celia green and the institute of psychophysical research (of which she is the founder & director of) undoubtedly suffers greatly from a lack of appropriate support, namely: advertisement, funding, staffing and welcome.
although i have read, what feels like countless times of dr. green explaining that the sane human race does not care for evolutions in ontological explanation, no matter how clearly they are made, or evident they may be, or exact for that matter. though i never thought that people were so deaf to forethought & know-how until i tried to share what understanding i have learnt. the human race is more inclined to distract, if ever the subjects of erudition are raised, it seem to be comfortable discovering comprehension at a snails pace, and inexhaustibly ravels in its evasion to understand why things are the way the are; or what things could ever become.
almost every person that i have talked to with regards to celia green’s ideas mirrors this. some double backed into “what are her underling reasons ”, this is said not as a question but more as a warning to myself. the one person that did not step back when i mentioned the institute of psychophysical research [ipr] was: angela thompson smith, ph.d. of the nevada remote viewing group, inc. [nrvg] who has had fortune to work with celia green – and might i remark that it is not often that one may have the privilege to enable, undoubtedly a genius of out time.
in fact i have encountered people objecting so much to myself reading her books, even though they had never turned the pages of her books, that they took the decision not to grant me access to them when i was under section. it just so happen that i valued the information what i could recall to the point of making the effort to address my understanding of what is real and what is regarded as not real through her books, as soon as i was given permission to return home. the applicability, or level of occurrence of how applicable celia green’s observations, were and are still very strong for me – & i accept that it could be most probable that i recovered faster then most people that suffer psychotic attacks (75% of which never recover) due to the fast entrance of seeing and hearing what people might really be referring to, in the light of dr. green’s evaluations. now this, for those that have a slight understanding of psychosis, may say “well – psychotics are very susceptible to suggestion.”, but then it is the ability to be able to entertain ideas and find a momentum to live life for a purpose that is essential; not pretending to listen or not bothering to understand oneanother, or even oneself for that matter. it is that practice of objective introspection which celia green succeeds where most other respected thinkers, over the centauries have attempted to examine existence, being, everything and the absolute poorly with an objective framework.
but one still has to take celia green’s word that she has been able to examine the history of the human race with care; if one is to discredit other thought patterns precisley. (i'm sure the tedium of such acts would have drove such a creative mind into 'dread' of not wanting to belong to such acts for the remander of her life.)
however i would like this page of discussion to explore, under the terms of: what are the reasons for refusing or not refusing aspects from another individual’s point of view – that could most easily become a positive worldview.
i have read her being described as an apostle: noun one who attempts to convert others to a specific way of life, set of ideas, or course of action.
actually i only fully agree that celia green attempts to persuade others to a course of action and that she announce quite openly that it should be your decision. yes, she does mention many ideas, but at no point does she state that 'these are the only thoughts that human beings should be holding', only that she is very happy to hold them herself. anyone read different?
my own thoughts have turned to question of the use of describing her charity research area as an 'institute' – as being open season to call her research area capable of institutionalizing certain precious / venerable members of society. mongering the productions of conditioned responses. i guess its that dread of what are her intentions, that one needs to ask before one says such slander, really you have to make the effort to read her works, as much of them as you can before anyone should venture forth to hinder an already struggle glimmer of ontological furtherance that could be made by the ipr.
please consider these few angles before responding to this discussion:
gaining from embracing insight.
doing everything in your own way, keeping an autonomous life.
helping an obvious genius of our time.
cognitive prejudices’ (possible the only current recognizable ‘thought crime’.)
should the human race hold credence above that of suspicion. ▪
celia green and the institute of psychophysical research (of which she is the founder & director of) undoubtedly suffers greatly from a lack of appropriate support, namely: advertisement, funding, sta…
(more)
Hue, I have never read her books and only listened to the CD once! And I have to say I was listening to the music in a competitive way! "Heretic!" the interesting thing is the thought of not being allowed to read them if I so wished. Christ, they used to burn books didn't they? This does sound like the thought police from 1984. I often follow The Independent newspaper's articles / campaign for rights for the mentally ill. It is scary what 2 doctors can do.
