+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Strictly Law of One Material (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? (/showthread.php?tid=4255)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Diana - 02-24-2012
(02-24-2012, 01:14 PM)drifting pages Wrote: Guys you can just click the "view today's posts" link in the upper left side of any page.
I actually use that function, it is much easier then having to navigate trough countless forums and sub-forums.
I mostly use that as well. But sometimes I like to see the forums laid out and go back to earlier posts and threads.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Richard - 02-24-2012
(02-24-2012, 01:16 PM)godwide_void Wrote:(02-24-2012, 01:14 PM)drifting pages Wrote: Guys you can just click the "view today's posts" link in the upper left side of any page.
I actually use that function, it is much easier then having to navigate trough countless forums and sub-forums.
Likewise.
And Richard, I'm pretty sure anybody who comes onto this forum in the first place (assuming they have prior knowledge of the Law of One) will know well enough to know that the notion of a "hierarchy" is illusory in the grand scheme of things.
Why would we assume that GW? I had no prior exposure to the LOO before I found the Law of One (the website was only just then in the process of being finished). I found my way to here by researching the UFO phenomenon.
I think you are presuming a greater knowledge of this body of work than actually exists. I'd venture to say that many new people just stumble into this place looking for...something..that they aren't even quite sure of yet.
In any case, I'm just trying to put myself into the place of a new person on that search and finding this forum...maybe beginning to read the LOO..but seeing "Advanced Studies"..and thinking..."well, I don't know anything, so why should I post?"....
When their opinion is every bit as valid as yours or mine , in truth.
Richard
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Bring4th_Austin - 02-24-2012
By choosing "Being enlightened, I am happy with all outcomes," do we automatically gain enlightenment :exclamation:?
I think a tarot/archetype subforum would be great, as a general "advanced studies" forum seems redundant.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - godwide_void - 02-24-2012
You make a very good point, I agree wholeheartedly, and as such I detract my generalization. I meant to say some people. I would have never know what "bring 4th" meant if I wasn't familiar with what "4th" implied (density). I agree also that "Advanced Studies" might throw some people off, but it might also encourage people to become more versed in the material so as to better contribute. Though as I said before, most of the threads made in Strictly Law of One, Harvest, and Advanced Studies overlap and alot of the discussions on the concepts are pretty advanced studies.
(02-24-2012, 02:44 PM)abridgetoofar Wrote: By choosing "Being enlightened, I am happy with all outcomes," do we automatically gain enlightenment :exclamation:?
No, but perhaps the forum poll becomes Buddha incarnate in textbox form.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - 3DMonkey - 02-24-2012
My perception is that "advanced studies" was an installment to accommodate a member who didn't like opinions scuffing up his "facts".
I think most of us prefer our opinionated style of processing 'forum catalyst'.
When it premiered it was a "trial to be reassessed in august*". I didn't think it would last.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - hogey11 - 02-24-2012
I always took "advanced studies" to be intimidating. I felt like I would have to research everything three times over before i'd feel comfortable posting. I so often just write what comes to my fingers and my personal opinions are so often interspersed that it didn't jive with me. I can't be that disciplined
I make too many mistakes due to my lack of 'self-control' haha
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - JustLikeYou - 02-24-2012
3DMonkey Wrote:My perception is that "advanced studies" was an installment to accommodate a member who didn't like opinions scuffing up his "facts".
This member sounds familiar...I owe him a debt of gratitude. He and zenmaster taught me a lesson in humility in the same thread.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - 3DMonkey - 02-24-2012
(02-24-2012, 06:09 PM)hogey11 Wrote: I always took "advanced studies" to be intimidating. I felt like I would have to research everything three times over before i'd feel comfortable posting. I so often just write what comes to my fingers and my personal opinions are so often interspersed that it didn't jive with me. I can't be that disciplined
Right? And if you are just going to "study", why the heck do you need to discuss it? You'be already poured over it and answered all your own questions or changed the questions to fit the study material. Discussion just starts you back to the beginning. (which is, I think, why unity100 got so frustrated). ( also, Zenmaster
)
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Diana - 02-25-2012
(02-24-2012, 09:05 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: Right? And if you are just going to "study", why the heck do you need to discuss it? You'be already poured over it and answered all your own questions or changed the questions to fit the study material. Discussion just starts you back to the beginning. (which is, I think, why unity100 got so frustrated). ( also, Zenmaster
Because, no matter how smart you think you are, there are other viewpoints that extend your understanding. And your understanding evolves. You don't get to the "end" of knowledge.
