Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

Let's Groovey to the beat of a 3-2-1-anda 1-2-3-Diefferent Dummer< hear WE go:

Posted May 27th, 2010 by barbi hammond

--As exhibited by "Exhibit A" by the appalling silence and disturbingly uncritical tone or rather, "nods of approval" expressed by so-called "integral" listeners by default in their lack of courage to challenge Michael Zimmerman's climate change "solutions" of recommending inaction and denial of climate change as his "solution" to an overwhelmingly uncritical and receptive "integrfal" audience who collectively or intersubjectively inan intersubjectve space of "inner We" exhibited nno indication that any among them as individual ego-subjects were scientifically-informed or capable of thinking critically or comprehensively on a topic of utmost concern for the sake of planetary survival to have the moral fortitude or individual decency or courage to speak out critically on behalf of GAEA to challenge his solutions of, "Can't we all je I-I we the people just agree to disagree with the "hard" scientific evidence of human-caused climate change and just 'get along' as "people" instead by endorsing "postnormal" (postmodern) "warm, fuzzy, soft" scientific relativity instead in the name of "diversity" of non-scientific "perspectives" in an intersubjective space of We the People vs. it-the planet mother Earth, a mondless its=objects?"  The deafening silence expressed mutely by his unchallenged statement by any single listener out there or viewer of the video leaving the Universe the burden of responsibility to speak out against scientific fraud or this war on science being waged by politics in the name of integral to "attack the hard issues of climate change" by denying it and not a single objections to challenge such ludicrous claims or aims since there were no objections or critiques to challenge this shoddy treatment of Climate Change issues until I bothered to to air my disappointment and disgust at the lies and ignorance of so-called "integral" philosophers.  This then permitted a few others (the "3 out of 32 who did not find it useful") to speak out in rejection of the fraudulent scientific claims made by integral on the subject matter, a scientific discussion.  This is why I was utterly dumbfounded yet amused yet puzzled by the first comment that I received to my response, which turned out the have absolutely nothing to do with climate change, to my post, to my treatment of the scientific analysis of Zimmerman, or with nothing whatsoever in objection or agreement that was relevant to the topic of discussion, a scientific discussion on climate change on her and GAEA's behalf..  Instead, she merely "dropped by" to offer "help" by suggesting that I try 3-2-1 psychoanalysis after commenting that she read my profile and learning that I am autistic (uhh--what does that have to do with climate change...?  or with any issues or concerns that she has specifically in regard to my treatment of the issue to which she was responding?) suggesting that there is a global crisis of ignorance held by not only individuals in society-at-large but also or perhaps even especially the case within the Wilberian community which seems fixated on "personhood" and "Self" and basically--the psychological end of personal self-development as in Self-Help New Age sections of bookstores with nothing original to offer in terms of what is integral in any of the other disciplines.  As if to suggest that what it means to be "integral" is first and foremost, the development of social skills, interpersonal relations, capacity to form friendships and relations, and the ability to "relate" or "empathize" or communicate with climate change deniers to understand the often very deceptive and self-deceptive tactics employed by persons and complicated "unwritten rules of society" and emotional maturity as the most defining aspects of what it means to be "integral" (e.g., "degree of I-I individual personal excellence of human self-hood" as opposed to "it-objects").  While granted that "arrested development" in any area or line of development can potentially stunt an individual from selfdevelopment of shadows or even mutation into the newest consciousness, the I-I endorsed by I-Integral philosophy emphasizes personal Selfhood and "relating" to other personal selves for "altitude" of personal self-development at the expense of planetary survival and scarcity issues as the par excellence of being "ingtegral" and is hence no adequate to meet the demands of the newest consciousness and must be superceded by the newwest mutation which is not merely confined to that of psychological self-help issues relating to the ability to have empathy to put oneself in someone else's shoes to think from "other people's perspectives" e.g., social empathy for personal or interpersonal success to "get along with ones shadows" which are those traits that are shared or dis-owned by nearly all humans, nearly all of whom are neurotypicals (whether they are integral or no) yet seem to do very little to inform anyone of second-tier planetary survival and scarcity issues which is the concern of the newest consciousness revealing a hypocrisy in that "shadow work" permits the dis-ownership of self-deceoption of dis-tedentity of self from objects in space such as the physical Earth evidently in an effort to first dis-identify with the Earth so that they can "have it" for possession by "dis-owning" it as part of I-I dentity which as made painfully obvious to me by the mass-hypnosis of self-deception and denial ; yet the very traits which are deficient or lacking in those of us who are neurologically "diverse" or have a communication disorder and cannot understand nonverbal communication and many things spoken "between the lines" by normies as if in doublespeak.  Most autistics, myself included, have the emotional maturity of a 13 year old and have neve r learned how to master many basic skills and yes, me do watch cartoons such as "Kin-Possible" and Space Ghost Coast to Coast and have many childish preoccupations that we should have outgrown by 13 but we never did.  Me not ambarrassed about any of that nor do me feel inferior to any of I-I becau of that not understanding humans.  Does this mean we have "shadows" any more than she does or the normal human does? Adt least we can get "in touch" with more fundamental "shadows" such as physical objects and identifiy with them via sense of either identity or be-longingness which is more important than that of "having" magical 3-2-1 interconnected dotso people  which is the impression we get of the lady who recommended -321 and claimed that "she was only trying to 'help me" as if I have some kind of a "[=problem" that need "I need 'help'" by her I-I when she did not say ndada anything concerning ownership of shadow of planet Earth as part of her idetntity rather than possession for identity for a sense of be-longingness to it and the Universe rather than "having" if she did not care about it at all.  uYet I am willing to akcowledge that there may be some "hidden shadowns" that I don't know about but she of I-I will have to explain how defending mother planet Earth from the rape of scientific denial of climate deniers can be thought to be a "shadow" of "me" that I disown when the shaadow appears to be an aspect not of truth but of denial of cliamte change and denial who are in denial because they deny that they are deniers and claim to be "skeptics" so obviously are dealing with some "shadow elements" and we are sent here by the Univefsity to offer their mirror to look at themselfs how they look to me and to the Unvierse.  Likeweise,    f I have some kind of a "probvlem," I expect people t3ellme straightup what they are" talking about" by pointing out specifically on the post what they meant.  Don't you worry about embarrassing me because i really would like to know what you think is my "PROBLEM." I had to look up "shadow" to make sure I know what it mean?

