August 9, 2012
Jan Irvin is an independent researcher, author and lecturer, speaking at both academic and public venues. He is the host of Gnostic Media and the curator of the official website for John Marco Allegro. Jan returns to discuss his latest research on Gordon Wasson, an influential New York banker and the godfather of the modern psychedelic movement. According to the historical record Wasson, an amateur mycologist, first ‘discovered’ ‘magic’ mushrooms. Irvin shares his evidence which points to the possibility of a secret history of the mushroom in the elite power structures of the west. Jan explains how the psychedelic/hippie movement was a psyop and can provide a window into how the elites run their mind control systems. He’ll talk about how the mushroom and other mind altering sacraments can be used to control the illumination of the masses. Jan questions the foundations of psychedelic history, the new age movement and UFOs.
Relevant links
www.gnosticmedia.com
Jan's Online Brain database:
Investigating Wasson Brain - MK-ULTRA and the launching the psychedelic and environmental movements
Download the Brain software:
www.thebrain.com
Download Jan's entire Brain database file:
https://www.gnosticmedia.com/Wasson/InvestigatingWassonBrain-MK-ULTRA.brainzip (170mb)
Note: For use in the software version only (this version is the best, clearest representation of the database and the easiest to follow and research). This version must be IMPORTED into the Brain software after installation.
Related programs
Jan Irvin - Trivium Education
Jan Irvin - The Holy Mushroom
http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2012/08/RIR-120809.php
“The role of drugs in the exercise of political control is also coming under increasing discussion. Control can be through prohibition or supply. The total or even partial prohibition of drugs gives the government considerable leverage for other types of control. An example would be the selective application of drug laws… against selected components of the population such as members of certain minority groups or political organizations”
~ Ronald K. Siegel; Louis Jolyon West (1975). Hallucinations: Behavior, Experience, and Theory. ISBN 978-1-135-16726-4.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:51:11 — 51.0MB) | Embed
Fascinating information and impressive research. However, can psychedelic substances really be the “how” by which “the elites run their mind control systems”? If mushroom-taking was advocated in that era, one would think it would be accelerated today given the (inverse) totalitarian state of affairs. Perhaps clinical trials of LSD presently underway, a hiatus of some 40 years, indicate that the elite is again turning to the use of psychedelic substances for mind-controlling the masses, but I doubt it. Television would surely have fully fulfilled that role. There is, nevertheless, a resurgence in interest in mind-altering substances with a present planetary formation similar to the ’60s and a correlation thereto, I am happy to report. The revelations provided in this interview of psychedelia’s history may not on the other hand be so pleasing to those whose income relies on raising Terrence McKenna, for one, to apostolic status.
“Perhaps clinical trials of LSD presently underway, a hiatus of some 40 years, indicate that the elite is again turning to the use of psychedelic substances for mind-controlling the masses, but I doubt it.”
What makes you doubt it? I mean, what do you base your decision on? Only TV? Do all people watch TV? How many psychedelically oriented people say to turn off their TV? Is TV the only way to do things? Or are their others, maybe many others?
I don’t think that psychedelics are the only “how” by which the elites run mind control systems, I think it’s one way. The Trivium and fallacies, for instance, is also used, as is TV – and the fallacies are used via TV and any other MSM outlet. Sports, patriotism, radio, controlled opposition, voting, politics, religion, etc, are just some of the other ways (See my interviews with Larken Rose.) Just because they have one, doesn’t negate the other. It’s not an either / or issue. It’s an also / and. Check out the brain database linked above.
“indicate that the elite is again turning to the use of psychedelic substances for mind-controlling the masses”
And what makes you think they ever stopped using them? These are the very issues that I’m setting forth. They never stopped using them for mind control:
“The role of drugs in the exercise of political control is also coming under increasing discussion. Control can be through prohibition or supply. The total or even partial prohibition of drugs gives the government considerable leverage for other types of control. An example would be the selective application of drug laws… against selected components of the population such as members of certain minority groups or political organizations”
~ Ronald K. Siegel; Louis Jolyon West (1975). Hallucinations: Behavior, Experience, and Theory. ISBN 978-1-135-16726-4.
These guys were apart of MK-ULTRA. They’re in the Brain too.
I couldn’t agree with you more about McKenna, et all.
Hi Patricia. How about dividing your writing into a few paragraphs? I’m not talking about meaning, but paragraphing.
It would be much easier for people to read because physically it is actually difficult for me to distinguish one line from the following one.
It might mean a lot more people will actually read it because it looks readable.
Just a thought!
Jason
HI just wanted to add a little to the point above about TV forfilling the role of mind control. Its seem as human when ever we want to tackle a subject we want open simple answer ‘Mind control’ also has an implication you are beeing brain washed in one hit as it were. Sure drugs can be used to alter ones’ state of beeing and maybe be to change perseptions but what this is realiy about is the limiting of acceptable thought.
Any way the real point is TV / media and KURT LEWIN. Lewin was a memeber of the Tavistock Institute he ‘studied’ the practice of gatekeeping this is how the media message is control from its initail life in the hand s of the journalist and its reconceptualization through gatekeeps such as editors sub editors headline writers etc. This is how the news media message is curtailed and slanted you only have to read Walter Lippmans Public opinion and Noam Chomsky Manufacturing Consent to gain a historical overview of how this has been applied since the JP MORGAN cartel bough and paid for the press in 1920’s USA (remember W.Lippman was also a founder memener of the CFR wich i beleive has ties to the Tavistock Insistute london) which was documented buy Oscar Calloway in the annuals of congress.
This was also tied up with Action Reasearch the socially scientific method of revamping a office enviroment to produce the new desired mindset and thus results the institute favours which has it heart in Hegel’s dialetic and has gone on to be morphed into change management and conflict management (the later: a heavily use tactic of the Tri-lateral Commision)
Thus the media certainly plays a role but it can only reflect what concensus has become: a picture of the acceptable extremes of debate. It’s how we arrive there thought? Surley re-focusing drugs as a source of purley recreation means and denying it spiritual implications is just another form of the dumbing down that suplants people inclinations toward inteligent critical thought?
Walter Lippman also worked directly with Wasson at the Century and CFR.
Didn’t the “experiment” backfire. How many of those LSD takers are under “control.” Doesn”t the “door of perception” lead you out of the box?
Susan, you’re starting with a bunch of false preconceived conclusions and then asking questions. Start the other way around. Research goes before conclusions.
What makes you think it backfired? I discussed this during the interview. Why are you asking Patricia these questions? You did hear the interview, above, before asking your questions, right?
When you say how many of these LSD takers are under control, what do you mean by control? Does someone have to take LSD to fall under the control of the New Age, 2012, positive thinking movement as was discussed in the interview?
“Doesn’t the doors of perception…?”
Well, if we understand that Julian and Aldous Huxley, sons of Thomas Huxley – the eugenicist and co-worker of Charles Darwin – Julian ran most of the eugenics programs in Europe, and Aldous in the US, and when you understand both were humanists/transhumanists (give yourself to the state for the higher purpose), and their “world citizen”, “new world order”, “4th world battle for the collective mind”, the Agenda 21 and UNCED, UNESCO, not to mention the World Wild Life Fund programs, that were also discussed, and you don’t ignore what was written in Brave New World, then you can see clearly that what Aldous presented in his books was their method of selling this agenda – this new age stuff, people leaping to conclusions before they’ve done their research, or apparently heard the interview, etc. This is how these operations run. May I suggest starting with John Taylor Gatto’s Ultimate History Lesson and start from there so that you have a foundation and background to build understanding from? So that you’re not committing non-sequiter fallacies?
Aldous Huxley
http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-5201
Julian Huxley
http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-676
Charles Darwin / Thomas Huxley
http://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9-D742DA541AAA#-417
Jan — awesome research! Wow — too bad Chris Knowles dismissed this but then I got banned from his blog for critiquing him. haha. Actually I did a similar expose based on following up on my masters thesis — the Actual Matrix Plan — http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_matrix43.htm which connects similar ties – H.G. Wells, Puharich, the New Age founders, etc.
Also you may want to say “Zionist New World Order” instead of Jewish NWO — although I suppose you intentionally said Jewish to be provocative. So fire away on why you said Jewish and not Zionist! haha. My own take is to go deeper on this stuff — I have my free download book with 725 scholarly footnotes – The Alchemy of Rainbow Heart Music: How Paranormal Sonofusion Subverts the Matrix Conspiracy. · http://www.filejumbo.com/Download/E87E698A59E79E6F So I take this stuff all the way back to 90% of human history, the original Bushmen culture which had no warfare and only used psychedelics to help the females enter trance while the males did a month fasting of trance dancing yoga training.
Anyway I’m glad you mentioned Daniel Pinchbeck — I passed on your comment on his website as I’ve been posting critiques of their research — all the way back when Daniel posted on his BOTH forum in 2006. haha. For example he promotes Jose Arguelles big time and I’ve exposed Arguelles’ ties to the Actual Matrix Plan (again Puharich, etc.).
So yeah I did do the plant-based DMT as a 5 hour full lotus trip but in many ways it wasn’t nearly as powerful as the qigong training I did from a dude who can see inside other people’s bodies — long distance — holographically — and he’s been confirmed by “randomized controlled” research at the Mayo Clinic. I’m referring to Chunyi Lin, who did a month fasting in full lotus taking no sleep, no water and no food the whole time. http://springforestqigong.com I simply mention this to point out there is still a lot out there in non-western information beyond just the psychedelic stuff but it is also connected in many ways.
So anyway I appreciate your use of Anthony Sutton also — Trineday of Kris Millegan had tentatively planned to publish my research but my book was too wild — although Trineday has republished Sutton. Sutton’s take on Hegelianism is something I build on in my book — but your expose on Wasson’s cover-up of the Carbine scandal is excellent evidence.
I used to be an activist getting policy changes against investment in slave labor – – getting $1.5 million of the U of Minnesota divested from Total Oil using slave labor in Burma. Then I organized a coalition to support boycotts against sweatshops used to make sports clothing for the University — so that Nike, etc. were forced to pay better conditions. Anyway so I got “public record” results but I also had to confront the corruption first hand and I did that all as volunteer work. On the environmental movement as being corrupt — as you mention about global warming – -I personally confronted Al Gore when he was Vice President — for half an hour with a dozen of his secret service and I said “everyone knows the CIA is complicit in the drug trade.” I was face to face with him and after that comment things got real uncomfortable for him and his secret service. I got pulled over by a cop on the way home and put on some list — the cop just took my drivers license and thanked me but never said why he pulled me over. haha. http://www.breakingopenthehead.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3940 That’s the details there.
Drew Hempel ~
I checked out the links you provided in your reply. Really interesting and groundbreaking information if their is truly any validity to it.
So, did you come about these connections via the Trivium and Quadrivium methods?
Joseph — glad you’re interested. Actually I rarely say what my masters degree was in because of the fascist culture becoming mainstream but thanks to Jan’s interview on Redice I can now proudly exclaim I have a masters degree in Liberal Studies!!! haha. Well it’s self-designed but the focus for me basically was to take my dad’s Platonic elitist trajectory — he went to NYU Law and had law colleagues who were students at University of Chicago of Leo Strauss — anyway so at first I considered St. John’s “Great Books” progam — you learn classical Greek and study all the Western classics directly – – Euclid, etc. But then I thought I want to focus on “solving problems” in current terms so I went to Hampshire College which is self-designed, no grades, tutorial style like at Oxford with Ivy League ties. I was doing music but also neoformalist analysis so I studied Gregory Bateson’s mind-bending book “Mind and Nature” over and over along with the Tao Te Ching and avant-garde culture. I could have graduated in just over 2 years so I transferred to UW-Madison to find a radical populist culture, protesting against U.S. empire and moving into a radical cooperative house of 35 people deeply steeped in the counterculture.
O.K. so the FBI was on to us we discovered from a FOIA request and I carried my activism onto the Twin Cities Minnesota, eventually going to graduate school there. So I completely agree with Jan and really appreciate Jan emphasizing that the elite use Platonic Hegelian tactics of subversive mind control logic. My dad would give me books to read and so they were far right corporate think tank propaganda. I would read them and write detailed critiques. I then gave him Noam Chomsky books to read but those in power have no need to intellectually engage with ideas that challenge the elite. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHj735t_knk Wow John Pilger’s documentary the War on Democracy is an amazining expose — he interviews a top CIA director who doesn’t hide his support of genocidal U.S. policies.
O.K. so basically I was able to get the inside perspective on the elite a bit — for example my dad was buddies with a Federal District Judge and so we went out to dinner the night before he wrote a closed door administrative ruling against the family farm laws of the Midwest. So the thing is the judge already had his mind made up before the trial based on his right-wing corporate fascist think tank views — like the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, etc. O.K. so the law was to support Cargill’s control — Cargill being the secret largest corporation in the world — I wrote this expose here when I was a staff writer for the U of MN Daily newspaper — http://www.aznlover.com/community/archive/index.php/t-63190.html
Anyway so basically I went so far to the left — hanging out with and getting arrested with activists who were in a communist cult that was raided by the FBI recently — I confronted them about their cult but also I wanted to understand where they were coming from. So then I got into conspiratorial stuff since I was working with an office that worked closely with Senator Paul Wellstone when he was disappeared. I think that was because he confronted the CIA about Colombia. Anyway then I discovered a 9/11 professor James Fetzer having his several mind semiotic books published by the far-right Moonies and I even discovered the Moonies then moved their publishing office to where Fetzer was professor in Minnesota — sharing the Moonie publishing Paragon House office is the Moonie front for a professor association. Fetzer also organized a JFK assassination conference but he was disowned as disingenious by many of the professors attending — and his liberal studies program director colleague was the direct protege of Werner von Braun, implicated in the assassination. Peter Dale Scott told me to be careful — but I did get threatened and I was fired from my newspaper staff op-ed job (even though everything I wrote was fact-checked before it was published).
Here’s my masters thesis published http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/themagazine/vol12/articles/epi-justice1.shtml I basically went into retirement after my activism that required nine meetings with the lawyer running the University – the presidents come and go — but the one president who went on to run U of California — he personally emailed me patronizingly asking me to not go on unlimited hunger strike as I had “done enough” already. haha.
Joseph — glad you’re interested. Actually I rarely say what my masters degree was in because of the fascist culture becoming mainstream but thanks to Jan’s interview on Redice I can now proudly exclaim I have a masters degree in Liberal Studies!!! haha. Well it’s self-designed but the focus for me basically was to take my dad’s Platonic elitist trajectory — he went to NYU Law and had law colleagues who were students at University of Chicago of Leo Strauss — anyway so at first I considered St. John’s “Great Books” progam — you learn classical Greek and study all the Western classics directly – – Euclid, etc.
But then I thought I want to focus on “solving problems” in current terms so I went to Hampshire College which is self-designed, no grades, tutorial style like at Oxford with Ivy League ties. I was doing music but also neoformalist analysis so I studied Gregory Bateson’s mind-bending book “Mind and Nature” over and over along with the Tao Te Ching and avant-garde culture. I could have graduated in just over 2 years so I transferred to UW-Madison to find a radical populist culture, protesting against U.S. empire and moving into a radical cooperative house of 35 people deeply steeped in the counterculture.