Whoever thinks they "know" is stuck. Just as people who "believe" are stuck.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Steppingfeet - 02-27-2012
Thanks everyone for the feedback and the voting.
Another aspects of “Advanced Studies” that prompted me to ask the question was that, in terms of the content, as some of you have pointed out in this thread, there seems to be little distinction between it and other areas of the forum. What was supposed to distinguish it was the manner in which the information was being discussed, but for the most part the members of Bring4th are relatively focused, so I don’t see the need to retain a sub-forum specifically for the purpose of focusing.
As to its fate, it seems from the voting that there is an even split between eliminating it altogether, and reassigning it to a specialized subject, like archetypes. I lean strongly in the direction of having a sub-forum for study of the archetypes, and as three members have, by virtue of their own enlightenment, indicated satisfaction with any outcome, I think we’ll give an archetypes sub-forum a go!
How sounds:
"Archetypes of Spiritual Evolution"
"Archetypes of Mind, Body, & Spirit"
"Book IV Archetypes"
"Archetypes and You"
"Archetype Shish Kabobs"
And any ideas about how to organize it?
(02-23-2012, 10:20 PM)JustLikeYou Wrote: It appears that there is a stigma attached to this subforum of which I am not aware. I do not know if it was a mistake for me to use it as the primary platform for my threads, but it is as it is.
This is also an opportunity to make a suggestion: I have designed the Table of Contents thread to be an easy way to access all the specific threads I have posted in the series; however, it, like any other thread, is susceptible to being bumped out of the front page. I think making this thread sticky may be a good idea, but only if there are others who would like this convenience.
JustLikeYou, no mistake in using that sub-forum for archetype discussion! The topic of the archetypes, especially as presented in Book IV, is so abstruse that a measure of focus is a prerequisite to make meaningful headway into their study, so “Advanced” was a good home.
A sticky ToC thread that would rest atop an Archetypes sub-forum is a badass idea, and one I would fully support. (Note: to anyone unfamiliar with the term, “sticky” denotes a thread which is listed permanently at the top of a sub-forum regardless of activity/inactivity.)
Βαθμιαίος and Plenum, both of you mentioned means of viewing new posting and accessing members-only sub-forums. On those two thoughts.
“Non-L/L Research Channeled Sources” and “Treehuggers Treehouse” are two sub-forums that will remain members only. We can however make the new Archetype sub-forum public so that new posts to that thread are visible without signing in.
About catching up on new posting. In taking on the role of head moderator, I had to ascertain the best way to read all posting. In my determination, the most efficient method to ensure I am reading everything is to read forum by forum. Here’s a breakdown of the three methods of catching up on posting works:
View New Posts
This option will show you every post made since you last logged in. In theory that sounds great, BUT the downside is that every time you log out, the cache is cleared.
So say you’ve been gone from the forums for a couple days on one of your Indiana Jones “Temple of Doom” adventures, you then log in for a moment, read a PM, play a game of Tetris, then log out without reading the forums. The two days of posts sitting in “View New Posts” is now gone, and with it all the wisdom that could have been yours.
View Today’s Post
This option shows you all posting within that particular day. I haven’t figured out how the system determines when the “day” begins, whether it uses your time zone or some other GMT zone.
The bummer about this is that if you’ve been away for more than whatever a “day” is, this option will not show you older posts.
Forum by forum
This is the one I use. As you all know, the system keeps track of what you’ve read/not read, and when a new post is made to a thread, the thread is marked as “unread”; and when a new post is made to a sub-forum, the sub-forum itself is marked as “unread”.
Using this method I work my way down from Strictly Law of One to Corkboard. Each time I open a sub-forum, the handful of threads that have been posted to since my last visit are lumped at the top of the screen, and clearly marked as “unread”.
I click on the “last post” option of the unread thread, and scroll up until I reach the date/time of my last visit. Then read downward.
- - - - -
I know what you’re thinking. I agree.
I, too, am impressed with this 101 on “Keeping Up-To-Date with Your Bring4th Forum”. It's magnificent, really.