In Jungian psychology, the shadow or "shadow aspect" is a part of the unconscious mind consisting of repressed weaknesses, shortcomings, and instincts. It is one of the three most recognizable archetypes, the others being the anima and animus and the persona. "Everyone carries a shadow," Jung wrote, "and the less it is embodied in the individual's conscious life, the blacker and denser it is."[1] It may be (in part) one's link to more primitive animal instincts,[2] which are superseded during early childhood by the conscious mind.

According to Jung, the shadow, in being instinctive and irrational, is prone to project: turning a personal inferiority into a perceived moral deficiency in someone else. Jung writes that if these projections are unrecognized "The projection-making factor (the Shadow archetype) then has a free hand and can realize its object--if it has one--or bring about some other situation characteristic of its power." [3] These projections insulate and cripple individuals by forming an ever thicker fog of illusion between the ego and the real world.

Jung also believed that "in spite of its function as a reservoir for human darkness—or perhaps because of this—the shadow is the seat of creativity."[4]

You are going to have point out "specifically" what you mean by that remark or I will have to assume that you are making a "racial slur" of some kind ofo stereotype A Exhibit A against Autstic against TYPES whom you they apparently regard as somehow developmentally arrested, inferior, retarded, or "somethng" maybe deficient magic tricks or dunce moves such as "I-I-3-2-1-1-2-3-Dunce moves in spatial #D3 spatial extenot music to only shadows dancing in the mind of perspecives, a revitalization of deficient magical one-dimesnional you were only trying to help me" AS IF I have some kind of "problem" that "humans" could "help" me with when I am beyond hope of human "help" yert clearly I-I may have shadows like anhy one I-I am sure but can't think of any that apply to me as pertain s to you or any other peoples bu still don't "get" what "shadow" "means" enither. Another thing that I find bizarre is that you completely ignored the post that I posted concerning the falsehoods of climate change denial which under the circumstances was entirely called for and appropriate and necessary in the absence of any defenders of scientific truth but you had absolutely nothing to say in response.  This suggests to we that you do not consider the denial of climate change narrated by Zimmerman and the interviewer as a form of denial eg. "shadow" but rather, as truthy truly good story Dream On, but we die feel that you were sincere in your efforts to offer "psychological help" to me instead we get our "ideas" from both fools and from sages and 'get' that the universe is using II she and me for a "reason".. Yo check out this one you gave me some bad ideas!! Those #D3 3D glasses that you oo looky like you are wearing the black high-tech kind of 3d glasses as if to suggest that you are unconsciously trying to disown Red/Green 3D shadows by claiming to be a "higher" high-tech dark 3D glasses that can detect motion in 3d but when i clicked on your provile, you not even wearing any g'alasses that was a "trickydicky" magical trick to fiool me into thinking that you were wereing motionidetecting 3D insrtead of traditional kind.

