Should We Be Feeling Instead Of Thinking?

How to Join	Member's Area	Private Library	Search	Sanctuary		Login
Main Forums	Discussion	Tech Talk	Mature Content	Archives	A home without a wall, Our haven without ends, A circle we all call Our Family of Friends!

RSWells
Member Elite

since 2001-06-17

Posts 2533

0 posted 2003-01-15 12:25 PM

The Moon, Telepathy, Science and the Collective Unconscious;

"Storehouse of latent memory traces inherited from man's ancestral past, a past that includes not only the racial history of man as seperate species, but his pre-human or animal ancestry as well"
   -"Jung And The Story Of Our Time"
         Laurens van der Post
         Hogarth Press

Quotes from the book "Symbol And Myth" Stafford,
University Of Delaware Press 1979 (Humbert de Superville's Essay On Absolute Signs In Art)will be italicized,
those from the magazine Discover February 2003 (article "Where Did The Moon Come From?" by Karen Wright) will not;

"Humbert......succinctly outlines the origins of man and the foundation of the first religious cult....Medusa or Medsusa comes from the Hebraic root med, which means battle, quarrel, struggle, and dsus, which signifies the tyrant, the violent one, the conqueror of clouds-an interpretation also found in Chaldee and Sanscrit, where it means ruler of storms. The Hebrews call the strange star in the constellation of Perseus "the head of the demon or devil," just as the Arabs name it algol or demon.
  The etymology will help Humbert to decipher one of the strangest monuments left by antiquity, and one that seems of singular importance, relating as it does to the last great revolution of our earth that brought about its present configuration.
...As with other fables and myths, he maintains that we must look for the origin of the Medusa story in natural occurrences. This distinctive image must be the symbol of a sudden, natural phenomenon."

"The origin of the moon is a mystery as old as the tides. No other planet boasts such a singular and striking companion;......Although the moon has enthralled observers for aeons, planetary scientists have struggled to trace its ancestry."

"Humbert claims that Medusa is the emblem of our moon and that this body, like all other moons or satellites, is a sliver or particle of a former world. The reason.....for this conclusion is that every large star is a sun and the sun is a ball of fire, a luminous body.........Because of shocks and concussions suffered by a comet's impact, fragments of this still-liquid rock were launched into space from the sun, thus becoming our system of planets following a trajectory around a central star.
Long ago, our earth was also formed in this manner.
After many eons had passed, creatures finally appeared. The primative belief, found among the Incas and the ancient peoples of the Americas, that men were God's children or children born of the sun, stemmed from this occurrence."

  "The manned lunar landings of the Apollo program were supposed to help by collecting hundreds of pounds of moon rocks.......But lunar samples may as well been made of blue cheese.
  "Nobody knew what was going on with these rocks," says Jay Melosh, a planetary scientist at the University of Arizona in Tucson, who witnessed the crisis firsthand. "Some bits of data supported one hypothesis, other bits of data supported another. The evidence was ambiguous. The results were utter confusion."
  In the midst of this disappointment, a few stalwart scientists came up with yet another concept. Called the giant-impact theory, it proposed that the moon was a kind of divot nicked off when the ancient Earth collided with another celestial object fully half its size. The theory may have been far-fetched, but it was consistent with the Apollo findings. Its advocates said it might also explain certain dynamics of Earth-moon interactions.
  Proving it seemed impossible. No trace of the impact would be found on Earth, because much of the crust folds under and recycles every 150 million years or so."

"Thousands of years passed on earth without there being a moon. Evidence of this is found in the annals of the Arcadians, who were called Proselenoi, or people who lived before the moon; they prided themselves on being autochthonous (aboriginal, indigenous). The New Zealanders have similar traditions of a time when there was no moon. Even the legend of the one-eyed Cyclops indicates that there was only one heavenly light during the primeval era.......Humbert proposes.....Fragments were broken off from the central mass and because of centripetal force they remained near the parent planet. A fragment was severed from our earth just as it was broken off from the others-by collision with another celestial body. With incredible force a projectile was hurled from the sun and crashed into the earth, breaking off a particle. From that encounter the earth developed its present orbit and received its moon.....
  The planet that struck us still exists; it is none other than Saturn, the "serpent-star," which is mentioned in ancient texts..........
   Saturn, the serpent-star, chased Adam and Eve from paradise during the golden or solar age. Saturn was the Greek python that obscured the sun and also the great Indian snake conquered by Visnu."

