Developing New Intelligence
October 21, 1988
AKS/News Item Gallery = jcap 1988-10-21 (0409)
Condensed AKS/News Items = See Below
Summary = See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = See Below (ck editing)
Summary
#409 ** Oct 24, 1988 ** – 1:20
Notes by TK
Kyroot to :04.
“New Intelligence” comes about thru more (flexible) thinking—not reading, studying etc. Ordinary intelligence will say “I’m always thinking!; all that’s possible.” The RR/Real Revolutionist has got to think beyond a maxed out thinking dance card—a forced flexible thinking, a constant asking of 4-d Why? belongs on the menu. Any with an agenda of intelligent expectations cannot learn anything new.
What they learn beyond everyday practical fact is always unsatisfying. An agenda of expectation stops thought processes as the question mark; then somebody else supplies an answer, fulfills the agenda, while you wait (without thinking). Ordinary intelligence is thought to be a product of concentration—a controlled narrowing of thought focus, but this is thinking-less, thinking limited. Revolutionary concentration is a widening of the focus; thinking more. A pertinent ‘sin’ for the RR: Misoneism (hatred of the new); distrust of change.
An historical synecdoche (figure of speech where the part is used for the whole; e.g., “suit” for business executive, “sail” for a ship): the total collapse of gov’t during the ‘dark ages’ as a lesson to western civilization that culture could survive and prosper even such a collapse of central control—i.e., the dark ages were/will be beneficial. A RR may have his own ‘dark age’ breakdown of City civilization as a prelude to New Intelligence. The “Nordic idea” of extra-indigenous generation and establishment of gov’t, i.e., established rule comes thru conquest by alien/foreign force. Relates to the RR having to conquer his unwashed masses and establish/impose a foreign domination. Revolutionary gov’t never is generated out of the City.
It seems possible to gain New Intelligence by reading/hearing of such (this is crudely true at the molecular level since the nervous system processes the pattern of the words) but it is impossible.
The RR must:
1) think differently;
2) think more;
3) think better to establish a Revolutionary gov’t while not destroying the old gov’t. To merely destroy the old guard is to do nothing—it is mere conversion, the obverse of the coin.
To discuss the price of TT/This Thing is to ask the cost of life-saving water in the desert. What difference does it make what the cost is? Pay or die.
And Kyroot Said…
There’s no need to try and pretend to be something you’re
not, because you CAN’T.
***
In the City, sweeping-things-under-the-carpet is one of the
better approaches.
***
A certain cautious gentleman instructed his young son
thusly, “Shh, don’t disturb Life while it’s thinking.”
***
If, from any distance, you hear an unidentified group
singing em masse, “Here we go gathering nuts in May, nuts in May,
nuts in May…” — make a run for it.
***
A Man who knows what he’s doing doesn’t have to be
religious.
***
Anything partially seen will always be seen as being
something else.
***
And from deep within the shaky complex of his sexual wiring
arose a cry, “If things get any more frightening you’ll have to
call off the orgy.”
***
If you don’t become free enough to think anything you want,
and anything you can, you, my tootsie, ain’t free for shit.
***
Another old City sore-type-head declared, “By and large,
most marriages seem to become a gradual form of legalized
murder.”
***
If a thing has no side effects, it has NO effects.
***
In the City EVERYthing is ersatz. (And damn proud of it.)
***
If anyone actually knew what they were talking about,
there’d be no need for supra’s, infra’s, or the good ole C.F.’s.
***
Never introduce yourself.
***
What Men ordinarily call ignorance is but an unexpected time
delay.
***
Roundly partaking of real intelligence never produces a
hangover.
***
If you wanna talk about what might be “real” philosophy chew
on this: Ideas without irony.
***
A City man, evidently desperate to be a source of some good
advice, informed his nephew thusly, “Never allow a cricket team
from the Lesser Antilles to refer to you as “that portly
gentleman over there.”