Here is you r copy of your post, in case you "for got":
"http://integrallife.com/member/barbi-hammond/blog/part-1-4-zimmerman-interview-climate-change-video-2?show=all

Aspie?

Posted May 21st, 2010 by Jennifer Grove

  • in
    -->

    I checked over your profile a bit. This must be one of your fields of expertise, yes?

    I see you are very skilled at handling Objects mentally. And I see that you are even able to turn the Subject into an Object. I have two Aspie friends who can also do that.

    Can you do a quality, authentic 3-2-1 on those who you think are wrong?

    I'm not asking this to embarrass you. I'm attempting to remedy a situation which you may or may not even see. I'm trying to help.

    --

    For just $14.95 a month, YOU TOO can offset your Karma Footprint by becoming a Member of Integral Life!

    [has that already been done?]


     

    Please Log in to Vote.

    0 out of 0 members found this useful.

    3-2-1-APPLIED to examples off the top of my ead

    Posted May 27th, 2010 by barbi hammond

    --

     


    YOU GAVE ME BAD IDS BAD IDS i HA! NEVER HAD BAD IDEA AHA! NEVER HAD BAD IDS LIKE THIS BEFORE ANDE ..YOU JKBOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO HAVE BADIDEAS IT'S JSTU.. BAED IDEAS IT'S JUS.. TPOSTIBBLY RTHE WORSKT IDEA I NEVER HAD BE4
     
    Practice: The 3-2-1 Shadow Process

    Own Your Shadow Or Be Owned By It

    Contributor: Kelly Sosan Bearer
    In this practice we begin the process of re-owning our shadow. We'll FACE our shadow in 3rd-person; we'll TALK to our shadow in a 2nd-person dialogue; and we'll BE our shadow in 1st-person. Face it, Talk to it, Be it...It's that simple.

    To Practice The 3-2-1 Process

    1. Choose an experience in your life that you want to work with. It's often easier to begin with a person with whom you have difficulty (e.g., lover, relative, boss). This person may irritate, disturb, annoy, or upset you. Or maybe you feel attracted to, obsessed with, infatuated with, or possessive about this person. In any case, choose someone with whom you have a strong emotional charge, whether positive or negative.

    2. Face It : Now, imagine this person. Describe those qualities that most upset you, or the characteristics that you are most attracted to using 3rd-person language (he, she, it). Talk about them out loud or write it down in a journal. Take this opportunity to "let it out." Don't try to be skillful or say the right thing. There is no need to sugar-coat your description. The person you are describing will never see this.

    3. Talk to It: Begin an imaginary dialogue with this person. Speak in 2nd person to this person (using "you" language). Talk directly to this person as if he or she were actually there in the room with you. Tell them what bothers you about them. Ask them questions such as "Why are you doing this to me?" "What do you want from me?" "What are you trying to show me?" "What do you have to teach me?" Imagine their response to these questions. Speak that imaginary response out loud. Record the conversation in your journal if you like.

    4. Be It: Become this person. Take on the qualities that either annoy or fascinate you. Embody the traits you described in "Face It." Use 1st-person language ( I, me, mine). This may feel awkward, and it should. The traits you are taking on are the exact traits that you have been denying in yourself. Use statements such as "I am angry," "I am jealous," "I am radiant." Fill in the blank with whatever qualities you are working with: "I am__________."

    5. To complete the process, notice these disowned qualities in yourself. Experience the part of you that is this very trait. Avoid making the process abstract or conceptual: just BE it. Now you can re-own and integrate this trait in yourself.

    Practice Genealogy

    The 3-2-1 process is a simple and effective tool for working with the shadow. It was developed by Ken Wilber and his associates at Integral Institute, and is a recommended practice in the Integral Life Practice Starter Kit. This practice is designed to provide a quick, easy, and effective method to work with our disowned selves. There are numerous techniques to deal with the shadow, but most require the assistance of a professional therapist. The 3-2-1 Process can be used by anyone anywhere at any time, and at no cost.

    The 3-2-1 Process helps you uncover your shadow and integrate unconscious thoughts and emotions, so you can become more healthy and whole. It takes an extraordinary amount of energy to keep aspects of ourselves hidden in shadow. The energy it takes to repress or deny aspects of ourselves could potentially be employed in other ways; perhaps even a developmental transformation. When we shine a light on our shadow and work to integrate disowned aspects of ourselves, we liberate the energy we were using to hide from ourselves, and more energy is never a bad thing.

    This process uses shifts in perspectives as a way of identifying and integrating shadow material. 3-2-1 refers to 3rd person, 2nd person, and 1st person perspectives. When an aspect of the self poses a threat, the self seeks to distance itself from that threat. As a result, the self concludes, "That is not me. That is someone else." The self exports that trait that threatens it onto someone else. We can disown both lower and higher aspects of ourselves. In either case, we project it as "You." You are angry. You are being selfish. You are worthy. In other words, we displace it from a 1st - person "I" to a 2nd- person "You."