O.K. so the FBI was on to us we discovered from a FOIA request and I carried my activism onto the Twin Cities Minnesota, eventually going to graduate school there. So I completely agree with Jan and really appreciate Jan emphasizing that the elite use Platonic Hegelian tactics of subversive mind control logic. My dad would give me books to read and so they were far right corporate think tank propaganda. I would read them and write detailed critiques. I then gave him Noam Chomsky books to read but those in power have no need to intellectually engage with ideas that challenge the elite. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHj735t_knk Wow John Pilger’s documentary the War on Democracy is an amazining expose — he interviews a top CIA director who doesn’t hide his support of genocidal U.S. policies.
O.K. so basically I was able to get the inside perspective on the elite a bit — for example my dad was buddies with a Federal District Judge and so we went out to dinner the night before he wrote a closed door administrative ruling against the family farm laws of the Midwest. So the thing is the judge already had his mind made up before the trial based on his right-wing corporate fascist think tank views — like the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, etc. O.K. so the law was to support Cargill’s control — Cargill being the secret largest corporation in the world — I wrote this expose here when I was a staff writer for the U of MN Daily newspaper — http://www.aznlover.com/community/archive/index.php/t-63190.html
Anyway so basically I went so far to the left — hanging out with and getting arrested with activists who were in a communist cult that was raided by the FBI recently — I confronted them about their cult but also I wanted to understand where they were coming from. So then I got into conspiratorial stuff since I was working with an office that worked closely with Senator Paul Wellstone when he was disappeared. I think that was because he confronted the CIA about Colombia. Anyway then I discovered a 9/11 professor James Fetzer having his several mind semiotic books published by the far-right Moonies and I even discovered the Moonies then moved their publishing office to where Fetzer was professor in Minnesota — sharing the Moonie publishing Paragon House office is the Moonie front for a professor association. Fetzer also organized a JFK assassination conference but he was disowned as disingenious by many of the professors attending — and his liberal studies program director colleague was the direct protege of Werner von Braun, implicated in the assassination. Peter Dale Scott told me to be careful — but I did get threatened and I was fired from my newspaper staff op-ed job (even though everything I wrote was fact-checked before it was published).
Here’s my masters thesis published http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/themagazine/vol12/articles/epi-justice1.shtml I basically went into retirement after my activism that required nine meetings with the lawyer running the University – the presidents come and go — but the one president who went on to run U of California — he personally emailed me patronizingly asking me to not go on unlimited hunger strike as I had “done enough” already. haha.
Drew, please put your posts into one and hit enter. This am you posted all of your statements into one, and by individual paragraph – like 6 or 7 total. All of your individual posts were deleted. Please just type the whole thing up at once so that you’re not hitting enter 5 times for each post.
Thanks.
Sorry about using shorter posts. I’ll now just post in one response so my one long response doesn’t get delayed to later on, thereby duplicating my posts.
Thanks, Drew, however, you may want to hear my interviews with Gilad Atzmon on that one issue. Thanks for the links.
I followed a couple of Drew Hempel’s links and I have to say, there is way too little critical thinking in what he writes. More than once he states as facts things that are mere claims, with a paucity of objective evidence. I mean, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so if you’re going to claim some amazing shit that turns science on its head then is reasonable to expect more than quote the claimant’s testimony of his feats.
An example:
“Also John Worrell Keely apparently developed higher dimensional harmonic resonance technology based on the 3:4:5 triangle.”
I looked up John Worrell Keely and found this Wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ernst_Worrell_Keely It is classic description of a conman, and reminds me strongly of some present-day “free energy” promoters. But, unlike the contemporary dupes, researchers of today have the benefit of seeing the whole story laid out from beginning to end (just read the link). Therefore, someone citing John Worrell Keely’s carnival act as evidence of some supposed super science is being careless in his research.
robert42:
Can you please cite where Drew makes the statement you quoted? I need to see the context in which this is stated.
Of course, John Worrell Keely APPARENTLY developed this “free energy” based on the harmonic resonance. On that quote alone it’s hard to say he bases this claim on fact. I need to see more data.
Thanks.
Joseph I wonder why Robert doesn’t just ask me directly instead of referring to me in the third person. haha. Is he scared to find out something that…what did he say: “turns science on its head.” O.K. Robert — try this out: randomized controlled research by one of the top medical research hospitals has proven external energy paranormal healing! Conclusions: “Subjects with chronic pain who received external qigong experienced reduction in pain intensity following each qigong treatment. This is especially impressive given the long duration of pain (>5 years) in the most of the participants,” writes lead author Ann Vincent, MD, MBBS, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. http://www.springforestqigong.com/index.php/sfq-for-health-professionals/medical-studies
Now Robert I know that words will not convince you. You would have to get an energy transmission yourself to actually experience what it is like. Real energy masters are truly rare – Chunyi Lin did a month in full lotus yoga position taking no food, water and sleep the whole time. So that type of training is currently unknown in the West. To limit yourself to “objective evidence” is to not truly understand the power of logical inference in nonwestern harmonics.
As for Keely being a “fraud” — the best analysis on Keely is Theo Paijman’s 1998 book “Free Energy Pioneer” — here’s the googlebook search results for “fraud” in Paijman’s book http://books.google.com/books?id=O3wZ4mbPb-AC&q=fraud#v=snippet&q=fraud&f=false
So the real mysterious that Paijman points out is that Astor — of the John Jacob Astor Skull and Bones family — funded Keely at astronomical levels in those times although Keely is noted to have lived a modest life, investing the money in his personally crafted machines. Paijman then argues it possibly that Astor transferred Keely’s technology to a secret society level when Astor had developed some futuristic watercraft cum aeroplane in 1910. Astor also wrote coded scifi space travel novels.
Please don’t misunderstand me — my masters thesis was in 2000 and I discovered the Actual Matrix Plan in 2001. As I kept researching I soon discovered an error in my masters thesis that had radical implications — specifically that the logistic equations of chaos science purported to produce the tai chi symbol as I referenced, in fact do not. This was made apparent to me after Charles Madden, a physicist who publishes music books, contacted me wanted to publish my masters thesis as a book that he would promote. Only he didn’t understand what I wrote about the void as not being empty as the source of sound being non-material and as I questioned him further he admitted actually it was his wife who wanted him to publish my book. So then I read Charles Madden’s book on music and fractals and Madden points out how the Tai Chi symbol is actually not a fractal as a logistic equation because the Tai Chi symbol is not symmetric.
So that key point seems harmless enough but in fact Western math is based on symmetry as Ian Stewart’s book “Why Beauty is Truth: A History of Symmetry” details — Stewart is a quantum chaos math professor I’ve corresponded with. So that led to several more books investigating the science of the time-frequency uncertainty principle as the foundation of quantum physics which is actually what I was referring to regarding the source of sound as being non-material.
O.K. in other words logical inference does not mean “objective evidence” because as Bernard d’Espagnat points out we can only logically infer that consciousness is real from the quantum time-frequency uncertainty principle. Quantum mechanics itself relies on converting the asymmetric or non-commutative math back to the classical commutative math via the Poisson Bracket. I have a very long recent thread on abovetopsecret, “The Devil’s Chord,” http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread807082/pg1 wherein I hash it out with several people vehemently debating me full on – and it was great for me to clarify my research. That’s why I’ve relied on the free uncensored debate on the internet despite being banned from several forums/websites due to the radical nature of my research.
Joseph I wonder why Robert doesn’t just ask me directly instead of referring to me in the third person. haha. Is he scared to find out something that…what did he say: “turns science on its head.” O.K. Robert — try this out: randomized controlled research by one of the top medical research hospitals has proven external energy paranormal healing! Conclusions: “Subjects with chronic pain who received external qigong experienced reduction in pain intensity following each qigong treatment. This is especially impressive given the long duration of pain (>5 years) in the most of the participants,” writes lead author Ann Vincent, MD, MBBS, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. http://www.springforestqigong.com/index.php/sfq-for-health-professionals/medical-studies
Now Robert I know that words will not convince you. You would have to get an energy transmission yourself to actually experience what it is like. Real energy masters are truly rare – Chunyi Lin did a month in full lotus yoga position taking no food, water and sleep the whole time. So that type of training is currently unknown in the West. To limit yourself to “objective evidence” is to not truly understand the power of logical inference in nonwestern harmonics.
As for Keely being a “fraud” — the best analysis on Keely is Theo Paijman’s 1998 book “Free Energy Pioneer” — here’s the googlebook search results for “fraud” in Paijman’s book http://books.google.com/books?id=O3wZ4mbPb-AC&q=fraud#v=snippet&q=fraud&f=false
So the real mysterious that Paijman points out is that Astor — of the John Jacob Astor Skull and Bones family — funded Keely at astronomical levels in those times although Keely is noted to have lived a modest life, investing the money in his personally crafted machines. Paijman then argues it possibly that Astor transferred Keely’s technology to a secret society level when Astor had developed some futuristic watercraft cum aeroplane in 1910. Astor also wrote coded scifi space travel novels.
Please don’t misunderstand me — my masters thesis was in 2000 and I discovered the Actual Matrix Plan in 2001. As I kept researching I soon discovered an error in my masters thesis that had radical implications — specifically that the logistic equations of chaos science purported to produce the tai chi symbol as I referenced, in fact do not. This was made apparent to me after Charles Madden, a physicist who publishes music books, contacted me wanted to publish my masters thesis as a book that he would promote. Only he didn’t understand what I wrote about the void as not being empty as the source of sound being non-material and as I questioned him further he admitted actually it was his wife who wanted him to publish my book. So then I read Charles Madden’s book on music and fractals and Madden points out how the Tai Chi symbol is actually not a fractal as a logistic equation because the Tai Chi symbol is not symmetric.
So that key point seems harmless enough but in fact Western math is based on symmetry as Ian Stewart’s book “Why Beauty is Truth: A History of Symmetry” details — Stewart is a quantum chaos math professor I’ve corresponded with. So that led to several more books investigating the science of the time-frequency uncertainty principle as the foundation of quantum physics which is actually what I was referring to regarding the source of sound as being non-material.
O.K. in other words logical inference does not mean “objective evidence” because as Bernard d’Espagnat points out we can only logically infer that consciousness is real from the quantum time-frequency uncertainty principle. Quantum mechanics itself relies on converting the asymmetric or non-commutative math back to the classical commutative math via the Poisson Bracket. I have a very long recent thread on abovetopsecret, “The Devil’s Chord,” http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread807082/pg1 wherein I hash it out with several people vehemently debating me full on – and it was great for me to clarify my research. That’s why I’ve relied on the free uncensored debate on the internet despite being banned from several forums/websites due to the radical nature of my research.
Hi Jan,
Currently listening to your Red Ice Interview.
how do you speculate that the uncontroled usage of psychadelics is being used to manipulate the masses? I understand that the “New Age” movement can get out there, but I guess it doesn’t make entire sense how the elite could be controlling every aspect of what people think and feel and do.
One of the issues I have with is the whole “poisoned world view”. I feel more helpless and cynical than I have in the past. While some may say that is an awakeneing, and certainly I want the truth, I also want to believe there is hope that we can change things for the better.
I think some of the more nefarious mind control has been obviously TV and Movies. Yet, as I have seen with Movies, there are some provocative movies that I feel really empowered by. Yet folks like Alex Jones with the whole Avatar rant kind of annoyed me because he just sounded paranoid and I left feeling like we can overtake the elites. (and not because of some white male being adopted by the “primitive savages” will save us as many interpret that movie to mean).
I know that you are saying that the whole new age philosphy has been bunk. I think we hae to be very wary about delving too far in the other direction. I think that we have to believe that there are still positive messages and Positive “energy” out there that if we are truly becoming ‘awake” that we can change things, but it WILL require all our efforts to share what we know with everyone and teach them HOW to think.
I also got finished watching the Olympics and have been speculating a lot on the Aurora shooting. To me, that entire thing screams MKULTRA. What are your thoughts?
There is something just not right with Holmes and that, linked with the London Olympics and the strange symbolism during the ceremonies (including a wierd insert of the Old style batman and robin and the phoenix rising during the closing ceremony), it just seemed like one big mass ritual “mind control’ unsettling imagery.
Just strange stuff going on.
thanks
It seems you missed this quote at the top of the page:
“The role of drugs in the exercise of political control is also coming under increasing discussion. Control can be through prohibition or supply. The total or even partial prohibition of drugs gives the government considerable leverage for other types of control. An example would be the selective application of drug laws… against selected components of the population such as members of certain minority groups or political organizations”
~ Ronald K. Siegel; Louis Jolyon West (1975). Hallucinations: Behavior, Experience, and Theory. ISBN 978-1-135-16726-4.
I agree that I think the whole Govt doling out the medical pot and other psychedelics is a farce. I know everyone is on the bandwagon about medical marijuana instead of just flat out legalization. It is ridiculous.
I understand that many left wing groups have been infiltrated and co-opted by the elite to “control the opposition’. Its bad. Both sides are getting poked and bent out of shape and yes, not using critical thinking skills or the trivium.
I guess my “concern” is being so cynical and kind of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Your comments regarding how much of the Rock counter culture may have been a planned controlled opposition and while some of that may be true, I don’t believe that any of the counter culture was initiated as such. I think that the elites saw the potential of counter culture movements and definately tried to co-opt them. But insinuating that that somehow all the great Rock bands from Led Zepplin to whoever were plants because their daddies were in the high up elite classes. I did check out one link that I could find regarding that but Haven’t found much else (unless you have more evidence on your site somewhere?).
Granted, I think that the whole 60’s counter culture movment was a bust, we all know how that turned out. There is only a handful of burned out disaffected hippies but most just joined the ranks of the corporate class. Big disappointment. I think that yes, for the most part the ELITE have “won’… but I can’t imagine that the entire counter culture movement was orchestrated as a ruse to control the masses. I think if they did try and start something, they lost control fast and I remmeber that intereview you played that one time about Charles Manson and how that may have been created to destroy the movement as well.
I watched the Olympics opening ceremony and they paraded all the rock music of Britain out and there was a lot of speculation on the occult symbolic meaning of those songs that we used to love when we were kids (I still love them btw). People were commenting on the Faux Paul McCartney and how he was a plant.
anyway, again, I am not going to be tossing out my rock albums any time soon and I am still going to try and hold on against the “forces of evil” most definately..
Hi Caelidh, remember our many discussions about putting your grammar, who what where when, BEFORE your conclusions and beliefs?
Dave McGowan has done more than a dozen interviews on Meria Heller exposing the details of just this. Before you dismiss that the government did this, did you read his work first? There was 21 pages there of material. Unless I have more evidence? McGowan’s Heller interview series is more than 12 hours of material. You’ve got to be joking. Did you bother to read it all, or listen, and compare what I’ve found in the brain before your conclusion? Or are you a coincidence theorist – whom always puts your conclusions before your data gathering? I know it’s been dozens of times that we’ve had this same conversation. It wears me out.
I can prove the counter culture was initiated as such. I have documentation to show it. What evidence do you have that it wasn’t?
