Jan Cox Talk 0450

The Past is Always Simpler


Video does NOT contain the first 5 minutes of aphorisms that is on the audio below.

January 27, 1989
AKS/News Item Gallery = jcap 1989-01-25 (0450)
Condensed AKS/News Items = See Below 
Summary =  See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = See Below
Curation = 4D Science


Jan Cox Talk 0450 – Jan 27, 1989 – 1:18  *
Notes by TK

Kyroot to :05
From a specific, quite valid view it is possible to see everything in the life of man as neutral in itself; everything has no preference in and of itself other than to serve Life’s preference for growth. It is man that is not/cannot be neutral, that furnishes the inflaming passion of preference for whatever is otherwise neutral. Yet man looks outside himself for the basis of this prejudice in order to shift blame, which then allows the illusion that rehabilitation of same is possible. Ideas, words do not have the ability per se to drive men. The purpose of human intellect is to divide and classify the otherwise neutral data of nature on the basis of his built-in preferences.

There is no idea/system/observation that can reveal, encompass or describe reality without including the prejudice of the thinker/observer of same. This is not really known in the City although it is accepted as obvious truth (i.e., “the source of that statement must be taken into account in verifying its validity”). If man were newly intelligent he would see that this means everything he says is neutral, while it’s his fellow humans that bring the pro or con to it.
All maps are ad hoc; for a given, temporary purpose. To use a map without understanding this will only serve to produce disorientation.  E.g., using a geologic map to find your way to a particular city or interstate. All knowledge is ad hoc, disposable, of limited lifespan. You must have a continuing awareness of this to do This Thing.
People go out to music concerts to be energized, excited (regardless of whatever reasons they say they go for). This would seem to be quite wrong in the instance of attendees at a Bach chamber music concert where the program is anything but stirring in comparison to a rock concert, in fact it is calming to the audience. This seems so only because humans have the prejudice that energy exchange is only of the latter type. But energy, too, is neutral per se. Remember the E-C gate; an energy exchange can go either way with equal profit for Life’s purpose. The Real Revolutionist must be constantly aware of this: humans take neutral energy personally, which then makes it something else, puts a new spin on it, changes it…but always for Life’s benefit.

And Kyroot Said…

     If problems don’t happen on time, they cease to be problems.


     A real revolutionist is a person who can give himself a hand  
while simultaneously bowing.


     I met this one guy who said that on city applications he  
would list his vocation as “Apprentice Dolt,” (and in less  
secular circumstances simply as “Lay Idiot”).


     To a revolutionist it’s all the same, except for the parts  
that’s not.


     There is this other city park philosopher, who evidently  
has had some revolutionary exposure, who recently pronounced the  
following:  “If the position of truth and error, good and evil  
were any closer, priests would be intellectually door dinged, and  
philosophers would be chain link installers.”  After a few  
minutes of silence, as we surveyed our quiet surrounds, he added,  
“If dead stood any nearer to life, we’d all have the willies even  
on weekends.”


     If the Biblical deluge had been of words and not water, what  
then might Noah have taken aboard?


     Read a city poet who said that “the surest way to a woman’s  
heart is by way of pity”; it must have worked since men have  
adopted a similar tack regarding their gods.  (What will humans  
think of next…if anything.)


     One harried city-ite confided to me that during one  
especially restless night, he heard his brain say to him not to  
worry, that it was “just passing through.”


     Everyone’s about the same distance away…(unless you’re  
doing it wrong again).

     Last weekend at that little tavern just off the main city  
park, I overheard this gent at a nearby table announce, “Well, at  
least I do not engage in exaggerated claims; in fact, I make  
fewer exaggerated claims than any man, woman, or priest who’s  
ever lived at any time or place in history.”


     My kinda sports:  A team that decided 3rd base was a waste  
of time, and 4th down an unnecessary bother.


     In the city, only the incomplete will satisfy.  OK then,  
let’s get right to the marrow of the matter then:  In the city,  
only the unsatisfying will satisfy.


     To forge the correct and necessary inner power structure,  
the revolutionist must adopt the operational attitude of, “If I  
said it, I can do it.”


     There’s this chap in Geneva who’s been partially lamed by  
the falling collected works of Robert Browning, who sez he knows  
the private number for Room Service for the whole world.  (He  
adds that it shuts down at nine.)


     A real revolutionist is extremely weird…no, strike  


     Overheard a fellow say that since he’s gotten involved in  
certain revolutionist activities, he’s become so pleased and  
pressure packed that he’s forgotten why he got involved in the  
first place.