***
In another one of those City philosophy books I read, and I
quote, the following, “Even the gods can’t change the past,” and
to that I add, even if they could — what difference would it
make?
***
Even if they smile and INSIST, “Ah, come on, tell us what
you think,” — don’t.
***
I’m sorry, I truly am, but there is no substitute for
intelligence… NONE. Sorry.
***
Transcript
10/24/88
409F
No Diagrams
DEVELOPING NEW INTELLIGENCE
New Intelligence does not come about through more reading or
more studying, but through more thinking — all the time, and
flexibly at that. If you were to say this to someone back at the
ordinary level, it would sound ridiculous. If anyone listening
at the ordinary level were to hear that there is something like
New Intelligence, they would think that it came about through
some sort of studying. Ordinary consciousness would ask how to
get New Intelligence and after hearing the explanation would
start to study it. In fact, a busy person might ask for
something to read so that they could read it later and then study
it.
New Intelligence will not be developed by reading or
studying of any sort. NO WAY! The approach is simply to think
more. To this statement good old ordinary intelligence would
say, “But I think all the time as it is!” We’re not going to
question ordinary 3-D judgements about measuring the quantity of
time spent thinking, but it is important to remember that there
is as much quantity as there is space. There are no empty
places, no empty spaces. Everywhere that ordinary 3-D
consciousness can look there is stuff filling up space. Although
it appears otherwise to 3-D consciousness, there is no sense
saying, quantitatively speaking, that there are no empty spaces
in one’s thinking schedule. It simply is not the case that there
are no empty thinking spaces. Even if it were true, you’ve got
to think more — you’ve got to think all the time. Every moment
you have to think more. All right, you believe you’re thinking
all the time, but you’ve got to think some more. Once you try to
think more, you will find out that you can take whatever space is
being filled up, and put in more. It is part of the illusionary
reality of the 3-D world that more can be put into whatever space
appears to be already filled up. (Ordinary consciousness does
not want to put in more, though, because that would mean “playing
in the key of CHANGE,” which everyone fears and dreads.) The
forced new additional thinking has got to be done all the time,
and it must be flexible. Then you are on the way to developing a
new kind of intelligence.
Whatever is going on, you should be thinking, involved in a
continual asking of yourself, “Why, to what end from a 4-D level,
is such-and-such going on?” You must think with a sweeping,
omnidirectional sort of consciousness. For instance, first thing
in the morning as you are getting ready, think about everything
you have to do that day (not in a worrisome manner), while
simultaneously brushing your teeth, combing your hair, keeping
your eye on the clock, listening to the radio to check their time
against the clock time, listening to whether the coffee is
perking yet, thinking of all that you might do today if you have
time, and so on. Don’t think of things linearly, in sequence,
but in a nonordinary way; think of them all together, at the same
time, continually, all the time.
There is a saying, “Anyone who has an agenda will never hear
the doorbell ring.” Anyone who has any sort of intellectual
expectations will never learn something new. Ordinary 3-D
intelligence cannot perceive that as true. One must be
approaching the level of new intelligence to see that if one has
any ordinary-level expectations, then one can’t learn anything
new. That is why the appearance of learning something new never
satisfies. I specifically mean this beyond the basic physical
level. For instance, if you’re having trouble with your electric
can opener, and you find a pamphlet on how the consumer can fix a
electric can opener, you can fix it, say, “AHA,” and be
satisfied. Beyond that level, any higher circuit information
(philosophy, religion, metaphysics, etc.) cannot be truly
satisfying. Anything you’ve ever learned cannot be truly
satisfying except at the 3-D city level.
If you’re interested in the nonordinary track, you soon
realize that you can read, study, or learn about something, and
it is never truly satisfying. One description of a reason for
this is that if you have an agenda, you can not learn anything
new. At the 3-D level, though, you would not attempt to learn
anything new unless you had an agenda. If you wanted to learn
something, you might believe that if you could only get some more
information, you would be satisfied. It would be no problem to
find more information; you need only look around, check the Dewey
decimal files, and you can find a book on the subject you’re
interested in. But once you read the book, or even memorize it,
does it seem to satisfy you? If you had not had an agenda, a set
of expectations, would you have even tried it?