Charles Manson also came out of Laurel Canyon… fyi.
In 2004 I watched the Olympics in Vegas with my former co-author. We sat and laughed our asses off as we could see clearly so much of the occult symbolism. The Olympics are filled with that stuff.
I didn’t ask you to toss out any rock albums. I just asked you, again, to read and study before coming to conclusions.
“may have been a planned controlled opposition and while some of that may be true, I don’t believe that any of the counter culture was initiated as such. I think that the elites saw the potential of counter culture movements and definately tried to co-opt them.”
Co-opt. Please. It’s as if you studied NONE of the evidence or articles.
Again, please stop trying to constantly use beliefs in place of logic and research.
And if you’re saying “while some of it may be true” – I’d like you to point out, exactly, with citations, point by point, what isn’t – or don’t make unfounded “belief” based statements. This isn’t a religion class.
Interesting stuff but why don’t you post shorter comments?
Why does it have to be your life story?
Jason
Jan, if you do not support the use of psychedelics, why do you advertise Bouncing Bear Botanicals on your site?
I’m a bit confused, Derek. Where did I ever say, even once, that I was against the use of psychedelics? Do you have a quote or something?
If you paid attention, I’ve written several books on them, and done more than 50 interviews on this show about them.
It seems to me that you misheard one thing and then made a false leap to conclusion on another without doing any grammar first.
I guess the interview got cut off after the 1st hour but I heard your comments regarding the creation of the “world citizen” as being part of the elitist global agenda.
I am sure next John Lennon will be strung up as being an operative because of the TRUE meaning of the song IMAGINE. Imagine is probably another code for “world citizen” as “imagine there’s no countries.
As I listen more and more to some of this stuff I get very dismayed.
It isn’t because I can’t handle truth but there seems to be a poisoning in the opposite direction.
I understand that there is a lot of infiltration by the Elites in the environmental movement and in the new age movement etc.. but I am beginning to have to draw a line in the sand because I find myself becoming very cynical.
While certainly, I accept and support the truth and the study of the trivium, I don’t however, see EVERYTHING as a plot to take over the world.
Yes, perhaps there are many elites who want total power but there is perhaps some well meaning people who do genuinly want WORLD PEACE and not need to involve rampant eugenics operations or mindcontrol.
I think the ultimate problem with humanity is our EGO. Our EGO issues stem from our brain imbalances and our fear of scarcity. It WOULD (in my mind) be a good thing if we could get over our frelling differences and quit being so damn jingoistic and nationalistic!.
I see honestly nothing wrong with considering oneself a world citizen. We ARE interconnected and yet we are continually driven to hate one antoher, be suspicious, cynical fearful of everyone and everything.
Certainly, personal soveriegnty is important. I think we need to wake a lot more people up, but I “fear” that poisoning the world view that everything is corrupted and contaminated that all the positive energy out there is really bad and you can’t trust that tree hugger next door because he is probably trying to take your soveriegnty away or a secret eugenicist.
Certainly, keep searching for the truth, but don’t allow your cynicism and paranoia to grow. I think there is a lot of positive stuff out there and while the “positive thinking movement” is extreme in that direction we can’t allow the negative then take over.
I see so much infighting and stupidity on boards and yes, it is because the populace is dumbed down and there are probably a LOT of shills out there.
Just don’t get too jaded… seriously.
Hi Caelidh,
I think if you heard more clearly, you’d have heard me discuss him being shot for coming out about that. Both hours were there – the full interview. It didn’t get cut off. Maybe your player.
There’s a difference between being an independent world citizen and being a shill for the global world order that wants to steal your autonomy, and life for that matter, for their own agendas. They’re warping people’s minds for their own agenda, their own benefit, not ours.
Rather than being positive, how about just balanced and able to look at the facts of reality based on our own 5 senses without our emotional reactions to drive our conclusions first?
There is evidence that the British invasion was tied to Tavistock and Pacifica stations. There is evidence that most of the 60s rockers were the sons and daughters of intelligence, and that a very too many of them came out of Laurel Canyon. I mentioned Dave McGowan. Please just go search out his work and see what you think. His stuff isn’t well cited, but I think he shows too many coincidences for their to be any coincidence and therefore we must consider more deeply his research – especially when looking at the brain database.
I assume you were looking through and studying all of the data points on this in the Brain before reaching any conclusions on Lennon or anything else? I assume there’s no need to go there again. Remember – grammar, logic, rhetoric.
This is extraordinary evidence that is presented here, Jan. The evidence is really airtight like you say. My wife grew up with parents who were really into the whole hippie and psychedelic movement; so after listening to Jan present the evidence in tandem with The Brain for a couple hours, she came out of it really dismayed. She felt like she had nothing to hang on to now. What hope do we have against these elites now if in fact we ought to question our cultural heroes and inspirations like McKenna, Huxley etc.?
It’s yet another stripping of our personal ego identities.
But she thanked Jan for the solid and honest research, but at the same time felt like a new sense of cynicism had arrived. A pessimism for society and perhaps more sympathy for atheism.
But I think this is a really solid step forward for humanity. When you utilize the Trivium, this is what you get.
But I do understand how some people may feel when their fallacious hopes and beliefs are stripped away. I felt similar when I began to realize the real hypocrisy of Christianity.
Thanks for that, Joseph. I really appreciate your comments. The trivium is really the tool that we should all be using in place of false beliefs. We’ve got to start believing in ourselves.
Dear Caelidh,
Please write less in your posts.
You write too much.
Thanks,
Jason
Namaste, Jan,
Since I subscribe to Red Ice Radio, I got a chance to listen to your most recent interview exposing the truth about Gordon Wasson. Since I feel that too often inofrmation is put out that has this person or that person was or is working for the other side, without any valid documentation, I was thrilled to see the work that you have done on this issue. Assuming that all this information is in your book, “The Holy Mushroom: Evidence of Mushrooms in Judeo-Christianity: A critical re-evaluation of the schism between John M. Allegro and R. Gordon Wasson … in The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross “, I suggest it would be good for anyone to study both your interview and the book for the excellent analysis on how to determine how disinformation works and how seemingly our friends are in fact otherwise and proving it with hard research.
Case in point: Some of my friends have heard Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman is working for the other side because supposedly she gets Rockefeller money. While I have seen some questionable information along with great information from her program, I refuse to believe this based upon a rumor. None of these friends have done any research on Goodman, and neither have I, for that matter.
Thank you, thank you. I have ordered your book today and with study plan on explaining to others exactly how we were duped by Wasson.
Recently Joseph Atwill became a new hero of mine, leading to me listening to your interview of him. I did know your previous work regarding Jesus and Christianity, and i was convinced. However I kept quite about it to not hurt any Christians feelings. With Atwill’s work in combination with yours I will be quite no more. Both together make the most marvelous case for how they fooled us for so long and are doing so today. In my book order today Atwill’s book was included.
Again, thank you for your careful research and sharing all of this with all of us.
Hi Susan, The Holy Mushroom contains, via 100% primary documentation, all of my argument and evidence that shows that Allegro was correct and that Wasson had started the campaign against Allegro himself based on 100% lies.
At the time I didn’t know how deep Wasson’s background and agenda was.
The new material really starts from where the holy mushroom leaves off. So by reading THM, you’ll be able to see Wasson’s agendas and conniving a lot more clearly when ready my newest piece or listening to episode 144 – which are the same – and continuing research: books/videos that I’m still working on at present.
Joe’s a friend of mine. We’ve been discussing the possibility of merging some of our ideas and research.
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/rev_atwill.htm Still this critique of Atwill is definitely revealing. I agree with D.M. Murdock’s research though.
so is this what you are referring to Jan?.
http://www.mygen.com/Laurel_Canyon-David_McGowan_report.htm
so, since these muscians had parents who were in the military or even in the high ranking military intelligence ergo they were trotted out to the masses to do their parents bidding? Again, while I could agree that the Elite most definately TRIED to co-opt the movement but it seems a reach to say that Jim Morrison did the bidding of his military father to continue the NWO.. or that he was used as an MKULTRA subject. That is too far fetched for my tastes.
I don’t think that the entire movement is tainted, parts of it and it was definately poisoned to self destruct, which it did pretty successfully.
but I think it was more of just human evolutionary experimentation and I think it did have some positive residue that can be reclaimed and yes, not through OFFICIAL govt sanctioned “drug research”…
Another point to emphasize. Just because they were the sons and daughters of career military doesn’t automatically mean they were shilling for the elite. That is a logical fallacy as you should know.
A lot of kids were of career military families, it was post WW2, that isn’t suspicious. It could also be speculated that they were legimately rebelling against the military mindset of their parents.
The reference I posted a link to above questions why Jim Morrison never spoke out against his father or the Vietnam war. Who honestly knows, Jim Morrison was a very unique artist, is it thought that he was faking the entire thing? That his death was faked and he was spirited away by the military elite where he is helping to destroy more minds?
I know the elite can be very nefarous and I totally see and don’t disagree with your research on Wasson at all, but I still think it is a reach that the entire 60’s counter culture was orchestrated by the elite.
No shit. Remember that stuff we use around here called the trivium, with that stuff called the fallacies? There’s that one called guilt by association, remember?
Again, did you read and study ALL of the material, the citations and database BEFORE you came to your conclusions?
Did you read ALL of McGowan’s work on this, including his book?
Jesus Christ, I was just talking with Atwill this AM about Jim Morrison and all of his connections… Seems the only people who constantly argue for coincidence theory are the ones who can’t read, or ask simple questions like who what where or when.
Jim’s father launched the fucking Vietnam war – himself. Jim then gets public when the anti war demonstrators come out… then they release all of the drugged up hippies who kill the movement and take any credibility away because they’re dirty with long hair and drugged up.
“We want the world and we want it now” – “this is the end, this is the end my friend”.
I mean, even his lyrics brag about this stuff.
Character Jim Morrison – his father Admiral Morrison – Gulf of Tonkin episode false flag, commanded his adventure from Bon Homme (good man)- based on John Paul Jones’ boat, which was named in honor of Poor Richard’s Almanac – the Freemasons.
The Doors of Perception – Morrison based the name of the band, the Doors, from Huxley. He claims to have been influenced by Dionysus into the cult of soma – the cult of drunken ecstasy and out of control licentious behavior.
Morrison claims that as a young boy the spirit of a dead Indian got into him – he was shamanized.
Lives across from Wonderland Project… film studio at Laurel Canyon
Jim’s father puts an inscription on his grave in Greek. His father claims to be an expert in NT Greek: “Gone according to his own demon.”
Going to the book of Revelation – the demon is positive because the Lucifer character – the worship of light… reversing the scripture.
The good man, Poor Man’s almanac.
Jim dies at exactly the same time his father is decommissioning the Good Man (Bon Homme) ship.
Poor Richard’s almanac is a spoof on the book of revelation Titan Leeds is the character that Ben Franklin is predicting the death of. Titan means Titus. Titus leads.
Oct. 17, 1773, at 3:29
Morrison his last song is LA Woman – Morrison gives an anagram of his name – Mr. Mo Jo Risen – an anagram of Jim Morrison
The boat is decommission and he dies on July 03, 1971 – the day his father decommissioned the Boat Bon Homme.
10, 17, 1773 – 07, 03, 1971
I mean, even the god damned blatantly obvious connection to Huxley is right in your face – The Doors – from The Doors of Perception.
All of these fucks tie into Huxley. Every single one of them that I’ve studied so far – every one.
You just dismiss all of this as coincidence theory. Show me how it’s all just coincidence.
And a few of the bands being sons and daughters of military and intelligence doesn’t make a conspiracy, but dozens of them does.
You can argue your coincidence theory until you’re blue in the face, but at least explain how so many of them just happen to be so (from intelligence, et al), and happen to be tied to Laurel Canyon where so much of this psy-op was generated.
I mean, if you’re going to not read and deny every single point, at least come up with a logical explanation for your coincidence theory – cause I don’t buy it. I at least have many thousands of citations to base my decisions on – thousands of grammar points. And you have, as you said, “belief”.
I would like to point out something interesting. Antioch College.
Antioch College, as you may or may not know, is considered one of the more “radical” and “subversive” schools out there. I attended Antioch, btw and I don’t apologise for that fact.
I don’t know if you are aware, however, that it’s first president was none other than Horace Mann who is, considered a bit of a hero because he pushed for many things that were at the time never heard of in education. I know the background on Mann regarding the Prussian Educational system, but the stuff I learned about Mann was nothing so oppresive, at least his work at the end of his career as president of Antioch College.
Anyway, Antioch has had a LOOOOOOONG sordid history, it has been infiltrated by the CIA, FBI, it is even speculated that the “official” hippie movement actually started in Yellow Springs, not in California.
The recent episode of Antioch almost being permanently shut down has links with the military industrial complex and other top elite questionable people.
The board of Antioch University has had definate questionable people on it. It was speculated that Antioch College was intentionally shut down and destroyed only to be rebuilt in a newer image, one that they (the elite) could more easily control. Now the COLLEGE is entirely separate from the University but there of course are still rumblings.
What i am getting at is just pointing out I understand that things can definately be co-opted. Antioch’s reputation is double sided. I personally see it generally as potentially good, but there are definately issues that I think many students find troubling.
Here you have a school that on one hand has a stellar reputation in some areas and then on the other hand has a very tarnished reputation. The students and the Antioch culture was at one point called “toxic”. It has the potential to inspire genuine good works and academic excellence and students to go out to attempt and succeed to “win victories for humanity” at the same time there is a sourness and self destruction that has occcured with some generations of students. Like the counter culture of the 60s and even with the present day Occupy and “truth” movements, knowing what is truly the TRUTH and being able to not be cut down by cynicism and bitterness, which to me, sounds excactly what the Elite want. If we are destroyed and unable to fight because we are infighting, or personally depressed and no longer inspired by music or imagination then the elite have won.
I applaud your work in bringing the Trivium to the masses. I am promoting it hard. I just wanted to give my own personal microcosm account of what I have experienced while attempting to change the world. I can imagine what the entheogenic movement will do as more of this info about Wasson gets out.. I do hope it doesn’t entirely sour the definate positive aspects of it
Wow. Fascinating, Captain ! So when PK Dick was saying “The empire never ended.” And railing on about the false gods, “black prison,” etc., etc. he was consciously,gently and carefully alluding indirectly to what Mr. Atwill is saying overtly ? It’s said that he actually hated, the little that he saw, where Blade Runner was going as an interpretation. Who’s the Drew guy writing here in comments ? I’m not groking it, maaaan ! Could someone more gifted than me sift through his twists and turns and explain it to us lilliputians ?