    If the threat of this emotion or situation becomes so great that it requires a total rejection, we push it away into a 3rd- person "It." At that point, the shadow arises as a sense of irritation, reactivity, fear, or aversion toward things, but we usually do not understand why we feel this way.

    And meditation alone won't fix this, most forms of meditation won't even help; in fact, they may make things worse. Meditation suggests dis-identification from experience ("You are not your thoughts. etc."). But to integrate the shadow, we need to RE-identify with disowned dimensions of our experience and ourselves. We can only truly let go of something that we have first owned. Healthy disidentification is only possible once we have re-owned, re-associated, and re-identified with the disowned parts of ourselves. For this reason, there is no substitute for shadow work.

    The 3-2-1 Process can be used in various ways. For beginners, try it out once a week for roughly 30 minutes and work with the biggest issue of your week. For more advanced practitioners, begin applying the 3-2-1 Process to dreams and issues of your daily life.

    You can also opt to use the "empty chair" rather than a journal. Just replace the journal with an actual chair in the exercise outlined above. Place this chair across from you, and imagine the person you have chosen to work with sitting in it. In "Face It" (3), simply describe the qualities of this person that provoke you. Talk about them in front of them. In "Talk to It" (2), dialogue with this person. When it is their turn to respond, sit in the other chair and respond as that person. Go back and forth between chairs until the dialogue is over. In "Be It" (1), sit as the other and be the person that triggers you. Embody the qualities that irritate or fascinate you and speak as this person using "I" statements: "I am ________."

     

    Addictions are in nonsense seems to win
    the yuck can get so tense when dire RECTions make no sense
    common sense is then in not so common any way ccoulden't "figure it out" right then don't SPEAK an other wooh=aa-aah


    It's just a ringing of tja
    yo way telling the same story twice tah die ah by being so nice jsut this once shew knoew whats what it be the first time you giving me a bad idea

    who are you giving me? you really giving me who are you giving mey? some bad ideas

    Some bad ideas
    some bad ideas
    some bad ideas
    Some bad ideas

    who are you giving meh? you really giving me who are you giving meh? you really giving me some bad ideas

    Anda 3-Anda-2-anda-1-anday-1-2-3D wepeeps -0h, wha4? -0ThoArt0 4amensional

    -1 Dimensional Deficient Magic

    Let'sy GrooVAY (BackWArdY) In 3Dssh!ADyonly in third-person s/heit spatial subject:object duality abstractly by "not doing" the real thing via concretion of time of Present--but only "taling aobut it" conceptually via discription or observartion in space with 3D fake fects deficient magic movie glasses onwhyGoLet'sGroovAY3DssH!ahdy only? Oh i get it becau the "shady" has a complex or a "shadow" and so needs sgtage props to hide from to dis-own his fakeness or fatneess by making an announcement, "May I have your attention, pleas, wil the "Real" "slim" or is the REAL "slimshady" 'standuup'or becau he thinks that people think that he is a pretty nurse evidentiary by the 'olookif it'; that For what use is Looky Shady 3D glasses while dancing to the "you say, 'Eye'" of mind of doubt of observation in space? For information qyak qualitycontrol porposes only of values of quantitative values of mass, quanityt, or measure of weight or appearance or BDD? To use/wear as protection or gear for stage prop in a performance, contest, mental ward, an experiment, use as a "symbol," or star in a videoa propcostume jewelry? For measurement or calibration of movement in precision-dancing in spatial nonmovement? For sensory integration or attention deficit of A,D.D.? Isit tooCreeypy 4anhyBotytodo Let'sGrooVAY? Isitin 3Donly spatial nonmovement or objservation? So how does alla dis relateto "talking about" pepole" in 3d? That sound like a readonly/thinkonly/lookyonly dance to aReadonly/thinkAboutDescriptionof a dancingto Let'sGroovayAmooVAY??->Back2yoDelayto:who?->BackWaybewhat
    imananjidesuka
    Who are you giving me ?
    ya really giving me
    who are you giving may?
    some bad ID I's

    Woo ho. who whoooo
    a ha ha haaaaaa who
    who ho hoooooooooh ooh
    a-aah hah ahaaaaaaaaa

    You gave me ideas bad IDs ideas I never had before ihnever had bad IDs I never had bad IDs like this and you know what it's like to have BAD i d s jusst BAD ideas before it's just possibly the worst IDi never had before anon anon

    -2 Dimensional Deficient Spken Myth

    )placeholder_ma:me:mu:mouth)

    03 Dimensional Mental structure

    )Placeholder_or see some of Richard LayMany's commenaries)

    -3 Dimensional Mental-rational Strucuture

    (Spaceholder for some Richard Layman's see also -1Deficient magic_)

     

    Please Log in to Vote.