     If you treat all ideas the same they’ll return the favor.   
If you treat all beliefs the same you won’t need favors.


     A real revolutionist is a person who can spell any word any  
way they want to.


     In the city library, day before sometime, after several  
hours of deep reading in the area of ancient and modern matters  
metaphysical and spiritual, a man stood sweatily to his feet, and  
loudly proclaimed, “Intensity without intelligent direction is  
the way of the Gumby Warrior.”


     A real revolutionist never uses the same material once.



Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1989

Document: 450,  January 27, 1989

You could look at everything, all processes, in Life and in the Life of man, as being neutral. To say that all processes are neutral seems to be in direct opposition to what I have also said that it is impossible to look at anything objectively, free from personal feeling — even Life has a preference in everything it does. So, let me see if I can get you to collect and fold up these apparently different views into one big origami map.

All things, all processes, all nouns and verbs, are neutral in that, within themselves, (together with the view that there is no such thing as objectivity) they have no personal preference — they just have to do as best serves Life’s interest and growth. Everything is neutral, yet, generally speaking, men cannot themselves be objective. No matter how intellectual, educated, proficient and craftsman like you are in any area, you are not objective. You can appear to be cold and analytical about a specific field, but if you’re interested in that area, you are not objective. You could be the living epitome of a person apparently sans human emotion, but you would still have a preferential leaning.

So, why do people strive to be objective when Life is arranged for them to not be so? In and of itself human preference about any given subject is not detrimental or harmful to an individual. Preference is nothing to be despised. If you had no feelings about anything — if you were dictionary “objective” — you would be dead. Even if you did not die you would be useless to Life. You’d be Life’s dead skin, simply dandruff or psoriasis.

Men cannot be objective, yet from another view all things in Life are in and of themselves neutral. Even a belief that is passionate, that incenses people, is neutral. Suppose there was a theory that people with green hair have a conspiracy to wreck human progress. Such an idea would apparently be loaded with human emotion. Not only that, it appears to be wholly based on human feeling. If you took away the human passion from such a statement, you wouldn’t be left with anything. An accusation of conspiracy is passion put into words. It’s full of feeling, prejudice, nothing even resembling the definition of objective, that is, free from human feeling. I’m telling you, even that is neutral.

Let me remind you, I am not commenting on the psychology of man. I do not discuss the illusionary. Man has no psychology. We’re talking about the nature of Life, how Life works, and how Life works through Man.

From a certain real, necessary, and quite useful view, everything apparently out there is neutral. Specifically, the things that apparently are of great importance to civilized, thinking people, that is, the world of ideas, institutions, philosophy, feelings — things singularly, uniquely human that have the power to drive masses of people — are neutral. No matter how based upon prejudice they seem to be, all are quite neutral. In and of themselves they have no preference.

Consider: What is a belief? Is it really a “something” you can get your hands on like a bad TV set, a spoiled dinner or a car that backfires? A belief is none of that. But people think a belief actually has some feeling, some preference behind it and that beliefs are tangible and real.

In a strange way, Life lets at least three-fifths and sometimes even three-fourths of some stuff actually seep into human awareness. Ordinary intelligence might say, “Although a theory doesn’t exist in the same way that an automobile exists, a theory can excite passion in people, and so it is dangerous.” But anything in and of itself, no matter what it is, no matter how it strikes you at City level, is neutral and has no preference. People say, “As much as I’m against censorship, this book can stir up unwanted passions in people.” Can you hear Life talking in almost a satirical way, to make men say such as that?

Can you see that this all may just be a satire, a put-on, perhaps the somewhat humorous ruminations that Life makes as it daydreams? Life makes jokes to itself, like a Revolutionist in front of a mirror. Can you imagine Life looking deep into its own eyes, into neural galaxies, laughing and demanding, “Okay, who’s really in there?” You can be close to Life’s little jokes and still not understand the humor. If you don’t realize everything is in and of itself neutral, no matter how inflammatory, weighted, prejudiced, or insane the idea/belief seems to be, then you’ll miss the satire, you won’t get the joke.

Let’s say the government announced that for population and health reasons they were going to execute everyone in your state. You would say that is a prejudicial idea. “Hell, they are about to shoot me. That law is not neutral!” But if you lived across the country, you would be indifferent. There is a quite real way that everything native to the human experience is neutral, because in and of itself, everything has no preference.

It takes the top end of the human nervous system to divide and classify, to create the perception that everything is based upon some sort of preference. But things are wired up in such a way that human consciousness — intelligence — is only working three-fourths of the street, seeing only a fraction of reality. And so, people think their experience, their life has made them the way they are, full of preferences and prejudices.