Lots of love, GLB
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Ruth - 02-27-2012
Wow, thank you again, Gary, for taking such good care of us. I'm especially looking forward to the shish kabobs.
L&L
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Bring4th_Austin - 02-27-2012
(02-27-2012, 04:29 PM)Bring4th_GLB Wrote: How sounds:
"Archetypes of Spiritual Evolution"
"Archetypes of Mind, Body, & Spirit"
"Book IV Archetypes"
"Archetypes and You"
"Archetype Shish Kabobs"
"Archetype Shish Kabobs" sound delicious, but "Archetypes of Mind, Body, & Spirit" is probably more accurately descriptive.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Plenum - 02-27-2012
Archetypes and Chicken Soup for the Soul?
Autobiography of an Archetype?
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - Oceania - 02-27-2012
lol.
why not just call it archetype studies?
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - zenmaster - 02-27-2012
"Archetypical Mind" would seem to make sense.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - JustLikeYou - 02-28-2012
I like either "Archetype Shish Kabobs" or "Archetypical Mind". For different reasons, of course.
After having reflected on this topic, I would prefer it if my take on the Archetypes is not the only one that is highlighted in a sticky thread.
This Tarot webforum has a small set of sticky threads which collect and organize the various threads that have been posted in the forum. Their membership is far higher than ours, so their needs are more drastic, but it is a very good way of keeping all the most relevant information at the very top of the forum.
I also think a Super-Thread which organizes the existing content (by Archetype, for example) is a good way of giving equal voice to all those who choose to participate.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - 3DMonkey - 02-28-2012
Archetypal Mind sounds like it leaves out spirit and body, but the archetypes are for mental clarity, so it confuses me. Shouldn't it be "of mind".
What is wrong with "Archetypes"?
I vote for Archetypes of Mind, Body, and Spirit
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - JustLikeYou - 02-28-2012
Per Ra, the Archetypes are, by their very nature, of the mind. The mind is capable of reflecting upon the movements of not only itself but also the body it generates and the spirit from which it emanates.
This is a common point of confusion and Ra emphasizes this numerous times throughout Book IV, so I certainly understand your perspective. In truth, the name of the forum is not very important to me, so I'll defer to those with stronger opinions than my own.
RE: Do we need "Advanced Studies"? - zenmaster - 02-28-2012
(02-28-2012, 09:13 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: Archetypal Mind sounds like it leaves out spirit and bodyNope, read the material or just do a search for Ra's use of 'Archetypical Mind'.
"76.9 Questioner: Is there, in Ra’s opinion, any present day value for the use of the tarot as an aid in the evolutionary process?
It is well to investigate each discipline, not as a dilettante, but as one who seeks the touchstone, one who wishes to feel the pull of the magnet. One of these studies will be more attractive to the seeker. Let the seeker, then, investigate the archetypical mind using, basically, one of these three disciplines. After a period of study, the discipline mastered sufficiently, the seeker may then complete the more important step: that is, the moving beyond the written in order to express in an unique fashion its understanding, if you may again pardon the noun, of the archetypical mind."
(02-28-2012, 09:13 AM)3DMonkey Wrote: What is wrong with "Archetypes"?If you're coming from a Jungian psychological background, it would be confusing as the term is generically used to refer to basically any symbol such as the 'wise old man'. Jung's archetypes are generally at the level of 'Planetary Mind', which is our local, collective mind. Whereas Ra makes a clear distinction, pointing out that the Archetypical Mind, while also local (Earth-Sun), is beyond that of one's Higher Self.
"Each archetype presents an aspect of the One Infinite Creation to teach the individual mind/body/spirit complex according to the calling or the electromagnetic configuration of mind of the entity. Teaching is done via the intuition. With the proper seeking or mind configuration, the power of will uses the spirit as a shuttle to contact the appropriate archetypical aspect necessary for the teach/learning. In the same way each of the other informers of intuition are contacted. They are hierarchical and proceed from the entity’s own subconscious mind to group or planetary mind, to guides, to Higher Self, to archetypical mind, to cosmic mind or intelligent infinity. Each is contacted by the spirit serving as shuttle according to the harmonized electromagnetic configuration of the seeker’s mind and the information sought."