PsiPog.net

View topic - Your ethical standpoint

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Telepathy and Empathy » Your ethical standpoint

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Your ethical standpoint

Author

Message

Posted on Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:05 pm

Joshy

Joined: 09 May 2006
Posts: 544

intrepidus6 wrote:

I have done TPS, or atleast somthing similair, not quite sure, because what I have done is more of a "you have no choice, you have to do this" not a suggestion.

Haha, You haven't been reading this thread, have you?

Posted on Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:10 pm

intrepidus6

Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 52

Joshy wrote:

Haha, You haven't been reading this thread, have you?

Why do you say this?

Posted on Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:30 pm

Jael

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 55

intrepidus6 wrote:

Afterwards I send them a telepathic "be happy" and, in my opinion, this makes it OK.

People have been very happy as they kill themselves. Ever heard of a drug overdose?

Based on your reply to Joshy, I will assume you didn't read the thread. Had Gekido not skipped over some parts of the thread, I suspect he and I wouldn't have started out on such a poor note.

Please read the thread before posting in the thread.

Jael

Posted on Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:44 pm

Jael

Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 55

One of the people who had been targeted by Adam and I discussed their experience. I will pass on a part of their comments, at their request:

Quote:

I had no reasons to commit suicide. Things were going extremely well, including having finished a great year at school, with another great year lined up. It was the height of summer and I was happy. No, this was not 'me laying blame on someone else'. This was entirely out of character for me to consider, nor had I done so previously.

One of their points was that the control did not start at the 'jump off a bridge' bit, but rather in smaller, other ways, such as the music that they listened to, typing in lower case (CAPS was apparently a pet peeve for Adam), and other non-crucial bits. Once those were firmly in place, the decline in perspective on life was unnoticeable to the target. One nasty trait was that the 'handler' would get the target down, then when the target saw the handler, they 'cheered up' the target, like a good friend would. Their control would become even stronger at that point, due to the standard bonding cycle that occurs with people.

One of the most important facts that seems to be missing at this point is the lack of understanding that TPS goes directly into the brain. It does not pass the part of the brain that can flag it as a "concerning" thought. Someone watching for TPS effects might notice they are thinking differently than they normally do, then increase their shields, since simple 'willpower' would not help them. However, most people don't think telepathy is real, let alone TPS. Even if they do recognise telepathy as real, the concept of TPS might be too far out to grasp.

The person mentioned above likened the "get stronger willpower and you won't get TPS'd" type thinking as the type of thinking that says "he wouldn't have gotten killed if he hadn't gone out late at night" or "she wouldn't have gotten raped if she hadn't been wearing those clothes" or even (my addition) "the kid wouldn't have gotten abused if they weren't so cute". (Non-consensual TPS is abuse, just a non-physical type.)

Based on another comment you made, I doubt that you are purposefully trying to blame folks for being TPS'd. However, that is one of the implications of your post.

Also, moving the conversation to PM would do a disservice to the thread itself, as the 'side' discussion is actually very important to the issue of TPS. I would like to continue the conversation publicly, and see what other folks have to add as well.

Jael

Posted on Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:32 pm

Omega92

Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 43

jael, i was not implementing that it was the victims fault, just trying to see if there was a way to prevent TPS. pardon if my post seemed like that...

my point of veiw on Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:25 am

striker42

Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 2

I agree with joe t reasoning of using tps to help a friend. I have a very dear friend who is addicted to drugs and alcohol. I have tried to help her every way I know how all to no avail. I would use tps to help her beat her addictions gladly. I could live with my choice to use tps far easier than I could live with out her in my life.

Posted on Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:51 am

WhiteRaven

Joined: 13 Jan 2006
Posts: 343

must... resist... urge... to beat... dead horse...

Not... resisting... well...

"good is what benefits lots of sentient beings, and evil is what benefits few."

okay, so murdering all the stupid people would be good because it would make all the later generations smarter... and give people more room to live in...

okay, on Rhetoric, it has made people do things they wouldn't do otherwise. Read Julius Caesar, remember that Brutus was one of Caesar's best friends, and the rest of the coup still converted him by convincing him that it was better for Rome to kill Julius, and afterward, Marc Antony easily got everyone on his side using his words, Adolf Hitler went into a room and stopped people fighting just by talking to them, need I go on?

also, who is this mysterious "Adam"?

Posted on Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:46 pm

stony1205

Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 170

WhiteRaven wrote:

WhiteRaven Said: Words Words Words

also, who is this mysterious "Adam"?