The Independent. It is, are you? - Q (how poetic!) ▪
Hue, I have never read her books and only listened to the CD once! And I have to say I was listening to the music in a competitive way! "Heretic!" the interesting thing is the thought of not being …
(more)
qub – they burnt disco too, and some still say that that was a good thing; the loss of information is never a good thing, nor is the holding back of information.
i was just talking with a friend that i have not spoken to for a few years; she mentioned to me that a friend of hers who has just finished her training as a social worker; is not obliged to mention to either the patient or family of a patient that resides in a mental hospital for the first time, that both the family and the patient may appeal immediately to the act of sectioning.
it was not until my mother had sort information via a subscription magazine dedicated to the issue of mental health – ‘Rethink’ – previously call ‘The national Schizophrenia Foundation’ that we discovered this information of appealing against my committal.
nor are the doctors obliged to remind regulaly that a person who may not wish to be keep in such an unnerving unfamiliar place, that they might appeal. so who is? a solicitor that you are allocated and which is paid for by legal aid if one does not have such funds. but your solicitor will not visit or be there to get you out if the patient does not request them to do so; and heavily medicated, one does not have such capabilities at the ready especially if cognitive issues are troubling one. mostly it falls under the social workers work-load to keep arranging that a patient receives his social rights. but up until recently it was only the oldest parent or next of kin that could be present at such meeting to raise objections to the social workers line of questing – of which is prying beyond the point of reasonable necessity. & there is nothing you can really do once such records are made in places like that.
my own troubles of sectioning are quite extended. medication was administered before a bloods test was done, or before a day or two had past in which they might also be able to assess the nature of my appearances. i did actually go against a panel of five people, which was not of my asking for, but an assessment to the first section that they placed, to change it to a six-month removal. now this was all ok with myself and my family, who had planned and hope that i would be able to convince this panel that i would be better off in remission at home. but an hour before i had to show my face to people i’ve had no contact with in the past, i was given old anti-psychotic drugs. Chlorpromazine to be exact – introduced in the mid-50s. as i was waiting to see this set of people that could offer me the outside world, devastating side effects from the Chlorpromazine started to interfere with not only my cognitive functions but my muscles throughout my body, i might as well not have been there. they chose to hold me further. i would like to add i have never committed a violent act nor do i intend to. i have very little malice inside me. their reason for choosing to put me there first off was because i went to give a lady a hug for sitting with me after i had been yelling my freewill; the police who turned up at my local GP surgery, who had been there less then two minutes, handcuffed me, took me in their van in front of my father and mother, with me making little or no resistance. put me in a cell, which i might add through me way off balance, a doctor entered the room, asked me if there was anything he could do for me – to which i replied that there was not. they then took the decision that i should be moved to a closed ward (locked ward – magnetic if your were wondering). as they moved me to the second van i was zip tied both my arms and legs – to which my restance was little; in fact i remanded still and let them carry me. i did ask if i may have my shoes that were just outside the cell door but they refused; only later to give them back to me in hosptial without shoe laces.
i was admittedly suffering from hallucinations that where heavily projecting them upon my rational state of awareness, i would hear the hallucinatory sounds far more then the voices of people that where trying to talk, in some cases they were dubbed with visual hallucination, tactile, taste and smell. none of this was actually alarming me – though i have never had such strong layers of attention before. in fact i was euphoric right up to the moment that they injected me with Chlorpromazine and a cocktail of others medications. i’ve seen myself at least a foot away from rock bottom; rock bottom being taking ones life, or consciousness.
i’m actually very glad of the experience, as i truly now have no faith at all for our current societies methods of care for their members; of which they subscript at such a young age that they can not object to the institutionalisation – installing fake hopes of a better life with dashes of hate here and there as seasoning conditioning.
if i could get a permanent grant or funding to keep me out of societies reach i would apply instantly. if you where wondering it was a natural chemical that forms in the brain called dopamine that had over produced, due to smoking tobacco and hydroponic buds, drinking a fair bit, very little sleep for over a year and a half and deaths in the family. some days i was able to go without sleep for three days and be quite active, especial cognitive wise; so much writing was produced, so much time to hear music read make, so much of the day was enjoyed, the full rotational experience.
talk soon. hue. ▪
qub – they burnt disco too, and some still say that that was a good thing; the loss of information is never a good thing, nor is the holding back of information.
i was just talking with a friend th…
(more)
can anyone offer strong reason, as to why one should be apart of this current 21st century society; other then ‘a fellow member is obliged not to kill or harm another fellow member’?
& that i am tremendously dubious that people are fully prepared to follow to the letter.
this 21st century as with the last, seems more for the restriction of ‘getting upon high horses’, then enabling apt. research and help with forwarding their members life away from twentieth / twenty-first century man’s sacrosanct opinions, and into new resolves. & if any of you are wondering what those are, please take a moment to explore ‘the human evasion’ by celia green. ▪
can anyone offer strong reason, as to why one should be apart of this current 21st century society; other then ‘a fellow member is obliged not to kill or harm another fellow member’?