Bill I am replying to questions and third person remarks about me. Basically I have a masters degree in liberal studies and I finished my degree doing intensive body-mind transformation energy training with a Chinese qigong master who spent a month in a cave sitting in full lotus yoga position with no water, no sleep and no food. http://qigongmaster.com is the training center. Check out the testimonials for example in my home town this young man was healed of severe epilepsy that the Mayo Clinic could not treat after using 40 medications. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MerE0BXoq5E So I’m just extending the psychedelic reality as I was doing conspiracy political activism — and then I tested my third eye permanent magnetic bliss against plant-based DMT and salvia. My blog has my free book with 725 scholarly footnotes for free download – “The Alchemy of Rainbow Heart Music.” I also have tons of free articles published on various websites, etc. So I’m not selling anything but I am pointing out that Westerners are in denial about real energy healing using body mind transformation. Nonwestern music is the best model to understand this paradigm – the original Pythagorean Logos. It was covered up by Plato and Archytas and that is the liberal arts conspiracy — http://nonduality.com/hempel.htm
Hi Drew. I get all that. But what is it you are suggesting if that’s even conveyable here ? Sounds all very spicy/specious. New energy form ? Are we supposed to hyper-mutate into something else now ? Fairness and justice for all ?
Hi Bill — my last response vanished — maybe Jan doesn’t want me to post anymore. haha.
I haven’t read any of the comments posted above yet!
My opinion is that Gordon Wasson wanted to corrupt the whole experience for the rest of humanity.
When we found out he was a double agent we would lose faith in the whole thing.
That’s the only scenario that makes sense to me now.
5 minutes later my opinion is a little different.
(I still haven’t read any opinions above)
They didn’t have a clue what they were getting into.
But they ultimately believed it would be the unravelling of society- perfect in
order to bring about their NEWWORLDORDER. Don’t those two WW’S look quite menacing?
Maybe listen to the entire interview and read the paper before you decide they didn’t know what they were getting into. The evidence shows they knew exactly what they were doing.
5 minutes of research and you’ve already decided how things are! That’s incredible. I’ve been researching this for 6 years.
The blow back argument is absurd.
No, you get me wrong. I haven’t decided anything. As you can surmise from my change in opinion in 5 minutes.
I am totally in the dark as to why Wasson et al would publicise magic mushrooms for the world.
I don’t deny your research for a second. It’s totally well founded.
I am merely throwing out my thoughts like everyone.
It doesn’t make sense to me personally, having used psilocybin mushrooms on many occasions.
I would like some sincere listeners to contribute their thoughts succintly and not in long boring diatribes!
Thanks Jan,
Jason
Is it that different from a bunch “hipster” seeming operatives going to burning man and all happening to come from military/industrial backgrounds of one stripe or another.
No, they couldn’t have known “exactly what they were doing”.
A) They had a short window of time to study the effects of psilocybin and LSD before they were unleashed to the public
B) There is no way to be sure of the effects of such an unleashing. Each individual brings something unique and inherently unquantifiable to the equation, that when combined with such compounds,produces effects that typically transcend cultural and social conditioning. When done on a mass scale the unpredictability therefore increase exponentially.
They may have thought they had a Brave-New-Worldian Soma that would subdue any unrest, but what they actually had was a Vedic Soma, inspiring transcendent, visionary, empowering states.
Your research is soild, and where the evidence is convincing, it convinces, but your speculations are just that, For instance, Aldous having an elitest eugenicist brother and having written Brave New World and lunched with elites, does not add up to him being a conscious player in the mass mind control operations perpetrated upon the masses, whatever the level of their success.
Sure, Brave New World may have been used as a kind of blue print, but he also wrote Island, so where is the evidence that he intended Brave New World to be followed and not Island ? The evidence actually favors the reverse, where he makes it publicly known that Brave New World is a dystopian novel, and Island utopian,.Rather clear which he would like to see embodied, unless you have some solid evidence to the contrary?
That’s hilarious… clearly you’ve never read their books… they’ve got dozens on this. I suggest you spend some time studying them before saying they didn’t know what they were doing.
You’re blind to the fact that they used these substances for positive thinking to control the herd of hippies. It was perfectly effective. positive, unbalanced, uncritical, thoughtless thinking, rather than balanced, critical, investigative, honest thinking.
What they got was exactly what the Macy Conferences and Huxley laid out – a world citizen.
It’s a fact that Julian Huxley was a very well known eugenicist – wrote about 12 books on it, launched Unesco, etc, which is very much involved with this. If you actually read their books, you’d see their agendas perfectly mesh together. Try to put some research ahead of your leaping to conclusions about it being speculation. I suggest you sit down and read and ask who what where and when before you determine why.
Yes, clearly Island is a furthering of this agenda.
I wonder if you’ve ever heard of controlled opposition?
Maybe if you actually listened to some of Aldous’s lectures where he flat out discusses population control and being in favor of them, the same programs his own brother happens to lead, would put your accusations at rest and get you to put your grammar before your logic.
You want us to believe that it’s fricking coincidence theory. We’ve got another coincidence theory nut on our hands here. Yay!
Let me clarify that I’m not suggesting psychedelics can’t be used for mind control, but in order to do so generally need to have some kind of handler there to instill it, or at its crudest, simply dose the subject unknowingly – though the level of control achieved here would be minimal at best.
To male these substances available, as well as providing good instructions as to how to use them and what their potential might be (thank you Huxley, Leary, Watt, McKenna etc) does not play into a successful mass mind control operation.
You’ve no concept of how mind control works – apparently on any level. I suggest you go and study the trivium study material in the link on the left.
And these people you thank for suppesedly teaching proper use, did not teach any form of critical thinking, thereby opening the user to control.
I wish to fuck people like you would study the work on this website thoroughly before they vomit a bunch of nonsense, and before actually researching things and putting their religious dogmas, wishful thinking, et al ahead of actually studying the material.
Yeah, man, it’s all blow back dude… they didn’t know what they were doing… keep on not studying the work around you and go lalalalala so that you can hold that position…
Or, you can simply open up their books and read them, listen to their lectures and find out for yourself if they were involved in eugenics… and I clearly laid out the ties to the UN’s agenda 21 – which you seem to have entirely missed – which goes right to the UN’s own website, and there’s plenty on UNCED laid out there too. Apparently you studied none of it.
Always the same… conclusions and beliefs before research. Your thanking your handlers for mind controlling you… you exemplify the Stockholm Syndrome.
I spent 5 to 6 years poring over this information, researching the relations, connections, associations and affiliations, et al, and you determine, without careful study, that it’s all BS in a matter of what, an hour?
I’m not saying it’s all BS, I’m saying that “they knew exactly what they were doing” is BS. Let me get this straight: Jan Irvin is claiming the elites had omniscience within the field of psychedelics and their effects on individual, group, and mass psychology ?
Huxley’s Doors of Perception provides a serious, spiritual and scientific expectation with regard to the psychedelic experience. Leary’s Set and Setting is info aimed at how to AVOID unwanted influence and outcomes during a psychedelic experience. McKenna’s 5 grams in silent darkness also provides for a tripping environment that avoids outside influences aside from that of the mushroom itself of course. Does that grammar fit with the logic of mass mind control ?
Your argument is called a neglected aspect, and is arguing from ignorance.. You select a few things, put them into this predesigned package that you believe in, and then you say see, does that fit with mass mind control?
Try putting your grammar before your logic.
That neglected aspect fallacy works the same in reverse, Jan. Removing contradictions should not be done by ignoring contradictions.
As well as your more solid evidence of the likes of Wasson being CIA, you present a lot of circumstantial evidence, which I agree is interesting and suggests collusion by some of these psychedelic figures with the nefarious elite. I’m looking at what these people (Huxley, Leary, McKenna…) were saying and doing in public, which is how they influence the public, and that grammar does not square with your logic.I am open to persuasion as to how these figures’ public works affected mass mind control, but am, as of yet, unconvinced.
Can I take your lack of response regarding the clarification of your “they knew exactly what they were doing” comment as a confirmation, or would you like to take it back?
Jay, Aldous’s brother Julian Huxley founded and headed several eugenics societies. Julian wrote the work for the elites while Aldous wrote the novels. If you read Julian’s dozen or so books on this subject, you’ll see it for yourself. Furthermore, Julian signed the Eugenics Manifesto: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_manifesto
Julian advized on the eugenics text The Race Question for UNESCO, which he founded. See his books on the purpose of UNESCO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Race_Question
He worked with leading eugenicist Theodosius Dobzhansky:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Huxley
While Julian ran all of this, he worked for MI-6, and meanwhile, his brother ran these ops through the US, intentionally popularizing psychedelics for those without the trivium, creating a positive thinking/spirituality meme. This was discussed thoroughly at the Macy Conferences where Gregory Bateson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Huxley) worked (a close friend of Aldous’s, who was behind MKULTRA, and later went on to help Aldous and Michael Murphey and Dick price create Esalen, which then sold these memes into society as a constant, focused effort, with the funding of the Tavistock institute behind them. Here we also see Kirt Lewin and other important MKULTRA figures there at the Macy Conferences:
http://www.asc-cybernetics.org/foundations/history/MacyPeople.htm
I’m not neglecting anything, Jay. I’ve actually read the material over and over for years, using this to connect the dots between these people.
What they say and do in the public is irrelevant, unless you actually go and read what they publish in their books, etc. For instance, McKenna gave a talk on education in the New World Order:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_Y5SR_r7vY
So essentially, if you only take a very selective observation of material and don’t do your grammar and look at all of it, reading their books, etc, you won’t find this stuff.
If you want to think that they didn’t know what they were doing, when the evidence shows via the positive thinking movement, etc, that they exactly achieved the goals of the Macy Conferences, etc, then that’s you’re prerogative. I’ll base my decisions on actually having read thousands of documents and tens of thousands of pages of evidence on this. If you think you can come to the (in my opinion) erroneous conclusion that they didn’t know what they were doing, that it’s all blow back, then that’s your conclusion – and might I add from not studying it clearly.
Anyone using entheogens can easily be mind controlled with logical fallacies alone. If entheogens were so effective in freeing the individual’s mind, then they would automatically equip that person with critical thinking to see through the lie after they come down from the trip. That’s not what happens. At that point, as even Prof. Marlene de Rios has well published, it’s easy to program what ever you want into the person at that time. They’ve severed their connection with the major dogmatic religions – and then the NEW AGE is offered them, with all of the enlightened solutions of no government, no boarders, and happy, peaceful, positive thinking, and do nothing, mummy and daddy socialists will take care of it for you – or there’s that technocratic solution such as offered by Zeitgeist.
Go through and read and study all of the datapoints – closely. You’ll see they all connect. I might not have a document that’s a smoking gun, but then by using logic and removing the fallacies, we’ll see that this number of coincidences is impossible.
The definition of a coincidence theorist:
A person whom no matter how many correlations and ties to other people involved in any type of crime, no matter how solid the evidence is that is presented to them, these people will refuse the evidence and claim that there’s no conspiracy and it’s all just coincidence! This sickness is derived from putting one’s logic, or conclusions, before grammar, or
research. No matter how it’s explained to them to just look up the citations, they can’t. These people typically exemplify the “don’t confuse me with facts, I’ve already made up my mind” mentality.
In rare cases it can be cured with critical thinking, logic and the trivium. However, in most cases the inflicted are not saveable and must be “left to Jesus”.
Jan,
Thanks for your response. I know that you have a lot of work on your plate, and the comparatively lengthy, referenced and gentlemanly-toned is much appreciated.
Let me point out the obvious, and I know you know this only too well, that Julian is not Aldous, and to conflate the two is to commit the fallacy of guilt by association. Therefore, the first few points and links regarding Julian are neither here nor there if we are looking for solid evidence that Aldous was part of a mass mind control conspiracy.
You say that Aldous ran Julian’s MI-6 operations in the US – do you have any verifiable sources you could point me toward for this? Further, you say that these operations included Aldous popularizing psychedelics for those without the trivium. Certainly I agree that he did popularize psychedelics, and undoubtedly that influence would have reached those with questionable critical thinking skills, however Aldous was an intellectual writer, and was (I admittedly speculate) probably more widely read by the educated, who would have been more well armed with critical thinking skills than most. Also, Aldous was publicly against the mass use of psychedelics, he apparently argued for their use solely by the best and brightest – again, those who would be more likely to have the trivium/refined critical thinking skills.
I will look further into Aldous’s connection with Bateson and Esalen, but I’m sure you can appreciate that I am wary of the guilt by association fallacy and therefore require something more solid to tie Aldous in with a conscious effort in mass mind control. Any particular sources you can recommend for that? (He apparently wasn’t at the Macy conferences)
Jan, I really appreciate your work for bringing a lot of this stuff to light, but I have to ask, if you’re really not neglecting anything, then how do you explain the effect of the public work of these psychedelic figures when it exhorts primary experience over dogma, self examination, and, yes, even critical thinking?
I am still baffled by your insistence that these elites knew EXACTLY what they were doing when they were working with an INEXACT science.
I agree with you in general with regard to coincidence theorizing, at times it is just absurd. But consider this: I have a fair number of friends who are Involved in various aspects of the NZ music industry. I’ve drunk, dined, travelled, hosted, conversed, argued and generally cavorted with these people over the years. Perhaps I’ve even inspired some of their work to some degree. However, despite all these connections, I myself am not part of the NZ music industry. So the various forms of evidence connecting me to these people (photos, emails, eye witness accounts of these meetings etc) are valid in that they show a connection, but it would not, in itself, show collusion in the NZ music industry. However, if you found my name on an album sleeve, or on an employment contract, or at an awards ceremony etc, that is the kind of evidence that would start to suggest, if not eventually prove, that I was lying. This is the kind of evidence I would need against Aldous et al, in order to compete with the contrary evidence of their public works.
I’m sure you’ll appreciate that in order to jump on board, we all need to do so with the amount and kind of evidence sufficient to personally convince – and that that will vary from individual to individual.
Keep on fighting the good fight, Jan.
It’s no guilt by association. Read their god damned books, listen to their damned lectures. How many times do I have to repeat myself here? Do you know what grammar first is? Aldous himself, as I already said, is very clearly for eugenics and population control in his interviews and lectures. See, for instance, his lecture at Berkeley. Think for a minute about controlled opposition, which I know a bit about. In “some” lectures, Aldous appears to be against these things and supporting individual freedom, while at the same time, his own brother is promoting and heading some of the largest eugenics/humanist programs in the world. He never once calls out his brother. He talks in one lecture about being for individual rights, while in the next he’s talking about mind control and humanism – which is giving the self to the state. He worked with Tavistock for fuck’s sake – the world’s largest psy-op/mind control funding and study center. He’s tied in with the foundation of Scientology – a cult, tied in with the foundation of AA – a cult. He’s tied in with the launching of much of the modern psychedelic new age stuff – a cult. 2012 – a cult. He’s tied to Puharich’s 9 – a cult with connections, again, to the JFK assassination – just as Wasson. He’s tied in with Al Hubbard, a known CIA asset who worked with MKULTRA, worked with Bateson – MKULTRA – worked with Wasson – MKULTRA, CIA and CFR, worked with the Fabian Society – a known secret society involved in social control. He’s tied directly and said to have influenced directly, ALL of the key players in the psychedelic movement’s launch – those he didn’t influence directly, ie post mortem, such as McKenna, themselves state him as their largest influence. He met with Wasson at the CIA front Century Club before Mushrooms Russia and History was printed. Carlos Castaneda also met with Wasson at the Century before his work was done. The Century was a god damned CIA front headed by Alan Dulles HIMSELF. Rather than assume that I’m committing guilt by association, which you’re about the 20th person to not read and attempt this claim, simply put your grammar first! Read god damnit!