Chances are, if you dont know, it doesn't concern you. JoeT/ShadowMind already made a post about it (which is gone now). So if you didn't read it then, sucks to be you.

If you're really curious, I'm sure you can google around and whatnot and find out.

Dont go digging up the past, because they only thing you'll get is dirty.

~ Stony

Posted on Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:00 pm

Ancheron

Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 27

I have a somewhat unique perspective on this issue, being an outsider of sorts now that I have moved on. This comes from experience in my new field:

Morals are meaningless if they are based off of subjective awareness. Subjective awareness can only properly govern the inner self, the individual, the microcosm, whatever you might want to call it, isolated from the outside world. Subjective awareness and morality therefore are meaningless when attempting to address the universal issue of the application of Telepathic Suggestion for all Individuals.

Objective morality for this issue must then be found. Objective morality is absolute, for it universally applies across all levels in the Universe that was, is, and is to be.

So the point of this whole debate then, once properly defined, is this: what is the universal or absolute morality that governs TPS? Some would call any sort of absolute morality the Law of God, for it being a statement on the whole of the universe, bounded upon ony by God, and so it must be asked what is the Law of God.

The Law of God is the Will of God, and the Will of God is by definition total and all-pervasive. Therefore, all that occurs, all that must occur, all that has occurred, is part of the Will of God, and therefore is under the Law of God.

This must then be taken in the light of the Polarities of the Will, that being Good and Evil. These polarities are in conflict constantly, under the Principle of Rhythm as defined by the Kybalion. It is in this balance Judgment is made of actions, similar to Karmic law of the Hindus, based upon which Polarity is utilized. It is in this light that Telepathic Suggestion is found to be only a tool, nothing more, and nothing less. That tool is motivated by either Polarity of Will, and that shall determine its place in the aforementioned cycle, and the consequences the Individual wielding the tool shall reap.

Exemplum egregium: An individual decides to use TPS to motivate a crowd he is speaking to support the proposal to end a reign of injustice and corruption. Is his action fueled by "Evil" Will? Nay, it is fueled by the desire to liberate millions from a tyrrant. Does simply imposing an influence, however strong, upon the consciousness of a crowd make that attempt to liberate millions evil? In the light of the true sense of Objective or absolute morality? It does not.

A good read would be the principles of Theurgy, which may be found here:

http://forums.vsociety.net/topic/7438.0

It is the job of an individual to expand his understanding of the universe, to emerge from the night into the light; that is the growth through understanding. "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God", it was said; though no one was paying particular attention then or now.

Benedicta

Posted on Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:38 pm

Lightbringer

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 293

WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!

What the crap is that sound? Oh, it's just Ancheron hitting the nail on the head! Razz

Posted on Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:42 pm

WhiteRaven

Joined: 13 Jan 2006
Posts: 343

uh...Ancheron... the only god I worship is me. As a follower of the left hand path, the belief that some old guy sitting on a cloud wrote a book and threw it down to earth doesn't apply to me. god is an unproven concept, and it, incidentally, happens to be against the "no religion" rule, along with karma, and numerous other things you mentioned.

@ LightBringer: uh... wow, you added absolutely nothing to the thread except agreeing with Ancheron.

Posted on Wed Aug 09, 2006 12:37 am

Mad_Hatter

Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 393

No Religion. Come on guys, stay on topic... I don't want to lock this thread.

Posted on Wed Aug 09, 2006 3:49 pm

Lightbringer

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 293

Everyone assumes that when someone talks of God that they are talking about a religious concept, namely an old white guy. Why don't we all assume every concept refers to the most popular thing that falls under that classification. From now on "actor" will only ever refer to "Tom Hanks", "car" will only refer to "Ferrari" and so on. Hopeflully my joking sarcasm has shown you the error in your logic Smile

This concept of God that Ancheron (and thus I) referred to is not one derived through "sacred texts" but through personal experience and understanding.

And yes, I did agree with Ancheron, because that's what I do when someone else voices the exact same view as me just before I do. I fail to see the problem.

Posted on Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:03 pm

DanielH

Joined: 27 Nov 2005
Posts: 479

No religion. Even if you consider god to be another word for ants... I don't care. No religion. Stop being stupid and try to use some logic.

Posted on Wed Aug 09, 2006 7:15 pm

Scorch

Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 94

Psh, you have no proof that ants don't exist.

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

PsiPog.net Forum Index » Telepathy and Empathy » Your ethical standpoint

You must agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to view this website. Click here to contact the webmaster.