If you have an agenda, you are not thinking all the time.
With an agenda, you only think so far down a particular track.
You decide, “What I want to know is this.” Apparently almost any
snake oil salesman in the City can give you an answer. Suppose
you want to know what the nature of Life is (or why small
electrical appliances turn on you after a couple of years). You
have an expectation of where you want to go. Suddenly someone
will make the secret signal, tell you to come hear a lecture, and
you go. Apparently the guy answers the question, but on
reexamination you think, “Naw, that didn’t do it.” You didn’t
get new info. As long as you have an agenda, you will never hear
the doorbell ring, because it’s ringing all the time. But people
wait for the doorbell at specific times, or they listen for a
specific ring. People are wired to believe that they need a
particular type of information. They think that if they could
only get some specific information, they would have what they
wanted. But it’s not true.
For a long time, I have periodically tried to convey to you
that you’re not using the brain in the way you should. Every
time I try, you may take one step and then you trip. I ask what
happened to your car, your foot, your mind, your memory, or
whatever it turns out that you forgot, and you feel guilty. I
try to tell you, for example, to drive your car and think of what
you are going to do once you park the car. You could even be
driving the car into a parking lot, looking for a parking space,
making sure that you miss pedestrians and curbs, and if you are
thinking more, looking around, you might see that a particular
lot might not be the most propitious for your health, safety, or
the condition of your car upon your return. If you were trying
to think all the time, Life might just say to you, “Don’t park
here,” or, “Don’t go down this street.” I have had very limited
success with this with any of you. Very few of you have been
kicked into the position of trying to think more. If I say that
to many of you, you stare more, think less, and it becomes your
new agenda. You don’t do what I was saying, which was to think
more. In the City that is known as fornica… no, concentration.
In a sense, that is what people do.
Suppose you’re upset about something. Say you’re on the way
to an interview and you’re late, and you’re thinking about not
being late. You’re not thinking all the time, and you run over
the curb, or hit a pedestrian. If you get mad, and you keep
thinking about it, and you think about it over and over again,
you are actually thinking less and less. Anybody in the City can
tell you that is not good for you. What is the difference
between that and concentration? In the city, they say that
concentration is good for you. In either case, though, you are
thinking less and less. But people don’t believe that these are
the same thing.
That is the difference between This Activity and anything
else in whatever guise. If you hand people a set of rules to
study, they think less. It’s like trying to teach someone to
dance while continually knocking them off balance. If you say
to someone, “Listen to what I tell you now. Don’t keep thinking
about what I say; don’t get limited to that.” Then you ask what
they are thinking about, and they say, “I’m thinking about not
thinking about what you just said.”
New Intelligence is not just the reworking of the old
molecules, nor a rewiring of the old system. This does not really
address anyone’s agenda; you just think that it does. I get
letters thanking me for what I’ve said because it seemed to
address what the person had been thinking about. Whatever I said
seemed to help them, but the person had an agenda. If someone
could reach inside your head and neutralize your problem, you
could not get down the street to have a cup of coffee before you
came up with three new problems. Whatever you want changed or
neutralized cannot be changed and if it could, you would not be
better off. Instead, you would have other problems.
If you could answer such questions as, “Why does so-and-so
treat me this way?” or “Why is my life this way?” or “Where does
light go when the light goes out?” you would not be better off.
You would not be satisfied. You have not gone to any church, or
read any book on philosophy or religion, and ever been satisfied.
The author of a book may spend the first 200 pages describing the
questions, sharing his life and his problems and his search
running from pillar to post, and finally give an answer to the
questions at the very end of the book. But whatever answer he
gives is not the answer to him, nor to anybody else. This is not
to say that there is anything wrong with his answer; remember,
there is nothing wrong with Life. The answer the author gives is
merely a period, an end for the questions, but it is not
satisfying to the upper levels of the nervous system.