  "In the past five years, a new generation of technology and talent has emerged to resuscitate the giant-impact theory......Now scientists are invoking giant impacts to explain a constellation of planetary artifacts.
"Our thinking of the early solar system as a plodding and predictable place [has given] way to the notion of planet-size objects careening into one another in wild, stochastic ways," writes Robin Canup, scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado....."It's fair to say the giant-impact theory has more truth in it than any other theory," says Melosh."

"...the fragment broken from our planet still hovered above it, not yet stabilized into regular orbit. Here Humbert recognizes the origin of the fable of Io, or Isis, searching for the mangled body of Osiris, who was killed by Typhon (Saturn).
Osiris is the victimized earth, a fragment of the sun that has been rent asunder. Finally, this errant detached particle became a satellite or the moon, just as, after innumerable wanderings, Io and Isis came to rest.
  When the moon first appeared, not only its orbit but its physiognomy was marked by irregularities. Volcanoes on its surface spewed fire, producing new terror in the heart of man. These conflagrations caused the moon to look like a head encircled by tendrils. Emitting fire, it appeared to be sticking its tongue out; suspended over the earth, one ascribed wings to it. When the satellite was seen at full moon, it seemed to possess a countenance. Thus it happened that the moon came to represent a severed head-the head of Medusa-because it was broken off from the earth. During the waxing, the moon has horns. Thus the horns of Isis and Io became metamorphosed into the bull Apis, associated with moon worship. Since it is the eye of the night, the owl and cat are its attributes.
  The Medusa mask-symbol of an amputated sliver of the globe-is found on images of Ceres and Minerva, both of whom typify the earth. Humbert wonders if the hole that was left by the severed piece was later filled by the calm waters of the Pacific Ocean that inundated the volcanic crater made by the removal of the soil.
  In ancient mythology the moon is Astarte, Thola, Diana. Finally, with the Greeks, our moon became Medusa, a woman whom Perseus decapitated. Perseus performs with his sword like Saturn with his scythe. The Greek tendency to personify natural forces changed what had once been the symbol of the earth into a face whose spots coalesced into the specific traits of eyes, nose, and mouth, and whose volcanoes became the tongue. The Greeks metamorphosed the snakes, which were so visibly a part of the ancient likenesses, into two ribbons. The wings, which had formerly symbolized the firmament, were later omitted. Originally, serpents were probably given to Medusa for hair in order to illustrate the fact that the earth was born from the bottom of the sea. In the late 18th century it was believed that before the flood no snakes existed."

"....the mineral composition of moon rocks......resembles that of earth rocks says Tim Swindle, planetary scientist, University of Arizona.
..But the Apollo samples differ in important ways from earth rocks........on Earth, water molecules seep into spaces within the crystal lattices of minerals.
When researchers analyzed moon samples, they couldn't wring out a drop. "Nobody has found even a single molecule of water in moon rocks" says Melosh.
The moon is moving away from Earth by more than an inch a year. Scientists in the 1930's calculated that rate from ancient astronomical records, and laser reflectors planted on the lunar surface by Apollo astronauts confirmed it. The moon was much closer to its parent when it formed more than 4 billion years ago-probably 15 times closer.
It would have loomed 15 times larger in the sky, had anyone been around to see it.
  William Hartmann, Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, recognized that such a cataclysmic impact could account for the moon's superficial similarity to Earth if it blasted only the planet's crust and upper mantle into space and left the iron core intact. And if the blast was hot enough, water and other volatiles would have burned off the lofted material and been lost in space. When Hartmann and his colleague Donald Davis presented the giant-impact hypothesis at a conference in 1974, they learned that a team of Harvard astronomers had come up with then same idea.
  The lunar samples had been found to contain a large proportion of low density minerals, and the only plausible explanation anyone had proposed was that the moon's surface had once been entirely molten.
  If Earth's core was present at the time of impact, geologists faced another problem. A collision big and hot enough to yield the moon's magma ocean would have melted at least part of Earth's surface as well. But geologists could not find any evidence that the mantle had ever melted."

