Do Contributors Naturally Exist? | Philosophy and Philosophers | Forum Topics

 
You must be logged in to post Login Register


Register? | Lost Your Password?

Search Forums:


 






Wildcard Usage:
*    matches any number of characters
%    matches exactly one character

Do Contributors Naturally Exist?

No Tags
UserPost

7:41 am
April 26, 2013


Onasander

Member

posts 95

I'm starting to have serious doubts if Contributor though is a independent form of thinking, or if its a learned behavior from traumatic survival.

A lot of the contributor philosophers I've identified gone through significant trauma in their lives, the few I can't obviously point to are Aristotle, the monkish Sun Tzu (though I doubt one lives so secluded and focusing on topics like Sun Tzu without pretty good trama), St. Anslem, Al Birudi.

Usually we suffered, and badly. Hannibal and Scipio Africanus are examples of the intellectual non-Philosopher, the Cynic Philosophers have the highest concentration of us (in Sufi schools adopting Cynic practices, the Contributors and Exhorters split the majority). Confucius suffered. Buddha suffered, Machiavelli Suffered, Nietzsche Suffered, Boethius, Ibn Khaldun.. I'm noticing a trend here, and a lack of suffering in the others could point to a incomplete history.

So is contributor thought real, or is it just a extension of other personality types reacting to affliction?

I bring this up because though I am Catholic, I follow Pan-Philosophy and try my damnest to examine every aspect of philosophy ancient and modern and international, and notice in affliction oriented philosophies- in Hinduism since the Chandogya Upanisad tackled Karma, to Buddhism- I can see everyone at play EXCEPT Contributors. Even in basic monism of Advaita, the juxtaposition is between Perceiver-Exhorters and Perceiver-Facilitator. George Feuerstein when I talked to him a few years ago seemed the later.

Sometimes I'll see one, RamaKrishna….. but it's his type I see, it's not reflected in their theories, despite nailing most of the feedback loops mentioned here and then some.

I also doubt my doubt, wondering if the Guru-Disciple programming of per-literate Vedic Schools might of limited Contributor thought to the schools head, effectively submerging it in others in such a way they could hold much, much more information dispersed amongst them without questioning or manipulating it.

If you watch the CHANYAKA series on YouTube (with English subtitles, 40 some episodes long about the top contributor thinker in ancient India who drove Alexander the Great out) you'll see this tradition of verbal repetition. I'm both drawn to joining in and revolted by a lost of control. But that's the whole basis of the Mantra chanting in Bhakti cults there- people juggle Mercy and Perceiver thought, trying to evoke a independence awareness of this….. both Monism and Dualism do this….. but it usually seems to be Teacher or Facilitator doing that.

I find Monism countered to Mathematical thinking….. Buckminuster Fuller is a Perceiver very aware of contributor thought, its where is inventive rules and ideas are pulled from…. but your average Monist? Their rules for the states if consciousness (pulled from Buddhist sources) in books such as the Uddhava Gita or Ashtavakra Gita (Ashtavakra in myth being the archetype of suffering overcoming contributor thought) its suppressed or gone. Multiplicity avoided, the various categories of psychological imagination labeled but seperated, and told to avoid (Jains do this too- Exhorters thought manipulated by Contributor thinking causes silly dreaming phenomena, I've noticed this on Jungian forums).

If its so easy to cancel out contributor thought, despite paralleling near everything else here, its getting me to wonder if Contributors actually exist. In Hindu and Buddhist theories, they closely parallel and push beyond the feedback loops. Sometimes I feel it hits contributor thought, but usually not.

One aspect of Monistic Advaita I think hits us may by the interpretation of the sense of self fun relationship to Turiya exploiting Contributors extra sense of awareness of form-formless thought via seeing closed eyed hallucinations between levels 1-3 naturally with little concentration. Exhorters can see them better, but don't have nearly as much imaginative control over them. It's the one aspect that exists in waking, dreaming, and unconscious deep sleep, as its a continuous activity (lava lamp still bubbles for a time after light is turned off). Given its relations to visual aesthetics, and several classical contributors believing vision starts in the eyes, hits the object, and returns…. It seems a likely place for contributor thought, and given its ability to exist in dreamlike states that are refreshing, and reducing eye strain- I can see it fitting the bill, but it doesn't in other respects- the feedback loop of Facilitators from the videos also has a lot of possible relation, perhaps more.