Rather than creating a straw man example of some hypothetical guilt by association fallacy, simply quote an exact error of MINE and show me what’s wrong in the database. I’ll even upload the most current one for you to download. Not every connection is correct. I’ve updated many leads with the primary documents that I’ve acquired from university, CFR, hoover and CIA archives over the last several months. There’s thousands of connections and leads in the database though, so if you find one lead or citation to be in error, try not to use fallacies, such as poisoning the well, or sweeping generalizations against the rest. Common sense requires that we go point by point and show how each point is wrong… not just assume something is a “guilt by association” because we’re too fucking lazy to read through everything.
If you actually studied the material, like the Macy conferences, et al, as I’ve REPEATED, you’d have nothing to be baffled about, but your own befuddlement.
If you had actually read closely, you’d see what are primary – direct sources, secondary, and 3rd hand leads, etc – listed throughout the database. They’re about all listed there. What aren’t, you can search online or read their books. But again, I’ve already told you repeatedly to listen to their lectures and read their books where they talk about this stuff. Look at what the Macy conferences were all about.
Once you understand the Macy conferences and this idea of the world citizen that they were creating, you’ll then understand that Huxley, Murphy and Price all dispensated exactly this through Esalen. Interestingly, that eugenicist Theodorius was friends with Julian, and the guy who created that 2012 theory was Prof. Michael Coe at Yale, who was CIA, and in his 1966 book on the Maya, Coe makes the first mention of something to happen in Nov or Dec. 2011/2012. Coe was Married to Theodorius’s daughter. So Coe creates the theory, he’s close friends with Wasson and son in law to Theodorius. Theodorius is close with Julian. Julian is the brother of Aldous. Aldous with Murphy and Price sell the 2012 meme at Esalen. Do you see the connections here? Or is this too far for you? William Burrough’s also mentions the 2012 meme just before Coe’s book comes out. Coe was the first to ever publish ANYTHING on 2012 and the Maya, so how did Burrough’s come up with it just shortly before? Coincidence theory?
We’re talking about a continuation of the ancient elite mystery cults. And, as I’ve discussed in my interviews, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that the psychedelic cults of the elite from 2000 years ago never died out. They didn’t just find this stuff as their official stories claim. Bicycle day is a total joke. There was a novel printed 10 years before Hofmann’s “discovery” of LSD where in it states that a fungus derivative from wheat will be found and will be used to start a new religious movement. Oh wait, I forgot, you’re one of these coincidence theorists who believes all of the official line and goes around attacking the first person in 50 god damned years to actually bother with going through the archives and looking through the primary documents… so you’ve got to attack me, because if it’s not all blow back, then you’re a brain washed dupe. It’s easier for you to say my work is wrong, than it is for you to accept that you’ve been fooled and ARE brain washed. And in fact you are.
Wake up.
I’m done. Thanks.
NY Crimes new article promoting Esalen
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/us/as-esalen-celebrates-its-past-its-future-is-debated.html?_r=1
Kris Millegan exposes the similar secret society plan to drug the masses for social disempowerment: http://watergateexposed.com/index.php?start=20
“The Viet Nam War is about drugs. There are these secret societies behind it.” and then, “Communism is all a sham, these same secret societies are behind it. It’s all a big game.” And that “they” were playing out a “lose scenario.” Later in a discussion/argument he told me that there was a plan to opiate the boomer generation.
Jan,
First off, thank you. I have been researching these subjects for at least ten years now, and rarely, if ever, do I come across research that is so thoroughly vetted.
“You can lead a horse to water…”
I would encourage those who want to discuss this research to dive into it before engaging in the Egoic banter that is commonplace on the internet. When Jan has painstakingly supplied anyone who is interested with all of his source material, yet people still persist in attacking it or criticizing it without thoroughly reading what has been provided, this conversation devolves into a vulgar attempt at bolstering previously held beliefs. This information is far too important for that, in my opinion.
Well, from experience, it doesn’t really matter how “dumbed down” or how educated you are in the trivium or quadrivium when you cannot engage in compassionate communication.
Naturally, everywhere you go you’re going to have ego tripping, not just from the people who don’t use critical thinking, but from people who use the trivium like a sword.
Amongst all of our “egoic bantering” back and forth on this website and elsewhere, no one is exempt from being a hypocrite, including myself.
Myself, being knowledgeable of the trivium and some of the logical fallacies, I do realize that these methods of being able to spot one’s B.S. and then engage with them is a waste of time and usually worthless.
I do nothing to empower others when I cannot compassionately speak, and actually listen, even to the B.S.
Greater Nowheres, your last paragraph is revealing. In my opinion, let’s try to be more compassionate and refrain from using the trivium and logical fallacies as a weapon. I know it’s tempting to call people out all the time, but the logical fallacies, in my estimation ought to be used selectively with people. Compassionate communication actually will minimize the headaches and drama over critical vs. non-critical thinking.
While I agree with the sentiment of both Joseph Pierce’s and Greater Nowhere’s posts above, I do feel it pertinent to point out that in Jan’s and my back and forth, also above, he blatantly uses fallacies in his rhetoric, while falsy accusing me doing the same.
To clarify:
1.When asked by myself to point to the information that establishes the guilt of one party, he posts multiple links to information regarding the guilt of associated parties. Sure, this provides context, but it does not establish guilt, and by implying that it does establish guilt, Jan absolutely commits the fallacy of guilt by association.
2.Because I do not agree with the full extent of his assertions, he claims I must beleive the official line on everything. This is the fallacy of a false dilemma, clear as day.
3. Failing to arrive at the same conclusion with Jan makes me, according to him, a coincidence theorist, and a brain washed dupe. Ad hominems, both.
4.Jan claimed that I “attacked him”. Perhaps he truly believes this given his vitriolic responses (though admittedly, most who disagree with him in the comment sections receives
a similarly toned response). However, nowhere have I attacked him. I have only “attacked”, or more to the point, questioned, his claims. I’ll leave the ad hominem’s to him.
5.Jan claims that my analogy regarding my connections with the NZ music industry (not a hypothetical, as it’s a real example) is somehow a strawman as well as a poisoning the well fallacy. To anyone with common sense, it was simply an analogy to show that associations and connections do not necessarily lead to collusion.
For sure, I have a lot more grammar to do. We all do, and no one can ever do ALL the grammar in a such a vast and complex area of study. Perhaps Jan is right to the full extent of his thesis.For various reasons, I am not at this point convinced, although a large part of his claim seems to be solid.
I suggest Jan tighten up his rhetoric, refrain from using fallacies, and perhaps drop the bullyish tone he employs. This could go a long way in engaging people and in garnering the support he asks for to help in producing the books and videos that showcase his research.
That is all.
Hi Jay,
Let’s see if we can go over this again one more time with you, including what are the fallacies you’ve claimed, and what aren’t.
1) You came here ignoring every bit of evidence before you, then created your own idea of what you think mind control is: “generally need to have some kind of handler there to instill it, or at its crudest, simply dose the subject unknowingly – though the level of control achieved here would be minimal at best.”
You provided nothing on how the many types of mind control we’ve gone into here, including the trivium, are wrong. You just ingored everything about that. Rather than having read my published article and read through the database before making your assertions of how mind control works, without studying a thing, you came here telling us how things are.
I don’t need one single smoking gun that says Huxley did this or that. I have the overwhelming support of circumstantial evidence in many of these areas because there are just too many to be any question of innocents. I further told you to to “read their god damned books, listen to their lectures” and said to listen to Huxley’s specific speech at Berkeley where he explains how he’s for eugenics.
Furthermore, both Julian and Aldous were humanists/ trans-humanists which in fact plays into all of this and getting people to work for a world citizen and give up their own autonomy. Their philosophies perfectly coincide from one family member to the next. Julian’s work perfectly supports Thomas Huxley and Darwin’s, and Aldous’s work supports Julian’s. It’s written throughout their 2 dozen books that I told you to read that you claim only provides context but does not establish guilt. Nonsense. Their own words, publications, companies and organizations that they created do in fact establish guilt.
2) You’ve not provided anything what so ever to substantiate your disagreements. The onus of proof falls on you to actually read the work first and then go point by point on what’s wrong. You don’t go around saying “well I disagree, um, just because, um. ha”. This is in fact NOT the fallacy of false dilemma. This is not “you’re either with me or the terrorists”. This is the onus of proof, where in if you make a claim and say something is wrong, where I’ve published extensive evidence, if you make the claim that it’s wrong ALL ONUS OF PROOF FALLS ON YOU – otherwise you’re arguing the arbitrary and EVERYTHING you say is DISMISSED. Yes, you were dismissed for arguing the arbitrary and not reading the research before you attempted conclusions – that is what is clear as day. But I am glad to see you begin to attempt to implement logic. This is a good start.
3) Anyone who would actually look at and read the evidence can go point by point on what they agree with and when they don’t agree, they’re able to substantiate their ideas and again, not just disagree because it causes cognitive dissonance with their conditioned response. You’ve not attacked any point or any specific research. You ignored what was presented and then created your own BS hypothesis of what you think mind control is and how you think it works, ignoring all of the years of work on the trivium and mind control that we’ve put out on this website. I never once made an ad hominem at you, I never said you were a brain washed dupe. Try not to take my words out of context in this false straw man of yours. What I clearly said was “so you’ve got to attack me, because if it’s not all blow back, then you’re a brain washed dupe.”
I clearly said “if – then” I never said “you are a brain washed dupe”. THAT would be an ad hominem. So please study logic before you attempt to falsely apply it.
4) Clearly you are attacking something when you go around ignoring everything presented and say it’s wrong but can’t quote one single citation that is wrong and don’t take the onus of proof as logic requires you do. If you kill the messenger before having read the message, you in fact attacked the messenger. This is pure and simple. Intelligent people read evidence before they determine what is says or it’s validity. Clearly that’s why it’s called the fallacy of “killing the messenger” – because in real life, under the right circumstances, you’d kill me because you feel so threatened about the work, hence why you need to attack it LIKE an emotional child before you’ve even studied it.
5) For your inference that your analogy is at all correct regarding my research, you have to quote something from my research. You can’t just dream up what ever false analogy you wish, not having read my work, and then create your own straw man base on something I never said about some potential guilt by association that you dreamed up in your own head – which of course bears nothing on my work what so ever.
Again, intelligent people know that they have to read something before they can know what it says, or even give any type of feedback or analogy on it, otherwise they have no logical ability to even know if their analogy pertained to anything that was said – so then there’s is no need to create bs, unrelated analogies about something they’re completely ignorant of for the simple reason they didn’t study it. So as I said: “Rather than creating a straw man example of some hypothetical guilt by association fallacy, simply quote an exact error of MINE and show me what’s wrong in the database.”
Clearly, rather than doing so, you came on here and agree with Joseph and others who also leap to conclusions before studying the work.
If you could show me where I’ve used fallacies, guilt by association, etc, and where it wasn’t your own misapplication of them, that would be helpful. But you’ve not provided a single example or quote or citation of where I’ve committed these fallacies you accuse me of – so I have to dismiss everything you say as arguing the arbitrary because you’re incapable of showing me how anything you’ve proposed is in fact related to my work – and not this fantasy land straw man that you’ve dreamed up in some false analogy in your own head and then falsely, and ignorantly, attempt to tie it to my work.
“Perhaps Jan is right to the full extent of his thesis.For various reasons, I am not at this point convinced, although a large part of his claim seems to be solid.”
My work seems solid, but you’ve provided not one single instance where it isn’t solid, and then you conclude that you’re not convinced because of what? Star pixy dust? Your own arbitrary wishful thinking? I mean if you say you’re not convinced, but in the same breath say the research seems solid, well that seems one hell of an unsupported contradiction to hold in your mind. When you say that you’re not convinced, why are you not convinced? What have you read and studied that I put forth? What have you omitted?
For one not to disagree, Jay, they must have a reason, as well as evidence on which to rest that reason – that disagreement.
But for you, you create all of these fallacies, attempt to falsely accuse me of fallacies, then say my research seems solid ,but then imply that it’s wrong, or your not convinced because of the facts of the matter, but can’t provide one single citation or anything else to the contrary…
Um, yay, ok. .. well thanks for disagreeing “just because” the star pixies told you to. I mean, that’s a wonderful reason – just because.
Maybe I should tighten up my rhetoric, but then I’m not here to make friends and kiss ass with people who are incapable of studying things and evidence before they judge them, being devoid of even the most basic common sense.
To these types, except with rare exception, no amount of kindness or sugar coated rhetoric will get them to think before they reach false conclusions and make false, unsupported statements as you have here – just to simply disagree … for no reason at all.
And this is, in fact, the very reason why these mind control and eugenics programs are in operation.
But with your inability to read the research, and the amount of effort you’ve put in to creating all of these false statements, I’m beginning to think you’re a troll.
Hi Joe, it has nothing what so ever to do with agreeing or disagreeing. It has to do with RESEARCHING BEFORE DRAWING ANY CONCLUSIONS. What, exactly, is someone agreeing with or disagreeing with if they haven’t even read the article and evidence?
Would you allow a teacher or professor in college to give you an F on a paper without ever reading it, just to agree or disagree?
People have to have reasons, based on the research presented, point by point, why they agree or disagree. Otherwise, as any intelligent person knows, they wouldn’t even know what they’re agreeing or disagreeing with.
The so-called champion of the trivium. Please, yourself, Joseph, try to put your research before your conclusions and unfounded opinions. Try not to spew empty opinions about things you’ve not studied.
Sometimes Rosenberg works, sometimes he doesn’t. But when people are too god damned stupid to read something before they judge it, and then other morons come around here defending such behavior, I’ve got no room for sympathy here.
I welcome any conversation regarding my work from people who have actually read it and can go intelligently, on the same page, point by point on what’s correct or not. I could give a fuck about anyone else’s uneducated “opinions” – including yours. Again, Joseph, see if you can comprehend the idea of studying something BEFORE you give feedback. It has nothing what ever to do, as you fallaciously suggest, about only following what I say. It’s really just common sense, Joseph. You read something, then you judge it and give your feedback point by point. It’s utterly stupid, moronic, idiotic, egoic, et al, to attempt to give feedback on something someone’s not studied.
Let people agree or disagree… do you know how dumb that sounds? Again, they have to know what they’re agreeing or disagreeing with. You just want an empty vacuum – where you think that the more confusion brings one closer to truth. Lunacy.
As for your trivium comment and Christians, their so-called “trivium” is nothing like what we teach, though we do use a very small amount of their teaching tools. How am I different? Again, Joseph, the trivium does not itself divide anyone. You have people on one side who have the brains to read something and go point by point on the same page with the research, and on the other side you have people who are too god damned stupid to read the research and go point by point and get their emotions and egos caught in the mix. Because they’re too damned stupid, no one can deal with them, and so therefore it causes a division. If you can actually bring people up to use their brains and study something first, then it’s a simple matter of going point by point over the research and no division is necessary as you’re able to focus on facts and data, rather than on moronic emotions and people who refuse to read. Nice guilt by association though, but you’re misunderstanding the origins of the problem itself.