"Humbert most certainly was also an exponent of a pre-Adamist theory such as that put forth in 1655 by the Calvinist Isaac de la Peyrere, who published Praeadamitae, in which he claimed that thousands of years elapsed before Adam, or man as we now know him, existed.
    The ancient peoples of Europe, Peru, India, Japan and Africa believed that during the eclipse of the moon a dragon was attacking and devouring it. They uttered loud cries and made noise to encourage the moon to defend itself.
   If the moon was not created simultaneously with man, then what existed prior to it?"

  Fascinating stuff this, begs more questions. The Discover article ends with a new theory by Robin Canup which suggests more answers would fit scientific questions if the scale were adjusted to suggest that the attacking body on their model be adjusted to include a much larger comet, Saturn?

How is it that ancient man who gets no respect from modern man knew something we can't imagine him living through, let alone witnessing?
Did these scientists know of these ancient beliefs? If so was it the writer who left such credit out? Will they now "discover" that it was indeed Saturn who knocked off a chunk now known as the moon? Can you imagine a raging and fiery moon 15 times more in our faces? What of the idigenous ancients? The "dreams" of the aboriginals?
Humbert de Superville was born over two hundred years ago. For more on this genius;
http://home.uchicago.edu/~bms6/%20Symbol_Web/intro2.htm

From Staffords Book;
  "The fall of man caused the earth to lose its former perfectly circular orbit, a condition that permitted the solar and lunar years to equal 360 days. This factor was used to explain such otherwise perplexing phenomena as the epigonous days and the great age of the Patriarchs."

   Is this an explanation for those extremely long lives we're to believe Moses et al lived?

  "The psychic history of man is rooted in the physiognomy of the earth or, as Kant would say, phenomenal reality is nothing other than the content of human consciousness.",

  Was Jung right? Are we and have we always been connected to everything that ever was in this universe? This doesn't deny God.

And this from; "The Presence Of The Past;
                 Morphic Resonance & The
                 Habits Of Nature"
                   -Rupert Sheldrake

"Randomly selected students find it easier to solve crossword puzzles the day after they've been published and many people have solved them. The same students take significantly longer to solve the same kinds of puzzles before the public gets to see them. Unpublished, control puzzles are no simpler or harder over time.
Or just recall the four minute mile. It is virtually routine among Olympic runners though once thought impossible. In other words, good habits become easier after they've been practced elsewhere-and bad habits, more difficult to abandon the longer and more often the've been indulged in."

  Has the answer to peaceful co-existence, starvation, pestilence been with us all the time? Should we be looking back? Or simply feeling?

[This message has been edited by RSWells (01-15-2003 12:51 AM).]

Midnitesun

Member Empyrean

since 2001-05-18

Posts 28647
Gaia

1 posted 2003-01-16 11:22 AM

"Are we and have we always been connected to everything that ever was in this universe? This doesn't deny God."

That is essentially how I view the world, and all within and without.
I am intrigued by the Saturn/Moon/Earth connections. It would seem to me that the moon's (?) self-distancing fits well with the expanding universe notion.
Thank you for posting this, as it expands the mind to think about the implications. Yes, we should be feeling the 'impact' of all this history.
And it really does nothing to take away from the notion that someone, aka GOD, begat us. But nothing in my feeble brain can resolve who begat God. I am dumbfounded, or perhaps just dumb.
Well done, Richard. You really delve deeply, always below the surface.

BTW, did you know my last name is Stafford? LOL.

[This message has been edited by Midnitesun (01-16-2003 11:25 AM).]

Severn
Member Rara Avis

since 1999-07-17

Posts 7704

2 posted 2003-01-16 04:19 PM

'The New Zealanders have similar traditions of a time when there was no moon'

Which is incorrect. Maori's have inhabited NZ for just over 1000 years. Their creation myth includes a segment on how the moon was gifted to the sky-father as a decoration for his cloak - the night-time sky.

It must be remembered while reading Humbert that he stems from a different cultural era. Also - anthropological information has progressed intensely - and all anthropological information from so long ago, while not worthless, needs to be weighed carefully with more recent veins of study, and processed information.

When Humbert gathered his information on the Maori colonisation of NZ the channels of communication between the Europeans and Maoris were still not sufficient for adequate understanding.

That said - makes you wonder how much of the rest of his article can be relied upon for accuracy doesn't it?

Still pondering this at any rate, but wanted to point out that inaccuracy..