Intelligence looks “out there” for the basis, the cause of preferences. Some guy says, “I don’t know, I only end up with women who drink and get violent — all five of my wives were that way. None of them ever took the responsibility to straighten themselves out!” He even attributes his internal involvement to something out there. “I have to admit, I have a subconscious, unprofitable preference for such women. But, you know, it’s not of my doing! Let me tell you about my home life as a child, my mother, my father…” Ordinary consciousness cannot see that things outside are neutral.

When I say “prejudice,” I mean prejudice in the full sense of the word, not just religious, racial or national prejudice — I mean having a personal, individual, built-in, wired-up preference in some situation that apparently has nothing to do with the situation itself. Prejudice means you are pre-sold, you have a preference which you cannot seem to control instantly.

Prejudice can also be seen as what people would call phobia and subconscious trauma. People use these terms to keep from realizing, “I’m hard wired” to keep believing that things aren’t as bad as they are, to keep believing that change is possible. All that is to keep people from having to face the fact that they are dressed up, standing in line, shuffling along unaware of how they got there. In a sense, all of that is to obscure the realization that the very things that seem to drive the human mind are within themselves non-prejudicial.

You have to understand there is no such thing as an idea that has a preference. No matter how insane and prejudicial the idea is, it did not suddenly organically grow somewhere with a particular prejudicial leaning. The idea is all neutral, within itself, because it has no preference. But it does have this: it has the unshakable, inescapable duty to go along with the preference that Life has, the same way as you do. There is what you have in common with everything “out there.”

One specific electrochemical purpose of the human brain is to take neutral things and properly divide and classify them. This is part of the purpose of the human intellect. You don’t have the responsibility to divide and classify everything in Life. That is why you appear to be almost objective about some things. A man who has no interest in sports is not in charge of classifying sports. To him that is almost a neutral area. If you ask him, “What do you think about sports?” he doesn’t know what to say. There is one example. Find some more within yourself.

Ordinary consciousness/intelligence will almost unanimously agree that you can’t take anyone’s opinion or theory at face value without some knowledge of their innate prejudice. If someone says, “The only real religion in the world is ______,” and they fill in the blank, you will immediately suspect that their answer is their religion. If someone praises a particular football team, you immediately suspect they are from that team’s city. A truck driver spouts off about how the only decent tractor is an International Harvester. The guy standing next to him, who drives a Ford will ask right off, “Who do you work for?” The driver answers, “International Harvester.” So the other guy shakes his head and says, “Surprise, surprise. Just goes to show you always have to take the source into account.” Everyone knows that you always have to take the source into account. However, no one realizes that everything — the singular part of human intellectual experience — contrary to what people believe and from a quite real view, is absolutely neutral.

There is no idea, no thought, no theory or system, that can ever fully reveal or encompass reality that does not include the thinker of the thought. There is no thought/observation that in any way reveals any kind of Revolutionary information, beyond what is known and available to City intelligence, that does not include the thinker, the observer of the thought, idea or observation. Ordinary intelligence cannot perceive this. It would say, “You’re saying that, ‘Any idea a man has, can’t really be taken as being a useful thought unless we consider who had the thought.’ What you are saying is, ‘Any thought won’t represent all reality and we may not even take it seriously, unless we consider the prejudice of the source.’ That’s all you’re saying. Anyone with any intelligence knows that.”

An idea itself, including the people who hear it and its far-reaching implications, has no preference. When people say: “You have to take the prejudice of the speaker into account,” they are saying, “All ideas are neutral,” without knowing it. If they could expand into one more dimension, they would see how what they say is obviously true, and once seen, is absolutely false. But no one sees this because if they did they would know that anything anyone says is neutral.

City people say, “You can’t tell how much validity to attribute to a statement without knowing who the speaker is.” If they could just stretch that around the corner they’d have: “Anything a human can think, any theory, any statement is neutral in itself.”

Now let’s turn to something else. All maps are ad hoc. This sounds like a great statement that can’t be true — a map’s a map. But all maps are prejudicial, ad hoc; all maps have a particular purpose. And any map will tell you it’s purpose, somewhere, for example, “Geographical Map Of Europe, circa 1924,” or, “Geological Map, Northern Africa, 1987.” All maps are ad hoc.