And aren’t you the one, Joseph, who every time you find dirt about one game, you go to the other, falling for the old dialectic yourself? New Age bad, Christianity must be good. Christianity bad, New Age must be good. How about both are faulty logic?
Well, I’ll leave on this note:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd7bVgyTJK4
I think it’s pretty obvious where Jan Irvin stands on his attitude toward life. Alan Watts seems to agree.
Just be careful, folks. An over-intellectual, prickly mind is dangerous because it ruins the joy of living.
Namaste
So one of your champions in the psychedelic movement gets his balls blown of beautifully by Jan, which, to a truly open-minded individual would be considered a great service. Yet here you sit, so above it all, replete with all of the spiritual smugness one could possibly muster. With all things spiritual figured out, I guess that the next step is to make baseless assumptions about Jan’s attitude toward life. Because, clearly, if someone is foolish enough to disagree with an enlightened heavyweight such as yourself, the next logical step is to make sweeping generalizations against them.
“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.”
― Thomas Paine, The Crisis
The irony of your post lies in its context. I don’t dispute that Watts expressed certain fundamental truths (that he took at liberty from others) on his relatively short voyage, but his personal life was a disaster, wrought with chronic alcoholism, rampant infidelity, the willful neglect of his children, lots of “free love” and drugs, and lots of thinking without practice. Yet another sacred cow who sacrificed himself to the god of hypocrisy. He preached but certainly did not practice. Which is one of the many things you are accusing Jan of doing. Alcohol directly contributes to the violent/confrontational behavior you are attempting to out, and avoiding intoxication is also one of the five basic precepts for Buddhists. And while you wax poetic about avoiding thought, you are caught up in a web of opposition that your thoughts created.
For more information on Alan Watts, I suggest taking a peek at Monica Furlong’s book “Zen Effects: The Life of Alan Watts”:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7964058/Zen-Effects-Life-of-Alan-Watts
Jan Irvin certainly does not practice what he preaches, namely the Trivium and especially, the logical fallacies. You want me to document all of the hypocritical attacks he makes – using logical fallacies himself! – to bolster his claims in self-righteousness?! The onus of proof is on me, and I will cite all of them if you request it.
Neither Alan Watts NOR Jan Irvin, nor myself or you are exempt from being a hypocritical sacred cow. My point in linking Alan Watts was to simply show how Jan Irvin is being an intellectual prick.
Alan Watts certainly did not suffer from exclusive “Zen Effects.” He suffered as all humanity suffers. He would be one to concede this.
[With all things spiritual figured out,…]
I never claimed to have all things spiritually figured out, and I intend to keep it that way. I personally desire to be happy and joyful in life, and THAT requires a mind constantly aware that I know that I know NOTHING. Uncertainty. If YOU have to be so certain in life based on a certain criterion for finding truth, you are going to be sorely disappointed on your deathbed.
The Trivium and Quadrivium methods are nothing new or enlightening as a criterion for truth. In fact, if you do your RESEARCH, you will find that these methods are included in ancient schools of thought that believed that such a THING as TRUE existence was simultaneously endowed with precise measurement methods or criteria that reflected it.
Irvin adamantly claims people who disagree with him are sinners, or in fact, that new piece of jargon is now “dumbed down.” Yes, everyone who cannot GET ON THE SAME PAGE are stupid, incompetent robots. Never mind the fact that Irvin, despite his tedious RESEARCH, will never ever know what was or is in the minds and thought processes of people whom he disregards as “perhaps part of the conspiracy.” That’s it! That’s where the Trivium, or that, ironically, DIALECTIC criterion for truth, stumbles and falls. It can never measure or create a true standard for first-hand, personal thought-motives and experiences.
Irvin’s school of logic was not just opposed to Immanuel Kant. No, no. If you do your RESEARCH you will find it goes way, way back. Even before Plato and Aristotle.
Here is an article you can start with: http://www.scribd.com/doc/62122635/Bett-Ed-Sextus-Empiric-Us-Against-the-Logicians
Well, who knows for sure? Sextus here could be WRONG! But, I just want to throw out a little reading to suggest that there is more out there than just the Trivium – the way Irvin presents it. And this Gene Odening, who – you would think, considering his high knowledge, would be more accessable even online!
If Irvin wants to present to me research he has done on the aforementioned research topic, he has to present evidence to the contrary. Then, the onus of proof is on me to counter.
1) If you bothered to read the book you posted, or had a general knowledge of Greek philosophy, you would realize that Sextus Empiricus proposed that we should suspend judgement about all beliefs. Now that you’ve eviscerated that approach in regards to your beliefs about Jan, perhaps you can find another philosopher to endear yourself to in order to bolster your claims and link to another critique of a school of philosophy that you didn’t bother to read, or, perhaps more importantly, practice.
2) I have no idea under what circumstances I am going to die, whether fortunate enough to have a bed to lay back on or so forth. Neither do you of your end. I do know that Jan’s research on this specific subject is vastly more informative than the punitive tripe that you have been selling. And with your post, replete with capslock mojo, aren’t you displaying a certainty that your criterion for finding truth is better than Jan’s?
3) Neither you or I know what Jan’s “school of logic” is. The irony (again and again and again with you) is that you are making the same kinds of assumptions about Jan that you say that he has made about Wasson, especially in regards to intent. The obvious difference is that he has done the research to substantiate his claims, and you have done absolutely nothing. Jan has every right to call what passes for your logic into question, because you are projecting a persona here of a trolling, incoherent, bitter child. You continuously bloviate on and on about how golden your approach is and love and compassion and the truth being relative, yet you then make dogmatic accusations that don’t reflect any of the horseshit you were selling in your previous posts. You’re also seemingly oblivious to how ridiculous you look calling the guy who created the site you are posting on a “prick” and expecting something positive to come from that. The fact that your comments are even showing up here reflects a tremendous amount of restraint on Jan’s part, in my opinion.
4) I’m relatively certain that the phrase “dumbed-down” is not new, nor is the need for its existence in the vernacular.
5) Rather than swinging wildly at the shadows on the wall of your cave, I recommend that you actually take your own copious advice on being unattached and clean up your own shit before slinging it out into cyberspace where everyone who isn’t fortunate enough to get out of the way has to task themselves with cleaning it off of everything it comes into contact with. When not even the surrogate persona you have constructed here who gives all of this free advice on the perfection of his approach to life can keep from going batshit crazy in a discussion that he has hijacked, you’ve got bigger problems than Jan or anyone else thinking that you are a jackass.
[If you bothered to read the book you posted, or had a general knowledge of Greek philosophy, you would realize that Sextus Empiricus proposed that we should suspend judgement about all beliefs.]
Haha. I actually DID read the book I posted. Very haughty assumption to suggest I didn’t read it, since you are not PRESENT here to experience it with me.
AND if you actually DID read it yourself, you will have found that suspension of judgment consists of exposing any criterion for truth. In this instance here, it’s the Trivium and Quadrivium.
[I have no idea under what circumstances I am going to die, whether fortunate enough to have a bed to lay back on or so forth. Neither do you of your end. I do know that Jan’s research on this specific subject is vastly more informative than the punitive tripe that you have been selling.]
Of course you have no idea! Embrace that uncertainty. But while you’re at it, try to make that a motto of the life you still live. You will find much more joy out of doing so.
And as far as your claim that Jan, as your unquestionable authority goes, you have made up your mind. A certainty so you can feel safe at night.
[Neither you or I know what Jan’s “school of logic” is. The irony (again and again and again with you) is that you are making the same kinds of assumptions about Jan that you say that he has made about Wasson, especially in regards to intent. The obvious difference is that he has done the research to substantiate his claims, and you have done absolutely nothing. Jan has every right to call what passes for your logic into question, because you are projecting a persona here of a trolling, incoherent, bitter child. You continuously bloviate on and on about how golden your approach is and love and compassion and the truth being relative, yet you then make dogmatic accusations that don’t reflect any of the horseshit you were selling in your previous posts.]
Jan’s school of logic mirrors quite a bit to what Sextus writes about, alone just in his Against the Logicians. But, YOU need to READ and do the RESEARCH before you jump to these conclusions. And if you had actually read this work in full AND the full citations for further reading you might apprehend the argument here. Well, we’re playing on your ground here. Follow your criterion, do the research.
And the truth is relative, because the universe you live in happens to be impermanent. Ay and all criterion, such as the Trivium are illusory. I’m not disregarding the Trivium as a whole, for it does help very selectively.
It’s ironic that you assume I’m dogmatic, when in fact your school of criterion is dogmatic in itself! This is exactly what Sextus writes about – these kinds of people. If you HAD READ and actually did more research on the matter AND did your further reading in the glossary provided, you might avoid these incorrect assumptions.
I am aware of people who promote the Trivium, but not nearly as extreme as Irvin or you seem to do. I’ve been through another dogmatic criterion of truth with people before: the Holy Bible, whom many Christians espouse as the one and only infallible criterion of truth. Why? Because it teaches people “how” to think critically and “filter” out all other nonsense. It’s dangerous to walk this road. Been there, done that.
[I’m relatively certain that the phrase “dumbed-down” is not new, nor is the need for its existence in the vernacular.]
Agreed.
[Rather than swinging wildly at the shadows on the wall of your cave, I recommend that you actually take your own copious advice on being unattached and clean up your own shit before slinging it out into cyberspace where everyone who isn’t fortunate enough to get out of the way has to task themselves with cleaning it off of everything it comes into contact with. When not even the surrogate persona you have constructed here who gives all of this free advice on the perfection of his approach to life can keep from going batshit crazy in a discussion that he has hijacked, you’ve got bigger problems than Jan or anyone else thinking that you are a jackass.]
Now I could be wrong, but is this just another one of Jan Irvin’s sock puppets? If not, he has certainly succeeded in having you as his mouthpiece. It sounds exactly like him. Haha. Just an observation.
Nevertheless, I do not simply “sling shit into cyberspace” (not to mention that in cyberspace there is more junk here than in your garage!). I have offered a good start with a viable alternative than what Irvin is preaching. People need to look at this information and see that Irvin’s Trivium is not as default as it looks.
These arguments have been going on for thousands of years and I am not one to come out any kind of victor now. I have no desire. I am simply informing people that there are works out on the horizon which they can study and decide for themselves.
What works have you cited in regards to this specific topic, you know, Wasson and mushrooms? Essentially, what you are doing is attempting to tar and feather Jan because you certainly haven’t refuted his research. This is why he uses the phrase “kill the messenger” appropriately. The topic we are supposedly commenting on is covered in the podcast, yet you don’t seem to be able to operate in that framework. Perhaps your comments regarding the fallibility of the Trivium would be more apropos on a page dedicated to the Trivium? Or in a thread dedicated to the Trivium in the Forum?
You do understand that there are countless refutations of the Skeptics throughout history, don’t you? You do understand that philosophy has moved on since the days of Sextus? So are we to look forward to you turning the comment section of future podcasts into a “What Joseph Pierce learned today about philosophy after a cursory google search and subsequent five minutes of skimming text” discussion? Because that seems to be what you want from this.
There are plenty of places on this site where your egosyntonic diatribes could be crammed into that would actually make a fraction of sense.
“These arguments have been going on for thousands of years and I am not one to come out any kind of victor now. I have no desire. I am simply informing people that there are works out on the horizon which they can study and decide for themselves.”
Do you mean arguments that have nothing to do with the topic at hand? Or perhaps an argument where one uses a specific discussion as his own personal therapy session? Do you mean an argument where one person gives facts (the who, what, where, and when) in order to better understand a subject, and the other person chooses to focus on his opponent’s footwear? Or perhaps the way his perceived opponent goes about his life (which isn’t truly knowable unless he has occupied the same physical space).
[What works have you cited in regards to this specific topic, you know, Wasson and mushrooms?]
My argument is not against Wasson and mushrooms. I think Irvin does a great job presenting a possible conspiracy involved with Wasson et al.
That’s about all the Trivium is good for: Tracing possible connections of history in a solid manner. Beyond that, the correct revision of history is insufficient and irrelevant. Why? Again, it cannot EVER get into the thought processes and therefore motives of these suspicious individuals Irvin exposes. Irvin was not there to OBSERVE firsthand or ask these suspicious individuals, like Wasson, what was really going on in his mind in order to do the things that are suspected of him. Firsthand observational experience cannot be circumvented by the Trivium or ANY OTHER criterion, as Sextus Empiricus and others before him AND after him have discussed.
[You do understand that there are countless refutations of the Skeptics throughout history, don’t you? You do understand that philosophy has moved on since the days of Sextus?]
Yeah, just as atheists would like to claim, “We’ve moved on from Christianity!” No kidding. Hehe. The argument has moved on, but it’s evolution is still with us. Yes, the great conversation is still here for you and others like Jan Irvin, like a brick wall for you to bang your head against.
The real issue is YOU. Your Consciousness as a force of Nature, is the only criterion and it is always unattainable and unknowable. It exists as Nothing, and therefore, no existence is to be defined by measurement. So, no one outside of you is dumbed down if they don’t happen to “get” on the same page by this dogmatic criterion you espouse. It’s merely your PERCEPTION, your ego which you need to learn how to cultivate and be aware of. That’s all.
[Do you mean arguments that have nothing to do with the topic at hand?]
This does have everything to to with the topic at hand. Again, I do not dissent from Jan Irvin’s exterior conspiracy connections. And I’m not disputing “conspiracy.” All of history is a conspiracy. He’s correct. So, R. Gordon Wasson’s connections MAY indeed have definite validity, but what does it do for me, or for you? Nothing, except bind you into a pile of intellectual and everlasting pessimism. It’s what one poster, John, had said about the dangerous road to nihilism.
But again, the main point is that whether or not Wasson indeed was connected in the way which is presented on the Brain or in this interview, cannot EVER really get into the minds of Wasson, McKenna or Huxley, in terms of their OWN INTERNAL thought processes which gave them the possible motives to do what they are suspected of doing or being a participant of. And again, Irvin was NOT THERE, either inquiring into their minds, OR observing FIRSTHAND experience.
And this, my friend, if you actually READ the writings of Sextus, this is part of his argument to suspend judgment. Because, after all, this IS what the Trivium method does – it judges, via the person utilizing it – the milieu of every person, place or thing.
50 years from now, some scholar could come right along and refine or refute Irvin’s assessment of Wasson and his apparent connections. This has been the case throughout history. Someone comes along, and – oh my! – this planet earth really isn’t what we thought it was after all!
[Do you mean an argument where one person gives facts (the who, what, where, and when) in order to better understand a subject, and the other person chooses to focus on his opponent’s footwear?]
You’re expecting me here to substantiate my own counter research and reading based upon the criterion of the very criterion I have exposed! How silly. 🙂
“So, R. Gordon Wasson’s connections MAY indeed have definite validity, but what does it do for me, or for you? Nothing, except bind you into a pile of intellectual and everlasting pessimism. It’s what one poster, John, had said about the dangerous road to nihilism.”