& that i am trem…
(more)
Dr Green's latest monthly column on metal illness is pertinent. A while back she guested on an edition of BBC All in The Mind (Radio 4), together with Charles McCreery. (Whatever happened to him?) The current series of All in the Mind has featured various people whose only claim to mental ill-health has been: "I thought my telephone was being bugged."
Hey, it probably was! ▪
Dr Green's latest monthly column on metal illness is pertinent. A while back she guested on an edition of BBC All in The Mind (Radio 4), together with Charles McCreery. (Whatever happened to him…
(more)
celia green and the institute of psychophysical research (of which she is the founder & director of) undoubtedly suffers greatly from a lack of appropriate support, namely: advertisement, funding, staffing and welcome.
although i have read, what feels like countless times of dr. green explaining that the sane human race does not care for evolutions in ontological explanation, no matter how clearly they are made, or evident they may be, or exact for that matter. though i never thought that people were so deaf to forethought & know-how until i tried to share what understanding i have learnt. the human race is more inclined to distract, if ever the subjects of erudition are raised, it seem to be comfortable discovering comprehension at a snails pace, and inexhaustibly ravels in its evasion to understand why things are the way the are; or what things could ever become.
almost every person that i have talked to with regards to celia green’s ideas mirrors this. some double backed into “what are her underling reasons ”, this is said not as a question but more as a warning to myself. the one person that did not step back when i mentioned the institute of psychophysical research [ipr] was: angela thompson smith, ph.d. of the nevada remote viewing group, inc. [nrvg] who has had fortune to work with celia green – and might i remark that it is not often that one may have the privilege to enable, undoubtedly a genius of out time.
in fact i have encountered people objecting so much to myself reading her books, even though they had never turned the pages of her books, that they took the decision not to grant me access to them when i was under section. it just so happen that i valued the information what i could recall to the point of making the effort to address my understanding of what is real and what is regarded as not real through her books, as soon as i was given permission to return home. the applicability, or level of occurrence of how applicable celia green’s observations, were and are still very strong for me – & i accept that it could be most probable that i recovered faster then most people that suffer psychotic attacks (75% of which never recover) due to the fast entrance of seeing and hearing what people might really be referring to, in the light of dr. green’s evaluations. now this, for those that have a slight understanding of psychosis, may say “well – psychotics are very susceptible to suggestion.”, but then it is the ability to be able to entertain ideas and find a momentum to live life for a purpose that is essential; not pretending to listen or not bothering to understand oneanother, or even oneself for that matter. it is that practice of objective introspection which celia green succeeds where most other respected thinkers, over the centauries have attempted to examine existence, being, everything and the absolute poorly with an objective framework.
but one still has to take celia green’s word that she has been able to examine the history of the human race with care; if one is to discredit other thought patterns precisley. (i'm sure the tedium of such acts would have drove such a creative mind into 'dread' of not wanting to belong to such acts for the remander of her life.)
however i would like this page of discussion to explore, under the terms of: what are the reasons for refusing or not refusing aspects from another individual’s point of view – that could most easily become a positive worldview.
i have read her being described as an apostle: noun one who attempts to convert others to a specific way of life, set of ideas, or course of action.
actually i only fully agree that celia green attempts to persuade others to a course of action and that she announce quite openly that it should be your decision. yes, she does mention many ideas, but at no point does she state that 'these are the only thoughts that human beings should be holding', only that she is very happy to hold them herself. anyone read different?
my own thoughts have turned to question of the use of describing her charity research area as an 'institute' – as being open season to call her research area capable of institutionalizing certain precious / venerable members of society. mongering the productions of conditioned responses. i guess its that dread of what are her intentions, that one needs to ask before one says such slander, really you have to make the effort to read her works, as much of them as you can before anyone should venture forth to hinder an already struggle glimmer of ontological furtherance that could be made by the ipr.
please consider these few angles before responding to this discussion:
gaining from embracing insight.
doing everything in your own way, keeping an autonomous life.
helping an obvious genius of our time.
cognitive prejudices’ (possible the only current recognizable ‘thought crime’.)
should the human race hold credence above that of suspicion. ▪
celia green and the institute of psychophysical research (of which she is the founder & director of) undoubtedly suffers greatly from a lack of appropriate support, namely: advertisement, funding, sta… (more)