    0 out of 0 members found this useful.

    The 3-2-1-Process tried as an experiment by a Gorilla 2win some...

    Posted May 28th, 2010 by barbi hammond

    -No person will talk to a girilla tanswero may question of what does a "shadow" mean? AND how do you win i woant wan tooo since everybuddy "ONW" I MEAN, ":own" "SAHDOWNS" i? didn't "get it" Ima Loerbabhy so whydontu killetme?\so can i have a banana INSTEAD? EEKEEEK.

    Wo; try to use the example of Jeinifer Grover AS a banana exanple to see if what she is talking about, sahdown mean, "shadows," is somehing I wouls also iklk to have fpr for  win"get" ownthing as humans or if they were more in reference to those ighigh-techic blakc 3D glasses instead of 3D red/green glasses of red/green shadows becau what i "get" is that the 3D green/red shadow glasses our "out of style" accordion to I-I integral, that thingks that green is "bad" and has red "shadows" and that red is "bad" too so are switching out their old style green/red 3D glasses (whoch look  ridiculous to they) for black high-tech newer tsyle 3D visiual orientation and call it "integral" when older style and newer style 3D glasses are both visually-oriented on visual acuity in space so are tricky-dickying themselves into delusion in thinking that by switching out types of 3D glasses, they can "skip" doing "shadow work" on their red/green 3d shadys that are lurking below the threshold of their consciousnesses and are controlling much of their lives unconsciously (the Zimmerman's endorsement of "Postnormal Science" from green postmodernism and thinking it is "Integral" and Ken Wilber's spatially-and quantitatively oriented "more and more" personal pluralistic multiple personal multiperspective being classic textbook examples of "dis-owned" green shadows but must "distance" themselves from green by claiming that their "multiperspectives" are "integral" and "higher" than green since green does not believe in the "stages of development" yet it is clear from the many orange readers that it does not require an integral perception of the whole to have a conceptual and spatial understanding of the "stages" suggesting that much of this philosophy is political and resulting in the inability of I-Integral theory to distance itself from previous forms of partial realizations and from that which it dis-owns which is made evident in the ever-increasing quantification and systematization and diffisioning of the structures into hair-splitting conceptualizations in an effirt to appear "higher" than green and essentially re-packaging and marketing a "product" they are trying sell as "new" to "disown" and do NOT claim to "own" becau LOOKY! I-Integral is "taking ownership" of blakd 3D glasses via "shadow work" so that they can keep on trying to disown red/green shadys and since I-Integral get to "switch out" "their" shadys, mer would like to swithc out shadys too becau it is not fair mer autstic don't look at people have no use for those shadys don't need them and is already a black thing i don't want a black thing have to be to prove that I existed am "some BOTY" like the fake Ima Pirate tries to prove with their black 3D sunglasses or "AMA da"the REAL soneslim Shandy Shadylike" a black gorilla and the real shady that you people seem like you are Whitey or yellow imitating the black people or the real slim Shady and it is no accident that yesterday, I said, after giving up trying to be a whatever it was changing my picture back to a black ape, and (Thouth) iGive up.So who AM I?  AN APIE? AN ASPIE? A pretty nurse? (which was "borrowed" from the movie, "Good Burger") accused someone of thing thinking that I "must be" some kinda pretty white nurse from the sound of their diagnostic of me since they are suggesting that my responding critically to climate change denial on behalf of the planet in the absence of no one else to do so on this website and future generations means that I "must be trying to dis-own some black shadows" to "dis-own" as green/red and then "repackage" as black which is more acceptible to I-Integral colour-coded theory to "take ownership of" via deficient black one-dimensional magical trickto claim that  if you are "black," it means that you are real and not like the fake Whitey or yellows but I don't want any 3D tricky-dicky glasses IT IS VERY clear from the clues comes from the Universe today that those glasses are in reference to three-dimensional visual orientaiton of space and concepts which are conceptual and abstract so are "fake" and I want something "real" that I can "eat" or "do" not something "conceptual" to "think about" you morons and would like to own a hello yellow banana or a blue hello kitty hair blow thingy bdau tha is what i really want to tgat a banana not those black high-tech *3d glasses _ since the message i aget)sorta- is a "sahdow" (why i keep typoing "shadow" as "sahdow" what is up widat?) is not a red or green thingy those are bad but black thing name naybe they are thying to own "black" but are white or helloy instead?ant to bit not tricked by the likes of dumb machines like Ima Robot are that cannot be black or real and have to pu on 3D shadys to dance a banana but a banana is not fake but is a real thing so will use reverse psychology on a banana instead of a shadow, to unnerstand if that is the same thing as a "shadow" accordion to bananak, it think that Zimmerman Climate change denial is "Right? to udnerstand what her shandow means amd os it the same thing as a banana?
    eek=eek!-