The irony of this quote is that nihilism is an offshoot of skepticism. Most of the people who throw the term around have absolutely no idea what it truly means, nor do they have any idea about the heart of the philosophies of Nietzche or Kierkegaard. I would have to say that the study of the perceived darker side of things (conspiracies and the control system) has actually better equipped me to understand myself. As to what value this information has for me, personally, I would say that its value is a bit diminished because I already understand that narratives are bullshit. But I am fully aware that many of us still root and tether ourselves to beliefs. Much like your belief that Jan should suspend all judgement while you pass enough judgement around to satisfy the needs of a large southern Baptist Church revival.
Research like this can be an entry point into a realization about a flawed narrative. That can be an empowering process for many people. I don’t stay in the conspiratorial realm for too long because I think that it can tend to be a bit disempowering with prolonged exposure. I can gain a pretty good understanding of boiling water by sticking my hand in it, but I wouldn’t want to keep it there.
“Whoever battles monsters should take care not to become a monster too, for if you stare long enough into the Abyss, the Abyss stares back into you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
I’m not sure how you can make the leap that researching a misunderstood historical subject will bind one to everlasting pessimism. I research many esoteric subjects far darker than this one. I’m also a practicing herbalist, permaculturist, and therapist. Pessimism doesn’t really work for me, but pursuing knowledge of how things operate around me and how I can affect them certainly does. Jan’s research on this subject doesn’t just expose the Wasson narrative as fallacious, it gives us a view of how manufactured culture works as an operating system. Being that we are steeped in conditioning and programming, unless someone is able to map their environment on even the most basic level, they will still be perceiving the projected template reality as their own.
If you have a better or more efficient tool or technology for mapping out the control system for someone who is exposed to it, feel free to share it with us. Because I have yet to see anyone secure true liberty of consciousness by avoiding any understanding of the machinations of those who actively act to suppress it, be it church, state, or even on the most basic level of family, and then subsequently understanding how their thoughts, ideas, and actions help to perpetuate said machinations.
In my work, I routinely come across sincere people who have been sold a bill of goods by the New Age community. They are told that they should simply “think happy thoughts” and everything will turn around for them. That’s easy for someone who hasn’t been brutalized as a child to say, or for someone who doesn’t have serious psychological and physical issues to work through.
The Trivium is merely a tool in the toolbox. It is perfectly suited for verifying research relating to dates, times, and specific events. In the book you linked to, Sextus uses the Trivium before discussing each philosopher he criticized. He gives us the who, what, where, and when. Then he uses the Quadrivium to navigate those parameters. The Trivium defines the criterion, the Quadrivium navigates the space therein and then maps the connections that extend from it. I don’t recall Jan ever stating that the pursuit of the knowledge of a thing ended at the Trivium. It seems like you have a bone to pick with Jan because of the way that he approaches those who disagree with him, which is fine. His pointing to the Trivium repeatedly in these exchanges is directly related to fact that several posters here were simply disagreeing with his research without knowing what it was comprised of. Again, Jan was challenging readers to suspend belief and do their basic grammar before making a decision about it. This is exactly the framework of all philosophical critique. And, as stated previously, this is exactly how Sextus went about his work.
Your contention that Jan didn’t have firsthand knowledge falls flat because he has read the writings, the personal letters, and the institutional documents concerning Wasson in order to answer the who, what, where, and when. He then navigates that territory via the Quadrivium to determine the bigger picture of how and why. This is where you can make a legitimate claim that he did not have firsthand knowledge. However, in this case, given the clearly cited connections between Wasson and the control system, there is clearly enough circumstantial evidence presented to question the validity of the Wassonian mythos.
Many in the New Age movement have replaced one dysfunctional narrative with another. In this specific case, the burgeoning entheogenic community has the opportunity to shed the weight of belief. I fully support that process because I fail to see how these narratives possibly serve us. Unlike you, I do see that as a valuable service to humanity, in much the same way as a researcher exposing the flawed narrative of a religion, or an economic model, or a political movement. That’s kind of the theme here. Clearly people come here for that kind of information, so projecting yourself as being beyond the use of that information is kind of like pissing in the wind.
Perhaps you would be better served to create your own space where people can go to seek out your philosophy instead of forcing it down the throats of people who weren’t looking for it in the first place.
[The irony of this quote is that nihilism is an offshoot of skepticism.]
No kidding. But there are many “grades” of skepticism, many schools, many derivatives. Sextus exposes many of these Academics, Stoics, et al for their own “brand” of skepticism. So, thank you for agreeing with me; yes, there ARE skeptics here, Irvin included, who, in my opinion, go the dangerous road toward nihilism. Do the ACTUAL reading and you will see Sextus naming these as Skeptics. Just don’t leave this to your conflation.
[…nor do they have any idea about the heart of the philosophies of Nietzche or Kierkegaard.]
I studied these philosophers in college. Still, that makes me no expert. No “appeal to authority” here. Kierkegaard for instance is a well know existentialist. But he was, if you study him, also utilizing a criteria for truth. BUT if you read Sextus, he makes all arguments exposing that there is NO criterion. Existence is thought to be measured, but even the measuring rod is in question, furthermore ANY demonstration of it.
[Research like this can be an entry point into a realization about a flawed narrative. That can be an empowering process for many people.]
You mean, like people who have already made up their minds about certainty, about a set criterion? Well, I suppose that can be the case, but who knows? You’ll have to ask “most” people in general with FIRSTHAND observational experience. 😉
[“Whoever battles monsters should take care not to become a monster too, for if you stare long enough into the Abyss, the Abyss stares back into you.”]
The Abyss ought to be welcomed, for therein you might realize the futility of certainty. Sextus makes note of Democritus having used the Void, as is similar to Nietzche’s “abyss.”
However, Democritus, per the writings of Sextus, is also ambivalent on the whole matter. For he himself, in some of his writings, appeals to a criterion.
[But Democritus sometimes does away with the things that appear to the senses and says that none of these things appear truthfully, but only in the manner of opinion, while what is true in the things that there are is the fact that there are atoms and void. For he says “By convention sweet and by convention bitter, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention color; in verity atoms and void.” (I.e., perceptible things are thought – that is, held by opinion – to be, but it is not these things that truthfully are, but only atoms and void.)
And in “Strengthenings”,despite having promised to attribute strong trust to the senses, he is nonetheless found condemning them. For he says “In fact we understand nothing precise, but what changes according to the condition of the body and of the things that enter it and of the things that offer resistance to it.” And again he says “It has been shown in many ways that in verity we do not understandwhat each thing is or is not like.”
And in “On Ideas” he says “A human being must know by this rule that he is removed from verity”;and again:“This reasoning too shows that in verity we know nothing about anything,but opinion is for everyone a reshaping.”
And yet again: “However it will be clear that to know in verity what each thing is like is hopeless.”In these places,then,he more or less removes all knowledge,even though it is only the senses that he singles out for attack.
But in “Rules”he says that there are two forms of knowledge, one through the senses and the other through thought.Of these he calls the one through thought “legitimate,”testifying to its reliability for the judgment of truth,while he names the one through the senses “bastard,”not allowing it to be unerring in the discernment of what is true.
He says in so many words:“There are two forms of judgment,one legitimate,the other bastard. And all these are of the bastard kind: sight, hearing, smell, taste,touch.The other one is legitimate and separated from this.” Then,ranking the legitimate kind before the bastard one, he goes on to say: “When the bastard one can no longer see any smaller or hear or smell or taste orperceive by touch, but more finely,…So, according to this man, too, reason is the criterion, which he calls legitimate judgment.] *Against the Logicians, pg 30*
[I’m not sure how you can make the leap that researching a misunderstood historical subject will bind one to everlasting pessimism. I research many esoteric subjects far darker than this one.]
My experience is that one can become too engrossed in a particular historical subject; in other words, focusing too narrowly and dogmatically on what happens in history as the road to apprehending everything there is to know via a criterion like the Trivium. The Trivium’s fine as far as historical, and perhaps theoretical revisions are concerned.
[I’m also a practicing herbalist, permaculturist, and therapist.]
That’s awesome. 😉 I’m also an herbalist and a permaculturist. But not a therapist. Haha. You have me beat on that one.
But I’m not online or in any books for you to research and read about in order for you to successfully construct whether I’m lying or I practice a pseudo herbalist and permaculturist lifestyle. You could contact me personally, to get how I might perceive these practices in my own INTERNAL mind and thought processes. Or you could experience me FIRSTHAND by observing my practices and my motives for doing so. Even then in the aftermath, you would probably NOT agree with all of my herbalist and permaculturist procedures and principles. Down the road, I might not either. 😉
The truth is that there is no everlasting, set criterion for “existence,” inasmuch as there is no existence to be measured!
[If you have a better or more efficient tool or technology for mapping out the control system for someone who is exposed to it, feel free to share it with us.]
I personally peruse Michael Hoffman’s Egodeath.com website for this kind of inquiry. It deals with “Self Control and Cybernetics.” Much of his philosophy is credited to where Alan Watts left off, or mused about in his “This Is It.” http://www.egodeath.com/
Now, I do not also espouse some of Hoffman’s attitude and tone when, for example, he treats us with his statistical views on the efficacy of Meditation vs. Entheogens. http://www.egodeath.com/IneffectivenessFallacy.htm
He argues for Block Universe Determinism, which posits that the homunculus is an illusory “steersman”, ie ego, and that, really, our “existence” if you wish to name it that, for lack of a better term, is actually not existence in itself, but the “existence” is the Block Universe which cannot be measured, or have any criteria, “by which” (Sextus) man can conceive himself. Instead, humanity, as an animal (Sextus) is simply a force of the Universe, or Nature, who is controlled uncontrollably by the abyss which is unfathomable.
[In my work, I routinely come across sincere people who have been sold a bill of goods by the New Age community. They are told that they should simply “think happy thoughts” and everything will turn around for them.]
Well, I would agree. We need to ethically strike a balance between “good” and “bad.” But even THAT is illusory. Even the balance, the scale, the criterion, is illusory.
When it’s all said and done, all that is left is happiness. But what IS happiness? Happiness just is, pessimism just is. If you try to define it, you negate it, putting a beginning and an end, a teleos, a goal. It’s just the journey. So happiness is not defined by it’s pursuit, nor by it’s demonstration. Because once you demonstrate it, you must rely on a criterion in which to practice it. (Sextus)
[The Trivium is merely a tool in the toolbox. It is perfectly suited for verifying research relating to dates, times, and specific events.]
Yes, it is. But only effective for “verifying” possible items in history. But as you ought to know, “dates, times, and specific events” are illusory also in nature. As a tool in the toolbox, you are consenting that it is a criterion, of which Sextus exposes.
[In the book you linked to, Sextus uses the Trivium before discussing each philosopher he criticized.]
Yes, but I never claimed that the Trivium is something to toss to the trash bin completely. If you had read my previous posts, I have said more than once that the Trivium is an intellectual defense criterion that is best used SELECTIVELY. Neither should it be dished out in a harsh tone, not should it be employed where non-violent, emotional toned conversations are demonstrated.
Every time you put something into writing, or even communicate verbally, you utilize criterion. Thus, the non-violent communication emotional, non-rational tone is emphasized. Structure isn’t good or bad, it’s just temporal, illusory. Criteria like the trivium, dealing with words and concepts, is by no means a de facto, default way of critical thinking, as Irvin adamantly claims.
[I don’t recall Jan ever stating that the pursuit of the knowledge of a thing ended at the Trivium.]
He didn’t. The trivium was regarded as a criterion “by which” man utilizes a clear mind. Therefore, man becomes the criteria himself through this process. However, Sextus exposes this by again, introducing suspension of judgment.
[It seems like you have a bone to pick with Jan because of the way that he approaches those who disagree with him, which is fine.]
Yes! That is really all that I desire to call him out on. You know, the man Irvin just chewed out on his comments section might actually save Irvin himself from some disaster. Who knows? This kind of “intoned” disrespect is really uncalled for, in my opinion.
[Your contention that Jan didn’t have firsthand knowledge falls flat because he has read the writings, the personal letters, and the institutional documents concerning Wasson in order to answer the who, what, where, and when.]
Incorrect. I have been writing back and forth between you and Irvin for some time now. Well, both of you SEEM to know me and my motives and experiences and thought processes, but really, you both have no claim on that, because it is only myself with the experiences to write what I do. Again, actually READ carefully what Sextus has to say in inference about these “who, what, where, when” criteria.
[However, in this case, given the clearly cited connections between Wasson and the control system, there is clearly enough circumstantial evidence presented to question the validity of the Wassonian mythos.]
Sure there is. Remember, my argument was never against the apparent connections of Wasson to the control systems. See, not everyone can be so easily labeled as malicious because they have apparent connections to a conspiracy. You have no idea what might have been Wasson’s more extensive thoughts and motives, INSTEAD of the few letters he allegedly wrote. It’s like these Christian scholars who assume that a particular set of biblical doctrinal criteria are well established in the contemporary Church because of these sparse records that are found in the Near East. When in fact, so few are complete, and many are fragmented, not to mention the fact we have copies upon copies upon copies.
I don’t care. Someone, like I said, could come along and totally blow the lid on Irvin’s research, simply because some other documents from Wasson turn up in the database.
The criteria of solidarity fails becaause the universe is impermanent and truth is change. Change is indefinite and cannot be defined, because it withdraws from any boundary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_theology
[Many in the New Age movement have replaced one dysfunctional narrative with another. In this specific case, the burgeoning entheogenic community has the opportunity to shed the weight of belief. I fully support that process because I fail to see how these narratives possibly serve us. Unlike you, I do see that as a valuable service to humanity, in much the same way as a researcher exposing the flawed narrative of a religion, or an economic model, or a political movement.]
Agreed, actually. But the assumption you make (“Unlike you…”) is not accurate. I do see this as a possible service to humanity. But let’s not just leave this as a psy-op. The whole apparent “psy-op” of Wasson, et al is simply a phase of humanity’s evolution.
[Perhaps you would be better served to create your own space where people can go to seek out your philosophy instead of forcing it down the throats of people who weren’t looking for it in the first place.]
Well, there’s the dialectic, right? Nothing wrong with that. Structure is temporal because it’s illusory. So, right back at you. There are people who feel that what you are promoting is being shoved down their throats. By god, maybe I should tell you about those long hours I spent debating Christians who felt like I was shoving things down their throats!? Or atheists likewise. And I was debating completely different matters than on this site.
I feel more like not participating in society. Doing my herbalism, permaculture, just living out in the woods. But unfortunately, people and shit follow you. It’s about happiness. Realizing contentment is not something to be gained or knowledge to attain. It’s already within you. Just rub the dirt off the diamond.
Reveal the divine spark inside you as the Gnostic treatises say at Nag Hammadi. This ought to be the epitome of the Gnostic experience, for those of you here at Gnostic Media.
Very nice post, Joseph, and very well articulated. I feel that I have a much better grasp of your thoughts and there are very few that I disagree with. There really isn’t a school of philosophy that I feel that I belong to. I am far from being a defender of being rooted in strictly nuts and bolts reality. I do see history as being somewhat illusory, but the themes are what I find important. I see institutions and centralized power crumbling, and to be honest, that process seems to be inevitable. However, for people who aren’t fortunate enough to be in an ideal situation for self reflection and contemplation via living immersed in nature, these are very confusing and troubling times. I am tasked with rendering aid to these people.
