really hard to tell which it is in each case.

            I think the best way to proceed is to take the high ground. Not trying to figure out what someone is hiding, or anything. Just treating them at face value. Even if they’ve lied to you, or been dishonest, or inexplicable with you, or someone you know, or whatever, give them the benefit of the doubt and let them hang, or vindicate themselves through their own actions. I don’t know how often I stick to this plan, but it’s what I think is the best course, when I’m thinking. It’s easy to get caught in the moment and react. I have more, much more, but I’ll stop now. Take it easy.

  7. john cokos
    August 17, 2014 at 11:50 am

    WHOA ! Did I just hear someone “Masonic”? If anything will get me to put down my beer and wipe off the BBQ it’s anything Masonic.
    I have a vast collection of masonic images and images that relate to the Masonic Corruption of Law Enforcement in particular. The police unions AND Fraternal Organization are a hot bed of Masonic Infiltration. A study in and of itself.
    A local Police Officer indenity who was sued in a Civil law suit was kept Secret for almost two years after he was spotted in a photo coming back from a Masonic Initiation and drunk as a skunk when he plowed into a civilian and almost killed him.
    Those Secret society boys sure take care of their own.

  8. Craig Bickford
    August 17, 2014 at 3:46 pm

    Also, I don’t think it needs to be said again, but I’ll say it anyway. Great job everyone involved with this episode including Jan for his continued excellence in research. I was just finishing up episode 2 of Remedy Roundtable, and somewhere in there I heard a reference to a future episode on Psychopathy. That is one I really would like to hear.

  9. john cokos
    August 18, 2014 at 10:30 am

    I’ll second that emotion….We meet psychopaths and interact with them every day on every level of government AND Law Enforcement. I never met or interacted with a Trans humanist, know a few cross dresser’s though. Whatever floats your boat.

Leave a Reply