In the City, at the 3-D level, there are things that are
satisfying. But if you think good food, good sex, or whatever is
ultimately satisfying, you are still looking only at the 3-D
level. For the upper end of the nervous system, those things
are not satisfying. The upper level of the nervous system is
what “stretches around the corner and touches linear tomorrow.”
The upper level of the nervous system cannot get all of its food
here.
If there was anything approaching “sin” in a revolutionist’s
activity, it would have to be just one thing: “misoneism.”
Misoneism is hatred or distrust of the new or anything that seems
to represent change. It is a perfectly good word, but I’ve never
heard it used anywhere in the city. To what end??? Isn’t it
interesting that you’ve never heard that word? Think about it.
Hatred of the new — that’s right to the point. What I’m
hinting at is that hatred of the new — I mean the discussion of
it — never seems to come up in everyday life.
Let’s examine several synecdoches from history. Some recent
writings about the so-called Dark Ages pointed out that the dark
ages served, from one view, a beneficial purpose. In the western
world there had been a breakdown of government. According to
this historian, the dark ages which followed the fall of Rome
provided a distinctly positive lesson to western man: the social
structures, commerce, religion, standards of conduct, and culture
all survived an almost total breakdown of government. Thus
western man learned that his social institutions could survive
without government. Could any of you see that in a sense a Real
Revolutionist might possibly go through his own dark ages in
the process of developing a new kind of intelligence? You might
even have already experienced the breakdown of your own Roman
government or central authority, and feel that all of the Huns
and other barbarians have attacked you, and you have lost all
control.
Some people might describe this sense of a lack of central
stability as the feeling that they might lose their mind. What
if all revolutionists have to go through a kind of dark ages?
Don’t fret; I’m not inferring that your Dark Ages have to last
1000 years! There is a sense, though, in which you have to go
through a kind of dark ages to discover that New Intelligence can
function without the stable, predictable, control generally
exercised by institutions of government. The government which
some people give up for this New Intelligence is their abiding
faith in religion. You may feel that you’re a long way from
Rome, but there is a Caesar and he is in control, even though
he’s mad and deranged. Look at people’s idea of god: remember
that it doesn’t bother people in the City for their ruler to be
insane. As you enter your dark ages, you may feel like you’re
about to go on a trip into the wilderness, but you can survive
with you intact, just as the historian pointed out about western
man. Think about how beneficial this can be to you, an
individual.
Another historian talked about an idea credited to the
Nordic people when they were down in Europe and Russia which
stated that the only real governments ever instituted must be
imposed by a foreign source. That is, no people indigenous to
any area ever spontaneously form a government. Of course, this
might have been an after the fact justification for all the
stoning, raping and pillaging done by the Nordic people. But
this historian has adopted the idea that no government has sprung
up from within its own people, but only from a foreign force
which conquers the people. Does that sound like it might have
any connection to a New Intelligence? There is no way that the
locals, the indigenous people in you — the intelligence, the
molecular structures, or neural patterns already in you — will
ever form a new government.
Ordinary consciousness might say that if a person really
wanted his own new government all he would have to do is study
more, but I’ve already said that wouldn’t work. The new
government must be imposed from a foreign source. So the locals
say, “OK, we’ll go get a foreign book and study.” This is one
of the great blind spots of local consciousness. Speaking
synecdochically, in the City people believe they can read about
something and actually learn something. They’ll read about
things that do not exist yet in the City, and they’ll believe
they have actually been there. In a sense, they have; by
thinking about things you can’t do, you have in a really crude
way almost been there. If you read something, your nervous
system converts the energy from the words on the paper to your
own neural firing patterns. But it’s not simple to tell somebody
who has read about what it’s like to be more intelligent that
they don’t actually know from the information running through the
nervous system and the brain itself what it’s like to be more
intelligent — even though in a really crude way they do know.