K

[This message has been edited by Severn (01-16-2003 04:46 PM).]

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

3 posted 2003-01-16 05:26 PM

I'm at a loss to see how you can derive your conclusion from your series of quotes. I've read this several times now.

But, regardless, I disagree with it anyway. I think it's fairly obvious that one can't think without feeling, but what's amazing is that once complex thought occurs, our feelings change as well. They are abstractions that when united amounts to what we call ourselves (as well as other things).

All myth results from thought for we have no need for myth until we can ask the question, "Why?"

Local Parasite

Member Elite

since 2001-11-05

Posts 2527
Transylconia, Winnipeg

4 posted 2003-01-16 05:40 PM

I'd say most emotion is secondary to thought... can you really experience happiness without the thought between you and your situation?

Can you experience anger without thinking, boy that ticks me off?

As for relying on feelings instead of thoughts, well, if I relied on feelings instead of thought in my everyday life, I'd have a terrible diet, I wouldn't go to school enough and I'd probably be dead or dying by now... I don't think the same approach would be healthy for world issues like starvation...

Ron

Administrator

Member Rara Avis

since 1999-05-19

Posts 8669
Michigan, US

5 posted 2003-01-16 06:44 PM

quote:
That said - makes you wonder how much of the rest of his article can be relied upon for accuracy doesn't it?

It seems like scientific quackery to me. More surprisingly, and for me a little shockingly, the comments attributed to Discover magazine are slanted and therefore equally suspect. Right off the bat they claim, "No other planet boasts such a singular and striking companion." Does a database of eight other planets really provide a statistically significant measure? One might even argue that if we see a relatively large satellite circling the third planet in such a very small sample of only nine, it is likely a very common occurrence in a universe comprised of many billions of planets.

That's just one example. The entire cosmology evolution presented here is highly suspect. They take facts out of context and then interpret them to suit their destination. Hokey, in my opinion.

The flip side to this argument? One scientific strand has postulated that advanced life could not exist without a moon capable of influencing the tides. Without the ebb and flow, aquatic life would never have gained a foothold on land. It was only through long evolution that species developed in the shallow pools periodically uncovered by the lunar gravitation and, without that stepping stone, we'd all be swimming with the fishies. In short, the moon necessarily existed long before anyone was here to see it. True or false? Who knows. But it's at least as plausible as anything in this article.

quote:
I'd say most emotion is secondary to thought …

I agree with Brad that it's impossible to separate the two, that one inevitably influences the other. I don't even think it requires complex thought to influence emotion, just consistent thought. But while I don't think they can be easily separated, I think they can and often are easily confused with each other.

The issues you site, LP, aren't so much instances of thought prevailing over emotion as they are thought influencing which emotions are better long-term choices. A steady diet of Big Macs is an emotional desire, but so too is a healthy body. Athletes who push themselves beyond the limits of health are also following an emotional desire. Very few people, and I often suspect none, are ruled by thought. Rather, we all simply get to choose which emotions to follow.

Local Parasite

Member Elite

since 2001-11-05

Posts 2527
Transylconia, Winnipeg

6 posted 2003-01-16 07:18 PM

quote:
Rather, we all simply get to choose which emotions to follow.

Which is thought.

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant

since 1999-12-21

Posts 5767
Southern Abstentia

7 posted 2003-01-16 10:50 PM

Last time I looked (which was probably around a decade ago) astronomers stopped referring to the moon as a satellite and started considering Terra/Luna a binary planetary orbit -- or such... and that the two actually formed together from a common glob of goo that separated kind of like lava in a lava lamp -- if that's changed in the last five years it hasn't gotten too much attention.

If you want to go to the other end of the spectrum RS and get some 'real' science (theoretical physics) blended in with some 'real' mysticism try 'The Tao of Physics' by Frijov Kapra. It would support this thought: "Are we and have we always been connected to everything that ever was in this universe? This doesn't deny God."
from a much different angle.

Other than that -- ditto's to Brad.

On the thought vs. emotion issue -- to LP and Ron -- I think Ron has the right idea here -- emotions have too many chemical precursors to them in the body that influence the thought process such as testosterone, adrenaline, oxytosin etc...

[This message has been edited by Local Rebel (01-16-2003 11:26 PM).]

	⇧ top of page ⇧
All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format.