>From owner-virus@lucifer.com Tue Jun 23 15:27:10 1998
>Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by maxwell.kumo.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA18577
> for virus-outgoing; Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:17:28 -0600
>X-Authentication-Warning: maxwell.kumo.com: majordom set sender to
owner-virus@lucifer.com using -f
>Message-ID: <19980623221656.9063.qmail@hotmail.com>
>X-Originating-IP: [207.79.35.43]
>From: "B. Lane Robertson" <metaphy@hotmail.com>
>To: virus@lucifer.com, psychoanalytic-studies@sheffield.ac.uk,
> LisThink@Esosoft.com, cargan@delrio.com, brettman35@webtv.net
>Subject: virus: Why?
>Content-Type: text/plain
>Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:16:55 PDT
>Sender: owner-virus@lucifer.com
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: virus@lucifer.com
>
>Religion is a product which includes "myth" and
>"fantasy"...but myth and fantasy are necessary
>components for de-mythologizing and dis-entrancing
>one's logic ("dis-entrance" applies to the term
>"fantasy" like de-mythologize applies to myth).
>
>What I am saying is this: We write our own
>*personal* myths to illustrate in a symbolic way how
>things work out ideally (like using numbers to
>represent statistical occurrences-- the "numbers" in
>this case being the "myth" of the behavior...
>representing the ideal nature of the behaviors in
>contrast to their actual working out). Fantasy is a
>similar process by which the myth of our lives might
>be compared to an ideal projection of those lives
>into a "perfect" (hypothetical) future.
>
>Thus we have a mythologized life, an actual life,
>and a fantasized life (a past, present, and future).
> The actual life can either be remembered or
>compared to the myth ("dreamed"). It can be
>projected into the future or compared to the fantasy
>("prophesied"). The myth can, similarly, be
>compared to the fantasy to create a "hypothetical"
>present which can be compared it it's "symbolic"
>perfection to the present situation in order that
>the present might be modified to become more in line
>with the ideal ("revelation"). As such, "myth" and
>"fantasy are
>NECESSARY components for intelligent behavior.
>
>Myth (being the present projected into the past...
>and being thus resolved "perfectly" in the present
>with complete certainty-- *circularly*) must involve
>the splitting of a presently "omniscient" god-form
>into the protagonistic and antagonistic version
>which had not-- at the remembered, or mythologized,
>time-- YET resolved to that perfect state... so myth
>is *by necessity* a polytheistic, or dual state of
>good and evil/ right and wrong. As such, myth is
>not religion (but forms society-- or more properly,
>*government*-- as a splitting of self into a
>bureaucracy, or system of self and "other").
>
>"Fantasy" on the other hand, BY NECESSITY, must
>resolve the personal myth into a singularity (as the
>present omniscient god-form of self is a singularity
>in comparison to the mythologized self/ other
>dichotomy-- so to must the future "self" also be a
>singular resolution of this conceptualization... but
>in this case an IDEAL resolution of the myth which
>is similar to the existential self but which does
>not ALWAYS include this self*). Thus, the self
>transcends
>the moment through the past and with regards to a
>symbolic future-- in which the self is a logical
>god-form which must exist in order that the non-
>self
>might overcome the "error" of the moment (like the
>projection of statistics "overcomes" the error of
>behavior which doesn't conform to the "myth", or
>formulary construction, of the mathematical
>equation... and this is "magic").
>
>Religion is thus the ability to propose "theory"
>("symbolic" projection) using "reason" (the
>"conceptualized" past as positive and negative); and
>is a form of "logic" (or "faith") which finds just
>"cause" ("myth") and reasoned "effect" ("fantasy")
>about which "rationality" is formed (personal
>"meaning" in the present) and by which a
>"technology" is proposed ("god" as an ideal
>formulation of "self" validity, or "scientific"
>verification).
>
>*to the extent that the self in the present is in
>error as determined by the government or religion
>(by myth and fantasy)-- or as determined by the
>present, through rationality or self- revelation--
>the future projection might not include the present
>self. While a projected future which does not
>include the self (who is thus not "immortal", being
>"sinful"-- or which is discontinuous, being in
>error)... to the extent that one might negate
>oneself in the present for the sake of rationality,
>reasonableness, or the continuance of logic; to THIS
>extent, the ability to be self-aware in the present
>(to be "conscious" OF) might require self-negation.
> Self-negation is shamanism (or objectification),
>rather than government or religion, and might thus
>require entrancement or mystification (loss of
>consciousness with regards to reality-- that is
>"depersonalization") rather than logic (mysticism
>rather than magic).
>
>
>B. Lane Robertson
>Indiana, USA
>http://www.window.to/mindrec
>Bio: http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
>See who's chatting about this topic:
>http://www.talkcity.com/chat.cgi?room=MindRec
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com