I’m not speaking simply of ordinary cartography. I am speaking of all maps including other kinds of maps. All maps are ad hoc and to ignore this will ultimately result in a sense of displacement and disorientation. If you didn’t understand that an ordinary map was ad hoc and you tried to do one thing and the map was made for something else — very shortly you would become disorganized, disoriented and displaced. If you’re behind enemy lines and all you have is an outdated geophysical map put together for oil exploration, you will have trouble finding your political allies. If you don’t understand that all maps are ad hoc, the inescapable result is to be displaced.

The same goes for every idea you ever had no matter how great the source. Even if you were the source, if you don’t understand or you forget that the idea was ad hoc, for some particular purpose, you will ultimately experience the three great D’s of the 3-D world: you’ll become displaced, disorganized, and disoriented. You will end up wasting your time. The things you thought were useful, whether you apparently thought them or you picked them up from someone else, will eventually become disorienting; they will displace you, you will end up lost. Ordinary intelligence doesn’t perceive that. Ordinary intelligence believes that maps are neutral and that there are final answers to everything. Otherwise, people would be standing in line, pulling out their little eyebrows. They’d give a whole new meaning to the words “stressed” and “frustrated.”

Ordinary intelligence cannot perceive the fact that anything worth knowing is ad hoc, that all useful knowledge is disposable. The food industry did not invent junk food by learning how to freeze. All the classifications and divisions, all the separations that the human intellect has carried out on otherwise neutral things, have been a process of developing intellectual junk food.

The truth is right before people, in history, in all kinds of examples. What was believed literally true a decade ago is now laughed at. Everyone knows that knowledge is disposable, but then again no one knows this because the map doesn’t change that much in one lifetime. Beliefs apparently change out there, but this does not happen within one ordinary intellect. No ordinary person has ever believed all their life that the world was flat, and then, before they died, realized that was completely wrong, that the world is not flat. That is not the tempo or the rate of progress of change in Life’s body vis a vis man. People view the truth as finite. They say, “I know all that, it is obvious.” It is not obvious.

The galactic structure of every human’s neural system is such that whatever map they have of the universe — what they believe and what they think and believe they should think and believe — they do not realize that the map is ad hoc. Your map is ad hoc to Life, but to you it’s permanent and unchanging, a scrap of paper to cling to, something that’s kept you afloat after the ship sank just before you were born and all hell broke loose.

Of course, your “map” is not just one map or one idea. It’s more like, “I’m going to hold onto me, my thinking patterns, my internal galaxies, my personal feelings and prejudices. If I didn’t have that, I’d go to pieces and they’d have to put me away!”

All maps are ad hoc. Ordinary intelligence cannot see that, but to try and do This and not see that, to forge ahead and forget that, is to your own detriment because you will become disoriented and not even know you’re lost. You’ll just be staggering around thinking you’re using a map you like and you don’t realize you are going in circles. Everything is ad hoc, seasonal. All purposes are finite, for a limited time.

This is also connected to the fact that everything, from a certain view, is neutral. All maps ad hocly make things temporarily — in your lifetime — apparently NOT neutral. After all, the map’s got warnings all over it: “Danger,” “Go around this swampy area,” “Unknown possible landslides and dangerous beasties.” So you’ve got a map, and then you hear something from me like, “Hey, all things are in and of themselves neutral,” and you think, “No way! I read this book, I heard this guy speak, I’ve got a map, just something within me tells me that is not right.” But, all maps are ad hoc, they are for a particular reason. It is to your own detriment to continue to do This without remembering that all maps are ad hoc. You might even get your nose pressed up right against the window in regard to This. You think you hear me contradict myself and you can end up thinking, “Does he know what he’s doing? Does This have no rhyme or reason?”

Now let me unfold, beyond its verbal confines, a piece of another little map I’ve mentioned before. You see, even if you have used up all the ad hoc-ness of a map, you don’t have to throw it away. You may sometimes think you get it all when I first mention something, but the map keeps unfolding. If you know how, all you have to do is give a little pull and you find another area that was folded under. You can take a map and keep going with it.

I once mentioned that people do not go out to a concert, to hear a lecture, or simply to see art. They go out to be energized. People don’t go to hear an evangelist for spiritual enlightenment, or to hear a music group because they like the music; people do not go out for the simple reasons they say. They do not go out to be entertained. People go out to be energized.

I had used the example of people sitting at a serious classical concert or a traditional ballet. Even though the audience is sitting quietly, some of them might be snoring, many of them look like they couldn’t dance if their life depended on it, those people are being energized. Now, a classical concert may not seem energizing, but I assure you, there is an energy exchange going on in various aspects of the evening.