You can read about Afghanistan, study the culture and the
geography, but you haven’t been there. Similarly, you can read
about New Intelligence, but that doesn’t give you New
Intelligence, and it doesn’t mean you really know what New
Intelligence is. The Nordic idea has validity: what you know
came from local city intelligence, and that is no new form of
government, no new form of intelligence. The New Intelligence
must come from a foreign intervention, from outside the ordinary
structures of the nervous system.
The New Intelligence does not become part of your
intelligence because you read about it. To develop New
Intelligence, you must be able to think differently, think more,
think better. You cannot get a government established in you by
having someone from the city attack you; the conquering force
must be foreign — from another city, almost another planet.
Their language, their culture, must be different. The more
foreign the force, the more efficient will be the takeover of
the new government, and the easier it will be for them to demand
tribute. How much more foreign could anything be than what I am
presenting of this New Intelligence to ordinary sanity? One way
to look at it on your own level is that this kind of internal
conquest has to involve the threat, the potential, of being
conquered by a foreign New Intelligence.
This particular kind of revolution, this kind of conquest,
is singular and most unusual, because you end up with a new kind
of government without destroying the old one! To do This, you
must have a sort of inflexible, stable underpinning, physically
and emotionally. In the stories of conversion that permeate
spiritual literature throughout the world, some guy (generally
the scourge of the earth) is walking down the road when the great
cosmic forces strike him and he undergoes some kind of total
conversion and becomes a new person. These stories have no real
meaning in the City; they do not even remotely resemble what
happens in ordinary 3-D life. But with the conquest of you
internally (not a restructuring of what you already are), a
kind of new intelligence takes over. The new intelligence does
not destroy the old one, because if it did, you would either be
nuts, or you would be a convert. (In this case, if it happened
here, I guess you would be a follower of me. Then I would have
to move. So don’t become a convert!) If you’re going to be
conquered by a New Intelligence, you cannot destroy the old one
or stop it from functioning. If the old does not remain intact,
you have been converted; you haven’t found New Intelligence, and
nothing extraordinary has happened.
Can you glimpse the kind of revolution I am talking about?
Can you see that the revolutionist can’t simply turn his back on
the old allegiances that he had? He cannot badmouth the old
allegiances; they are still operating at their own level, and
they are still part of him. He does not hate them. A Real
Revolutionist does not have to become a complete turncoat against
the alliances he has had with Life. Now certain philosophical or
religious tomes say such things as “you cannot serve two
masters,” “you cannot swear allegiance to two flags.” The
singularity of the internal revolution is that you are not faced
with that dilemma, once you escape 3-D gravity. None of This is an
attack on what you were when you came here because you are not an
apostate, and you do not have to be a traitor to your past. You
merely have a new allegiance. Your allegiance is to Life, where
it always was. You have not turned your back on Life; you have
not become a traitor to your past. If you can see it, you’ll
understand that the past is not good or bad in anybody; the past
is irrelevant. What can you do about the past? If you had
anything resembling New Intelligence, what would you do about the
past?
There is a poignant saying, “If you’ve got to discuss the
price of something, then you either can’t afford it or you don’t
really want it.” Also, there is a question I’ve posed for you if
you need any evidence of whether you belong here: “Would do
anything I told you to do?” Now look at those two together with
this third item, a story: a person trudging through the desert
for miles and miles is close to death when suddenly he goes over
one sand dune and sees a guy at a stand with a sign that says,
“water for sale,” so he asks how much it is, and the guy says,
“What difference does it make?” Consider all three of those
items together. Are you led in a direction away from the
ordinary flows and confines of how you think — how you think
about you, how you think about what you imagine This Activity is
or where you think it may go? Does anybody get the drift? A
Real Revolutionist would silently say, “You know, I get the
drift.”