    Bit mp now it makes sense to me why the computer screen kept flahsing "White black i meant , "blank."  It means i whitey died l went back to the abyss when i was a monkey.  But "black" does not mean "integral": it is merely symbolic for "lower" life forms such as one-dimensional black magic, apes, or otherwise is generic to mean, "the All"; the Universe of pre-temporal unconscious 0 Diemensional.  Four-dimensional "integral" does not mean being a particular "colour" on color-coded Altitudes or integral theory but rather, becoming "transparent" to the whole.  "Transparency" is not a colour but is infisible and invisible ye tis capable of wareing any colour due to its wholeness and integrality of transparency. It acannot be colour-coded into any particular "colour" to be "seen" nor "organized" nor divided into "a bunch of different color-coded integral stages."  It is different from "Clear hwity light" of daylight which is three-dimensional and symbolic for diurnal brightness of noontime.

    This portion requires a "re-direct" but here is a portion transcription:

    First time etelling story:

    One time i hired a monkey to take notes for me in class.  I wa just sitting there with my mind a complete black meant "blank" while the monkey scribbled on little pieces of paper.  So the teacher went, "Now class, I want you to write a paper usihng your NOTES."  So I wrote a paper that said, "jHell-O!  My name is Bingo!  I like to climb on things.  Can I have a banana?  EEK-EEK@!  I got an F.  when I told my mom about it she said, "I TOLD U NEVER TRUST A MONKEY!"  The end.

     Telling the same story twoice to: DAY:

    ACLICKITy? Or isit amority achirpity insectnoise sound of birds and aJemeny Crickets all around?  Itsounds of also hums of refrigerator and air conditioner nighttime sound of country and one earplug and one headphone out so cabn only one ear working tonight bu the computer screen keepsonhy flashing monotone=deafomyomimous white flashes of dead whited0yt relatives with blue dark blue strips on the top of the white screenflashing in front of meyeyes reminds me of I.E. the time hi!wen I-I asaminky boo-dle said, Hi! My I-I nay me as hell-)O! my-I-I nay me is beWhitey!eg-O! I-I liketo: climb ontopu things and thinkegos too can I-I havea bonoI-Inono?  Eyeeky eyeek!  I-I (buzing song in ear is haring now) got an0naemeneFor a gradery when i told my mamarya about it, she said, "Eyeee TODU-yoo to NEy-BAH TUruEWSTu A HA M0N!kEE-HE! Eyee amUYOO mama andU YOU PAPA TOO AMU ALLAHOODOO-SAI MEeasty Whoolitey-and u fada ees nogoodmaNkaHEHEmamakeIkEYEEK-EYEEK!allah da timu)! Bu that wa snot "the end" becau "the end" never (sometimes it flashes brown makeying me oneder is it a brown nosers and white lies alerter means? mecannot seesmell clicity tome? AJaminy CRICKETsetoid? HearuItsound chirpitoid formoid the insectnoise sideout yOR IS IT @  PINNOCHIOYO, CHECK OUT THE CLOCKIT, WHAT ITME IS ID, LO WAsprocket?

    12:-1.  Accordiat todat computat clockit locatedockit the LR quadrantick of thecomputertockat  a minute PAST MIDockit LIKE MA DON KNOCKIT LIKE A VIERGINALOCKIT UP FER CINDDERALLER GRANDMASTER FLAHS HWIGHTDER THE DER PRINDCER BALLROOMER DANCER (THOUGHT AT FIRST( I Y UNITIL I LOOKED AT THE PROVILE FOUND IT IT IS IA GY THAT TURNED INTO A MAGICAL PIMPKIN ACCORDIO NONE1 DIMNESIONalocciconni YOUTher iSSNOT INTO THE GROOVERY OF EARTH, WIND OR FIRE EVIDINTERY DUJUDGING MY DAT NON-CLIMATE CHANGE COMMENTARY TO A CLIMATE CLANG TOPICER THAT I POSTEDER FOR DISCUSSION BUT TTRIED TO "CHANGE" THE "SUBJECT" OF CLIMATE CHANGE INTO MAGICAL DEFIDIT AUTISTICSSHADOW-WORKING OR CHICONNI YOUTHEY OF SHADOW DANCERS BY THE BRER GIBBERS UT ONLY DO SHADOWER WORKOR SHADER WORK THE DER ONE DIMENSIONALMAGICDAL DEFICIt OF WITCH R CRAFTER NONEFFECTUAL CAUWHEN WE CLICKITY IT ON HER PROFILE PICTURE, SHE NOT HE PRINCER BU A S"LOOK-=ALIKE" A GUY WID4D faje BLAK SHADES ON  BU, SEEMLIKE FORM THE COMMENTARY A 3D LOOKY-GREEN/RED SHADOW 3d glasses=THINKS "iM' beginning to see the light of the VELVET UNDERGROUND" CAUSE I SEE SHADOWNS (QUANTITATIVE NUMERI C VALUE OF THE POST(NOT THE TIME STAMP) OF COMMENTARIES RATED BY I-INTEGRAL LIFERS AND THEN COPIED/PASTED FROM "THERE" TO "0" HERE AND THEN "WHEREUPON" THE NUMERIC VALUE CHANGED "ALL BY THE ITSELF" BY THE UNIVERSE FROM "1 OUT OF 3 FIND IT USEFUL" TO:

    (b 2 2D DESCRITION, AND 3D DISCRITPION AFTER SHORT INTERMISSION

    Fourth time telling same story:

    The 3-2-1 Pricess or process, while perhaps having limited value for those in three dimensional space, and henc e some value to me to that portion that refers to ego-self development in space of ownership and possession but not to "wholeness" of transparency can be "used" by arational consciousness but cannot ultimately define it in terms of "taking ownership" of something that self cannot own: it cannot "own" that which it already "is" ('the Universe") and I cannot own "black" but am "alraedy black" as an apie or a monkey shared collectively by the Unvierse. But I can "own" a banana to and take ownership of it but that does nto mean that just because I asked, "Can  I have a banana?" (as in "owenership" to have a ananana") that I was tryihg to "become a banana" when I was just a black monkey not trying to become a "banana" just wanted one so something seems amiss in the 321 process.  For example: after I told my mom about it, my mom tried to become my "Yellow Banana" thought she could be me everything for me because she is Japanese with yellow skin and "wears the pants in the household" and bosses my stepdat around as if she is some whitey I-I god Man owning everything; and it is not an accident tha tthat my mother's real "name" is "Keiko" for Eeeek=eeiko! and refers to all males as "monkeys" while trying to "be" both mo mommy and daddy and monkey too and essentially turning me into a blak monkey hahah or that how i came out a "monkey" my biological father my mom says is "no good" is named, "Whiting" (last name) and he is amonkey but is white a whitey guy, too, including meor actually, half white tried to become my black ape accordion to the story above eccause she was claiming to be "everything my mama, my dam daddy, everything to me" meanning she is "the Universe" or a black monkey and is trying to "own me" as her "Yellow Banana" as if I were some piece of "property."  So i died and become black Universe.  the Universe is the real "Sahdy" bu is not necessarily 'inegral" but only "the Itself" is integral transparency.  And it is fine to identity fiy i with the Universe of universal black of slhadow but if you are goibg n gtodo that, then you need to die not only try to identify with "ownership" as in "having" (that is the business of I's) but to be-long as a "we" and also "be" as in "the Itsself" of not just "I's" and "we's" of humans but belong to the Universe too meaning the part of you that identifies with complete identity in the universe but until you are complete Identity in thee form of "the Itself," you can only you be0long to "it" not as "I" but as "it" and if you are integratedk, the identity is "the Itself." 

    Aspie?

    Posted May 21st, 2010 by Jennifer Grove

    I checked over your profile a bit. This must be one of your fields of expertise, yes?
    I see you are very skilled at handling Objects mentally. And I see that you are even able to turn the Subject into an Object. I have two Aspie friends who can also do that.
    Can you do a quality, authentic 3-2-1 on those who you think are wrong?
    I'm not asking this to embarrass you. I'm attempting to remedy a situation which you may or may not even see. I'm trying to help.
    --
    For just $14.95 a month, YOU TOO can offset your Karma Footprint by becoming a Member of Integral Life!
    [has that already been done?]
    Was this useful?
    0 out of 1 members found this useful.
    (IN SPITE OF COPY/PATSING THE EXACT TEXT FROM INTEGRALLIFE.COM AND NOT MIDMODIFYING THE QUANTITATIVE VALUE APLIED TO "WAS THIS USEFUL," THE UJNIVERSE CHANGED THE COMMENT ABOVE FROM "1 OUT OF 3 MEMBERS FOUND" TEH COMMENT ABOVE USEFUL TO "-0 OUT OF 1 MEMBERS FOUND THIS USEFUL."  Wonder what that means?  The Universe is informing us that it is impossible to quantify quanity of "whole" ONWE of One or pre-temporal zero-dimensionality of "0ThoArty)() with a different numeric quantitative value.