To a person who looks at the dialectic of dark and light as illusory, using perhaps the most materialist approach to understanding the world around us may seem trivial. But that’s exactly how I was able to come to see things differently. I was fortunate enough to have studied philosophy on my own prior to this, as well as psychology, so that transition was much easier for me than it seems to be for some. I see people on a regular basis who are caught up in the first visceral stages of programming.
This research by Jan is actually several steps beyond that. And I think that what I am witnessing in Jan is a beautiful progression of a man who is working through his own beliefs. I have seen this in only a handful of researchers in the alternative fields. It takes courage to cite the folly in something you have invested so much time in. I would guess that this is why he is passionate about it.
It’s whenever I get my hands dirty with a subject from a nut-and-bolts perspective that I often wind up getting a greater sense of the whole. For many people, the conspiratorial genre, or self-help, or enlightenment, etc. seem to merely be forms of entertainment. The secondary catch-web that Jan refers to quite eloquently, is also operating on a much grander scale.
I have noticed that we will often nibble at the edges of fundamental truths until our previous tastes change. We don’t like the things we used to. They just don’t give us the same joy they used to. And when that old pattern becomes so stale that we feel the true burden of hauling that carcass around with us, we are ready for what’s next.
In your first post in this section of comments, you mentioned love and compassion. That compassion needs to be extended to everyone. I was taken aback by how quickly you shifted from that perspective to a seemingly dogmatic tone. We all get triggered for our own development. Me, you, Jan, the elites. It is a matter of what we do with that confrontation that is important.
I was once very close to writing off humanity and pursuing a much more solitary path. Upon reflection and years of contemplation, I decided to rush back into the burning house and see if I can help. When someone is caught in netting crafted in material reality, I have found that the first step is to help them navigate their immediate environment. This may seem vulgar to some, but it usually works. One step at a time. Once they create the space necessary for a wider perspective, then we move together until there is resistance. Then we map. Then we move. This is done in the true alchemical spirit. There is no fast-forward or cutting in line because each new perspective requires a great deal of sacrifice to reach.
I understand that the differences in our approach are more than likely due to circumstance. That’s why I don’t discount the importance of what may seem trivial at first glance. A few years ago, it certainly would have seemed trivial to me. And in the process of working actively with others through this process, I have gained a great deal of insight into how we got here and where we are going.
Thank you for the kind response, Greater Nowheres 🙂
[for people who aren’t fortunate enough to be in an ideal situation for self reflection and contemplation via living immersed in nature, these are very confusing and troubling times. I am tasked with rendering aid to these people.]
Well said. I as well feel tasked to aiding these kinds of people. I imagine the ones especially glued to the city life and hope often that there might be a mass migration into nature at some point in our lifetimes. Haha.
[And I think that what I am witnessing in Jan is a beautiful progression of a man who is working through his own beliefs. I have seen this in only a handful of researchers in the alternative fields. It takes courage to cite the folly in something you have invested so much time in. I would guess that this is why he is passionate about it.]
Absolutely. I give Jan a lot of credit. Yes, he is also one who is working through his conditioning. It takes someone bold to present what he does.
[For many people, the conspiratorial genre, or self-help, or enlightenment, etc. seem to merely be forms of entertainment.]
I do admit, though, that many times these genres are a form of entertainment for me, especially research on the internet. But I also am aware that on the practical, materialist level, I ought to be concerned. Aware that I can make a difference on a local level; which is, many times, what I am dissatisfied about. It’s really my own ego here.
[I have noticed that we will often nibble at the edges of fundamental truths until our previous tastes change. We don’t like the things we used to. They just don’t give us the same joy they used to. And when that old pattern becomes so stale that we feel the true burden of hauling that carcass around with us, we are ready for what’s next.]
Yes. I suppose that’s where I am presently. Ready for what’s next. Something deeper. But not everyone is at your level or mine. Many, I realize, are still dealing with the first or second rounds of dealing with their social conditioning.
[In your first post in this section of comments, you mentioned love and compassion. That compassion needs to be extended to everyone. I was taken aback by how quickly you shifted from that perspective to a seemingly dogmatic tone.]
Absolutely. It almost can’t be helped. It’s very difficult speaking in this language without being dualistic (not that that’s wrong) and then consequently sliding into dogmatism, which seems, many times, to constitute the nature of debate or argument nowadays. I was aware of my hypocrisy, but if I didn’t answer JUST ONE MORE time to defend my ego, then I just didn’t feel justified. It’s addictive – the need to be right.
I felt the need to comment about how the material was being presented, precisely because of my own experience with my wife. Being intellectual and philosophically minded, I usually am unconsciously preaching to her about something like the trivium or the history and hypocrisy of the Christian church. But I always come across (according to her) very condescending and the argument itself becomes threatening to our relationship.
I know many people who just do not seem to listen, or read or do their own proper research. Maybe they really are acting stupid and perhaps totally incompetent to follow through with sound logic. But in the end, I’m not making friends. For me, the words of Jesus make perfect sense: “Let any one of you who is without sin (error) be the first to throw a stone..” (John 8:7)
[I understand that the differences in our approach are more than likely due to circumstance.]
Agreed.
Jay, as much as I hate to enable laziness, here is a link to an article published by the University of California Press by Joanne Woiak, titled “Designing a Brave New World: Eugenics, Politics, and Fiction”.
http://theburningtree.wikispaces.com/file/view/BNW+Eugenics+Politics+Fiction.pdf
Do all of us a favor before commenting and trouble yourself to read it before commenting on it.
Here are a few quotes from Aldous as an appetizer:
“About 99.5% of the entire population of the planet are as stupid and philistine
. . . as the great masses of the English. The important thing, it seems to me,
is not to attack the 99.5% . . . but to try to see that the 0.5% survives, keeps its
quality up to the highest possible level, and, if possible, dominates the rest. The
imbecility of the 99.5% is appalling—but after all, what else can you expect?”
“How do they expect democratic institutions to survive in a country where an
increasing percentage of the population is mentally defective? Half-wits fairly
ask for dictators. Improve the average intelligence of the population and selfgovernance
will become, not only inevitable, but efficient.”
“But if, as would be the case in a perfectly eugenized state, every individual is
capable of playing the superior part, who will consent or be content to do the
dirty work and obey? The inhabitants of one of Mr. Wells’s numerous Utopias
solve the problem by ruling and being ruled, doing high-brow and low-brow
work, in turns. While Jones plays the piano, Smith spreads the manure. . . . An
admirable state of affairs if it could be arranged. . . . States function as smoothly
as they do because the greater part of the population is not very intelligent,
dreads responsibility, and desires nothing better than to be told what to do. . . .”
“A state with a population consisting of nothing but these superior people could
not hope to last a year. The best is ever the enemy of the good. If the eugenists
are in too much of an enthusiastic hurry to improve the race, they will only succeed
in destroying it.”
“The ideal state is one in which there is material democracy controlled by an
aristocracy of the intellect. . . . The active and intelligent oligarchies of the ideal
state do not yet exist. But the Fascist party in Italy, the Communist party in Russia,
the Kuomintang in China are still their inadequate precursors.”
“We may either persist in our present course, which is disastrous, or we must
abandon democracy and allow ourselves to be ruled dictatorially by men who
will compel us to do and suffer what a rational foresight demands.”
Huxley seemed to go through a transformation throughout his life. Much like any human being, to tar and feather him as being all good or all evil is an oversimplification, in my opinion. But he most certainly was a cynical eugenicist for a large portion of his life. He was a product of selective breeding, and it seems that it took a substantial period of time for him to soften and show his humanity. But one can argue that the damage of his previous work in mind control was already done. Regardless of how much regret he had for his involvement in some truly horrific schemes, much like Oppenheimer and his creation, we are all left to pick up the pieces in the aftermath.
“So, R. Gordon Wasson’s connections MAY indeed have definite validity, but what does it do for me, or for you? Nothing, except bind you into a pile of intellectual and everlasting pessimism. It’s what one poster, John, had said about the dangerous road to nihilism.”
The irony of this quote is that nihilism is an offshoot of skepticism. Most of the people who throw the term around have absolutely no idea what it truly means, nor do they have any idea about the heart of the philosophies of Nietzche or Kierkegaard. I would have to say that the study of the perceived darker side of things (conspiracies and the control system) has actually better equipped me to understand myself. As to what value this information has for me, personally, I would say that its value is a bit diminished because I already understand that narratives are bullshit. But I am fully aware that many of us still root and tether ourselves to beliefs. Much like your belief that Jan should suspend all judgement while you pass enough judgement around to satisfy the needs of a large southern Baptist Church revival.
Research like this can be an entry point into a realization about a flawed narrative. That can be an empowering process for many people. I don’t stay in the conspiratorial realm for too long because I think that it can tend to be a bit disempowering with prolonged exposure. I can gain a pretty good understanding of boiling water by sticking my hand in it, but I wouldn’t want to keep it there.
“Whoever battles monsters should take care not to become a monster too, for if you stare long enough into the Abyss, the Abyss stares back into you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
I’m not sure how you can make the leap that researching a misunderstood historical subject will bind one to everlasting pessimism. I research many esoteric subjects far darker than this one. I’m also a practicing herbalist, permaculturist, and therapist. Pessimism doesn’t really work for me, but pursuing knowledge of how things operate around me and how I can affect them certainly does. Jan’s research on this subject doesn’t just expose the Wasson narrative as fallacious, it gives us a view of how manufactured culture works as an operating system. Being that we are steeped in conditioning and programming, unless someone is able to map their environment on even the most basic level, they will still be perceiving the projected template reality as their own.
If you have a better or more efficient tool or technology for mapping out the control system for someone who is exposed to it, feel free to share it with us. Because I have yet to see anyone secure true liberty of consciousness by avoiding any understanding of the machinations of those who actively act to suppress it, be it church, state, or even on the most basic level of family, and then subsequently understanding how their thoughts, ideas, and actions help to perpetuate said machinations.
In my work, I routinely come across sincere people who have been sold a bill of goods by the New Age community. They are told that they should simply “think happy thoughts” and everything will turn around for them. That’s easy for someone who hasn’t been brutalized as a child to say, or for someone who doesn’t have serious psychological and physical issues to work through.
The Trivium is merely a tool in the toolbox. It is perfectly suited for verifying research relating to dates, times, and specific events. In the book you linked to, Sextus uses the Trivium before discussing each philosopher he criticized. He gives us the who, what, where, and when. Then he uses the Quadrivium to navigate those parameters. The Trivium defines the criterion, the Quadrivium navigates the space therein and then maps the connections that extend from it. I don’t recall Jan ever stating that the pursuit of the knowledge of a thing ended at the Trivium. It seems like you have a bone to pick with Jan because of the way that he approaches those who disagree with him, which is fine. His pointing to the Trivium repeatedly in these exchanges is directly related to fact that several posters here were simply disagreeing with his research without knowing what it was comprised of. Again, Jan was challenging readers to suspend belief and do their basic grammar before making a decision about it. This is exactly the framework of all philosophical critique. And, as stated previously, this is exactly how Sextus went about his work.
Your contention that Jan didn’t have firsthand knowledge falls flat because he has read the writings, the personal letters, and the institutional documents concerning Wasson in order to answer the who, what, where, and when. He then navigates that territory via the Quadrivium to determine the bigger picture of how and why. This is where you can make a legitimate claim that he did not have firsthand knowledge. However, in this case, given the clearly cited connections between Wasson and the control system, there is clearly enough circumstantial evidence presented to question the validity of the Wassonian mythos.
Many in the New Age movement have replaced one dysfunctional narrative with another. In this specific case, the burgeoning entheogenic community has the opportunity to shed the weight of belief. I fully support that process because I fail to see how these narratives possibly serve us. Unlike you, I do see that as a valuable service to humanity, in much the same way as a researcher exposing the flawed narrative of a religion, or an economic model, or a political movement. That’s kind of the theme here. Clearly people come here for that kind of information, so projecting yourself as being beyond the use of that information is kind of like pissing in the wind.
Perhaps you would be better served to create your own space where people can go to seek out your philosophy instead of forcing it down the throats of people who weren’t looking for it in the first place.
Jan,
I am going to pose something to you that may be “idiotic” to a trivium adherent.
Have you looked into the research done by Courtney Brown at Farsight.org?
Especially the remote viewing experiment regarding 2012? http://farsight.org/demo/Demo2008/RV_Demo_2008_Page1.html
Then there is the Webbot information from Cliff High at halfpasthuman.com
I wish to borrow a little something I learned from Carlos Castenada’s fourth Don Juan
book TALES OF POWER – The Tonal and the Nagual.
The Tonal is what describes or names everything in the world. The rules that govern the Tonal can be said to be the very same Trivium you talk about.
The Nagual, on the other hand, surrounds the Tonal; it is the place where power resides; it is where creativity takes place. It cannot be seen or apprehended by the Tonal, the Tonal can only see its effects.
I realize this comes from the much maligned Castenada who was most definitely a fraud. But, I have the unmitigated gall to think that the concepts of the Tonal and Nagual are valid.
The issues related to experimenting with psychedelics have much more to do with personal power than applying the trivium.
I believe Mckenna played ball with the power elite when he was a young man; he was an academic who needed to have a place in that environment. I think his new age views got him laid and accepted. The influence of Huxley in his life came very early because he read THE ART OF SEEING at the suggestion of his mother when he was 13. He was at the vanguard of a movement whose shining lights were Wasson, Huxley, Leary et.al.. However, I do believe he was sincere in his belief that mushrooms showed him the way with regard to the King Wen squence algorithim which describes a curve whose terminus is 12 21 2012. I believe him when he says he came up with it before he knew about the Mayan Calendar. I believe him when he says he was spoken to by an entity the he met while intoxicated on magic mushrooms.
Another thing I want to ask you is what you think about Graham Hancock? Have you read SUPERNATURAL? Dou you think he is also defrauding us truth seekers?
The elite have TV, Hollywood and a lapdog media… that’s all the brainwashing they need to control the masses. Just look around at all the brainwashed people in their daily daze. Television is the greatest brainwashing tool every invented!
What about those who kill their TV? They wouldn’t be effected by that. Who’s the largest crowd that kills their TV?
Jan I think you’ll have a field day with this interview with Simon G Powell on the Red Ice Radio website
http://www.redicecreations.com/radio3fourteen/2012/R314-120912.php
Thanks so much for this info.I really appreciate you taking the time to put it all together. The first time I remember hearing the 2012 meme was in the Ancient Prophecies NBC television show in 1994. I may have heard it before, but that is time that I can date. By the way, my husband is a Mayan Indian from Guatemala, and he’s disgusted by the whole thing.
Jan,
Fantastic information, can’t wait to start digging through your evidence. Most see this as an attack on psychedelics themselves. (how can they control our every action through the uncontrolled use of blah blah blah) When I see your mearly stating that a different use then the traditional use has been cast into the mass consciousness, use without critical thinking.
That’s how I first heard about your claims here. The accusations that you’ve done a “180” are the very reason im listening and forming my own opinion.
I will be commenting again, because I am sure I will have questions.
-Bryan