Besides, I don't like people here are aware Contributors can do this eye trick, effecting geometrical arrangements and depths in regards to a sense of self. I'm not the only one…. but if something minor like our hypnagogic control is missed, how much do we actually know about Contributors? Are they a real type, or something learned by other types, taking over what is otherwise unconscious and usually involuntary operations?

Cicero's approach to the art of memory- it's contributor thought manipulating Exhorters thought, but apparently ANYONE can learn this. It has me scratching my head.

Perhaps Contributor thought is the possibilities of the Unconscious to be learned and eventually controlled. You look at Sweden's 'The Ice Man', able to regenerate frostbite flesh, survive intense cold and heat…. he learned it through breath control and conditioning…. but these are (educated guess) Facilitator functions. The guy teaches classes on this, and Tibetian Monks do much the same.

Same with Exhorters. Amusement parks, formal parties since childhood were brought to, Mystery Cults and religious gatherings…. It too seems a socially learnable behavior most can join in (save the wallflowers).

I'm starting to wonder if Contributor especially, but to a lesser extent Exhorters and Facilitators are primary types, or just the Unconscious to the other four types.

This whole mindset of Contributor thought being three aspects began with the three part division of the cult of the muses on Mt Helicon by the Macedonians. It later expanded to nine, and in Alexandrian Hermeticism became a hieratic mind with three columns. One for a left hemisphere, one right- and a awkward one down the middle. I look at a brain, I only see two sides, and in epileptics, you can cut right down the middle to stop seizures. Wouldn't that for all meaningful purposes kill Contributor and Exhorters thought?

No Tags

About the Mental Symmetry Forum Forum

Most Users Ever Online: 33

Currently Online:
1 Guest

Currently Browsing this Topic:
1 Guest

Forum Stats:

Groups: 5
Forums: 13
Topics: 45
Posts: 182

Membership:

There are 7402 Members

There is 1 Admin

Top Posters:

Onasander – 95
Eun Sang Cha – 29
hatchback176 – 9
Tuukka Virtaperko – 6
Ben – 6
WildWinds – 4

Recent New Members: Tuukka Virtaperko, Kaeppen, Thinkist, Onasander, fairladyZ64, Ben

Administrators: lorinfriesen (45 Posts)



 

7 Responses to Do Contributors Naturally Exist? | Philosophy and Philosophers | Forum Topics

  1. WildWinds says:

    Interesting history of eyeliner. Also, agreed about the sunscreen (and blush, I never have understood the purpose). Cosmetic and fashion companies have good control over people. Some are even taking advantage of the semi-recent emotional crisis of how made up, airbrushed models used for advertising place unrealistic expectations on young girls.

  2. WildWinds says:

    I’m pretty much a baby in this theory; much reading in both Lane’s and Lorin’s texts is to be done. But for what its worth, I too noticed the differences in their writing styles and how they approached the topic and noticed how Lane goes more for the big picture. I’m a Perceiver person and really enjoy reading Lorin’s texts, I can actually relate when he makes comments like “As a Perceiver person…” Something will lead me to think about something else and how it applies, and sure enough if I keep reading, Lorin will cover what I was questioning. My Teacher person friends seem to prefer Lane’s texts though.

  3. fairladyZ64 says:

    I feel a little self conscience and relieved to reveal my cognitive style…would love to get a smile, recognization, appreciation, acceptence when greatful. As seen in a myrid of ways by other(s)~ their allocated traits + (plus) xp (experience) = exposition eg. self ~ NOTE…and note unto self My spelling is phonetic, at best…lousy drives me uP the wall, however I can spend and have hours on one sentance, a paragraph can get nowhere and I give…uP…exhausted with/in my effort to express myself verbally ( yet in type ) can cause me to back up truncation into non-existance expressions of what I … for lack of a better word /or not coming to mind… am…my way…of getting there. Lorin, I have forgotton my orgin of thought which caused this post, however in a round-a-bout way I am asking that you make a note that…I have awaited this forum. The reveal of the/ this theory should have NEVER been limited to the faulacity of your higher learning institution. Rather left exposed to humanity, with s response portal, to the whole…of humanity. For I have spoken/inquired of your findings b4 (deal with SOME short cuts of expression) finding your reality of facts and understanding, I was very frank with you upon my initial reading of the mercy room when I expressed to you ( in e-mails maybe long un accessed or deleated…and I’m pretty close to quoting myself…HOW do YOU know of this place??…a place I can find my emotions LOST in if it weren’t for TEACHER emotions and PERCIEVER facts, leading me into (ya, strange) Server actions which lean into the uncomfortable…and again THX, your …http//209.87.142.42/y/pro/ch1.htm I printed 1/18/2006 has valadated my perception of this realm. Tis’ a cool thing and a great gift. Thank you

    • lorinfriesen says:

      Hi. Over the years I have found that Mercy persons often really appreciate this material because they realize that it is OK to be a Mercy person. The inhuman technological world may shut down Mercy feelings, but these emotions are legitimate.
      I just spent eight years in South Korea. People there are not as emotionally split there as we are here in North America. Business and family go together there.