    IS IT A APiE? Aspie s?AsS Pies? A Spies?A Pretty Nurse?OK iGive u

    To Practice The 3-2-1 Process

    1. Choose an experience in your life that you want to work with. It's often easier to begin with a person with whom you have difficulty (e.g., lover, relative, boss). This person may irritate, disturb, annoy, or upset you. Or maybe you feel attracted to, obsessed with, infatuated with, or possessive about this person. In any case, choose someone with whom you have a strong emotional charge, whether positive or negative.

    2. Face It : Now, imagine this person. Describe those qualities that most upset you, or the characteristics that you are most attracted to using 3rd-person language (he, she, it). Talk about them out loud or write it down in a journal. Take this opportunity to "let it out." Don't try to be skillful or say the right thing. There is no need to sugar-coat your description. The person you are describing will never see this.

    3. Talk to It: Begin an imaginary dialogue with this person. Speak in 2nd person to this person (using "you" language). Talk directly to this person as if he or she were actually there in the room with you. Tell them what bothers you about them. Ask them questions such as "Why are you doing this to me?" "What do you want from me?" "What are you trying to show me?" "What do you have to teach me?" Imagine their response to these questions. Speak that imaginary response out loud. Record the conversation in your journal if you like.

    4. Be It: Become this person. Take on the qualities that either annoy or fascinate you. Embody the traits you described in "Face It." Use 1st-person language ( I, me, mine). This may feel awkward, and it should. The traits you are taking on are the exact traits that you have been denying in yourself. Use statements such as "I am angry," "I am jealous," "I am radiant." Fill in the blank with whatever qualities you are working with: "I am__________."

    5. To complete the process, notice these disowned qualities in yourself. Experience the part of you that is this very trait. Avoid making the process abstract or conceptual: just BE it. Now you can re-own and integrate this trait in yourself.

    Question: What if no one fals wants to talk to you only looky at you and you don't want to look at face of people and only talk looking down at the ground?  See this process did not "work" for me nobody talked to me.

    Practice Genealogy

    The 3-2-1 process is a simple and effective tool for working with the shadow. It was developed by Ken Wilber and his associates at Integral Institute, and is a recommended practice in the Integral Life Practice Starter Kit. This practice is designed to provide a quick, easy, and effective method to work with our disowned selves.

     

    To Practice The 3-2-1 Process

    1. Choose an experience in your life that you want to work with. It's often easier to begin with a person with whom you have difficulty (e.g., lover, relative, boss). This person may irritate, disturb, annoy, or upset you. Or maybe you feel attracted to, obsessed with, infatuated with, or possessive about this person. In any case, choose someone with whom you have a strong emotional charge, whether positive or negative.

    2. Face It : Now, imagine this person. Describe those qualities that most upset you, or the characteristics that you are most attracted to using 3rd-person language (he, she, it). Talk about them out loud or write it down in a journal. Take this opportunity to "let it out." Don't try to be skillful or say the right thing. There is no need to sugar-coat your description. The person you are describing will never see this.

    3. Talk to It: Begin an imaginary dialogue with this person. Speak in 2nd person to this person (using "you" language). Talk directly to this person as if he or she were actually there in the room with you. Tell them what bothers you about them. Ask them questions such as "Why are you doing this to me?" "What do you want from me?" "What are you trying to show me?" "What do you have to teach me?" Imagine their response to these questions. Speak that imaginary response out loud. Record the conversation in your journal if you like.

    4. Be It: Become this person. Take on the qualities that either annoy or fascinate you. Embody the traits you described in "Face It." Use 1st-person language ( I, me, mine). This may feel awkward, and it should. The traits you are taking on are the exact traits that you have been denying in yourself. Use statements such as "I am angry," "I am jealous," "I am radiant." Fill in the blank with whatever qualities you are working with: "I am__________."

    5. To complete the process, notice these disowned qualities in yourself. Experience the part of you that is this very trait. Avoid making the process abstract or conceptual: just BE it. Now you can re-own and integrate this trait in yourself.

    Practice Genealogy

    The 3-2-1 process is a simple and effective tool for working with the shadow. It was developed by Ken Wilber and his associates at Integral Institute, and is a recommended practice in the Integral Life Practice Starter Kit. This practice is designed to provide a quick, easy, and effective method to work with our disowned selves.

    (Be the Itself Origin_or just be a bunch of "eyes" of 3D shaydy ownerships "I AMS" thinking only looky looky:in 3Dlookyland