Ordinary intelligence struggles with such an example. Ordinary intelligence always fights against the kind of things I’m pointing out, that is, a greater, more complex description of how Life is working. Your City intelligence says, “I don’t understand it, you’re just being silly. Besides, I know what’s going on, I know what’s right and wrong and I don’t need anybody else to tell me there’s more to it. There is no more to it! Except, I just don’t understand why things are arranged so inequitably. Now, that’s my objective view and I’m proud of it!”

A classical concert may seem like the worst possible example of people going out to be energized. But I can use that to push, to strain your ordinary intelligence, and you have to be complex enough to benefit from my doing things like this. Can you begin to see that only the ordinary human intellect properly divides up such things as the concept of energized to mean only one thing? Remember the EC gate, the exciting/calming gate, a particular part of the human nervous system that I once described to you? This is no big secret — ordinary medicine recognizes what I described in another form — except it goes around the corner so I put a new name on it. Because what can be seen is more than what the medical field recognizes, just biologically.

Can you be complex enough to realize that the dynamics, the action of energy itself can be both and either calming or exciting? You could go to a lecture where the speaker did not seem to exude any enthusiasm. You could sit at a classical concert with 2,000 people being so quiet you could hear a pin drop, and listen to three and a half hours of serious Baroque music with no great ups or downs. Still, an energy exchange is going on. You should be able to see that to be energized is not simply to experience explosive energy. People can sit still nodding their heads and they are being energized.

Energy can calm and excite. Life has a preference or there wouldn’t be both possibilities. You couldn’t be enraged or afraid, sad or happy; you couldn’t feel something was right or wrong. Energy in any given circumstance is in a sense neutral. Only ordinary intelligence believes that to be energized is to be whipped up. Ordinary intelligence views excitement as some wild-eyed evangelist at a tent meeting with two drummers and his wife playing the organ. They beat tambourines for an hour and then he comes out, screams and hollers and the crowd gets all worked up. Ordinary intelligence says, “I can understand that. But to go and sit down to hear Browning’s poetry read, or an evening of fugues, how could you call that being energized?” There is still an energy exchange in either example. That is why the people went out.

You’d think humanity was divided into two great classes, for example, those who would go to a dance concert and those who would go to a sit-down concert. But it is all neutral. Energy itself is neutral except on the level of Life. Life has the continual preference to use energy to grow. But at the ordinary level, people take preference as being personal. People take the credit for having preferences and feelings about things that go on. You ask the crowd at a dance club, “Do you realize there are people that dress up in a tuxedo and pay money to sit down all evening and listen to serious music?” They say, “They’re nuts! And that’s my objective opinion!” Then, you ask the people coming out of a symphony concert, “Do you ever go out to discos, to good old sweaty clubs where the band’s getting down and people will spill beer on you and throw up on your feet?” They’ll say, “Heavens, no. Even if you could call that music, how can you enjoy it if you’re going to drink? Besides, it’s too loud, and everyone’s talking and doing these weird dance steps.”

Both groups are getting energized because energy at the human level is neutral. But does anybody take energy as neutral? No. If they did, then Life would have no ups, no downs. In a hospital, on the right kind of equipment, you can see that straight line and you’re really talking about neutrality. That straight line is saying the person in question is truly objective, with no personal feeling or preference.

Look at what humanity believes drives history: warfare between peoples, between nations and races and all that. I’m not here to cure that because it’s not an ill. But people believe that there is something to be cured, that there is something amiss. Part of the purpose of the human intellect is to take energy, the basic neutral energy that runs the high end of the nervous system, that runs the thinking mechanism, and divide and classify so that the energy is no longer neutral.

All maps are ad hoc. Every idea you ever had was a map which you took as being for your own purposes. The ad hoc reality was for Life’s purposes. For every one that thinks like you, someone thinks the apparent opposite. For every political idea you can come up with, there is opposition. For every piece of music you like, there is someone else nearby who says, “Hey, it don’t rate high in my opinion because it’s got no beat and you can’t dance to it.”

I shall close with a little story.

There were these two guys in a bistro in the city who, after a few coffees, started talking about the world’s oldest profession. Being intellectual, one said: “I’ll tell you, the world’s oldest profession must be medicine, because right in the first book of the Bible it talks about how god performed surgery by taking a rib out of Adam to make Eve.”

The other guy said, “I don’t think so. The oldest profession would have to be engineering, because before god made Adam and Eve he separated the land from the water.” And a Real Revolutionist sitting on the bar heard all that, and using their same kind of biblical model thought: “No, if they are going to do that, my profession is the oldest because before all that the Bible says, ‘All was chaos.'”