  4. Brandon Casner says:

    I was on the website with Hatchback- he was one of the ones who plucked us innocents off the MBTI forums. Either he or CBeck informed me I was a contributor, and apparently from the old material made it sound really cool and elite…. but it started getting on everyone’s nerves, and everyone started preying viciously on one another, mimicking the worst traits inherent in the idealization of the type. The facilitators became fascist, the teachers douchebags, perceivers contrarily douchebags, and contributors the archetypal aquarian destroyers….. and mercy just came out gypsy weird…. and easily toyed with.

    That site died once the seriphot came up…. and the dawning realization of how close the similarities.

    This being said…. after the dust has settled, may be a future in the system- largely because I still use it, as well as the seriphot, as quick shorthand symbols for ideas I have to note the beginning and end and sudden arrival of certain kinds of thought, so I can go back and try to trace back the mechanics of it. Sometimes helpful, sometimes not, but would be hypocritical of me to completely disregard it if I use it in part…. so I back it partly. I still recommend the videos to people if I have to get them up to speed real quick for psychology…. but I note everything I need them for isn’t really listed. Such as how each type dreams. I’ve noticed it differs…. also meditation- such as sitting meditation- differs substantially for a INTJ Contributor than for a Mercy or Facilitator, as my eyesight changes substantially in passive as well as active response to just sitting and stairing… I get shapes and sinewave patterns bouncing around from doing nothing distracting me, while others see nothing but a wall in front of them…. if I shift my thinking pattern, it shifts as well, or goes away completely. That’s what sent the warning signals off in my head to look into varient mediation tecniques, as Zen clearly isn’t designed for a Contributor persay, but better for a facilitator- hence the big Enzo loop. I see these issues everywhere, across religions…. I can apply some of it here to the differation of the cognitive styles, but it becomes ify at times. Some systems don’t easily stick…. such as dualistic tibetian mandalas. Yes…. I can imagine lorn sitting down doing a graph of a mandala and how everything would intergrate…. but time after time after time having to do the work over an over by hand makes it suspicious the theory itself is missing something fundamental that the mandalas themselves are teasing out, the the koans are, that the mantras are, prayers are, the walking philosophical discussions are, etc. Something Nietzsche grasped but failed to reach. A need for a overman mentality…. but in each system it’s not within the type itself…. it’s a transference to another style, or hodgepodge of them, as well as intergration in greater depth of a particular style. This seems a bit beyond what Hatchback and CBeck exposed us to, and I have yet to see it on mental symmetry…. though I am admittedly lack luster in searching through everything still. I’ll take my time. I have more gripes than pleasantries, but still am capable of pleasantries, so I’ll say hello to Hatchback.

    I will also say I can’t tell the difference between any writer’s writing style on the site…. looks the same to me unless I see the name titled.

    I am also perplexed as to why crabs have personality types. Why? I own three, each a predictable type…. but they don’t show signs of social organization in eating or sleeping someplace…. but they are as complex as baboons at times. Why? Their brains can’t be too similar to ours, much different evolutionary history, yet….

  5. Kaeppen says:

    I tried to reply to the forum to a topic about left-hemisphere and right-hemisphere Facilitators. but it didn’t work so I decided to put my post here:

    I remember in childhood I loved ‘wisdom’ and thought of angels a lot. I “felt” the presence of angels many times and wondered if I was an angel myself somehow. Maybe wisdom personified as an angel to me. Then came the uncertainty and in the end hijacking the cortex and sensation-seeking.

    I’m now trying to “light up” natural conscience again but I have started to feel extremely guilty. I cannot “atone for my sins” without P-strategy working but when it’s working and leading I feel like I’ve killed someone. I have no idea where to start because I did a lot of immoral things while in the “sleep” that I don’t even remember. I feel I’m pinned down here and sometimes wonder if I’m just delusional.
    What should I do?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *