Jan Cox Talk 2865


Summary = None
Condensed News = See below
News Item Gallery = None
Transcript = None
Key Words =

Jan’s Posted Daily Fresh Real News


July 17, 2002 © 2002: JAN COX

(If the color of the headline changes during the day it signifies revisions or additions to the story.)


There are two things you cannot change:
you cannot change what you are, and you cannot change what
you think about what you are, (since that is part of what you are,
[unless you want to count pretending-that-you-have],
the only real alternative to this is to be born one of those people who are an actual alternative to this),
and as if this was not luceedious enough, you have this offshoot:
what you are and what you think about what you are
dictates what you think about what is going on in life.

All ordinary people by nature think two things:
that they can change what they are,
and that they can change what they think about what they are;
gyms, priests, plastic surgeons, and psychiatrists handle the first one,
priests and psychiatrists, the second, and as for being-what-you-are,
and what-you-think-about-you-being-what-you-are
determining what you think about what is going on in life, that is education’s bailiwick.

even though none of the aforementioned succeeds in doing what it sets out to do, it all yet somehow works (just look around).
The main way it manages this is that sane, educated and sophisticated minds
will reject at least 99% of what has been written here thus far
(a viable exemplar of the old proverb: “Monkey no see — monkey no be upset.”).

The first two facets opening this story (regarding men not being able to change what they are, nor what they think about what they are)
are hardly worth reporting on………well — it is actually quite worth reporting on,
it is just that the story is such old news and that reports concerning it
have long ago proven to be, by and large, a waste of pixels, paper, typing energy,
and time, let us today concentrate on the second part of the main story, that:
what-you-are and what-you-think-about-what-you-are
dictates what you think about what is going on in life:
this fact, though equally invisible & objectionable as the first two to routine minds,
for some reason is not seen and rejected in a different order of intensity;
the collective thinking of ordinary humanity in a backhanded manner
almost accepts this fact,
in the sense that men are made to say they believe that certain unfortunate acts
of circumstantial fate in a person’s life can color and distort their view of life,
but by being post parturition caused, can be corrected through education,
(the introduction of different facts), or via mental rehabilitation;
from a certain view — this is not true,
but from man’s common perspective it is an operational given —
were it not, all human activity not directly related to mere survival would cease.

The thoughts which appear in them and which they accept
make ordinary men say they believe that those who disagree with their ideas
only do so because they have never been in circumstances wherein it would be possible for them to be shown their correctness;
the thoughts in each man’s brain perceive themselves to be innately accurate,
and say that anyone’s failure to realize this is due to their subjective, misconception of the thought — an inopportune condition, no question — but one repairable:
this mental scaffolding supports science, and keeps the humanities on life support,
but to the outside mind, does little else.

As so often the case (put crudely & colloquially) life seems to humorously jerk man around by not infrequently allowing some quite ordinary man to make the observation that: what a person is, affects their attitude toward life,
(always more specifically): what a person is — by virtue of their experiences in life
can affect the way they think about life,
and the clear inference being that if this be so — then change in a person’s perspective of life is plainly possible (e.g. if a boy was brought up being told that
green was red, this error in his thinking can be subsequently corrected,
[but only a man with that certain view knows what, “subsequently” really means — if anything]),
and by permitting this idea to be periodically floated in the public market place,
it inoculates ordinary minds from ever taking it seriously enough to
go the mysterious, one-step-further in thinking about it — which theoretically would
blow their head out and reveal to them what is really going on.
Have the fallacious cry of, “Taxman!’ sounded often enough,
and people forget whether they believe in the IRS or not,
and normal citizens no longer (if ever) give any thought to the matter/possibility
that what they are and what they think about what they are
dictates what they think about what is going on in life.
(“The ‘Taxman’ doeth not cometh —
and neither willeth the reality of what is going on in life —
not as long as I have normal thoughts in my head!” — so goes the Song Of Man).*

For the man born with that non standard neural wiring who,
more than anything in the world,
wants to understand what is really going on in life,
has a pretty easy place to get started on it:
by realizing that every single thing he presently & automatically thinks is going on is being totally driven & determined by what he genetically is,
combined with what he thinks about what he is (equally innate) which,
if he learns, via his own efforts and interest, how to come to grips with,
makes him the only prisoner who recognizes his captivity and is thus freed from delusions to the contrary — or: turns him into the only prince who realizes
he is in the palace, and is thus finally free to explore its many wonders;
any allegory is suitable, but the reality of it is that of a man with a particular,
peculiar sort of mind being able to ultimately simply look out a window of the castle, and understand: “Oh –
I am in this building with me and my thoughts looking at what is going on outside —

…………..(which are two different things.)’

*Simple allegories for simple people: abstruse ones for those who will eventually need none.

There was once a writer in whose work sometimes appeared words not found in any dictionary, and when
queried thereabout, had this to say: “When there is no word to fit what I want to convey — I make one up —

— not unlike what I also do regarding facts.”

Simple allegories for simple people: frigigmatic ones for those who will not ultimately require any.