The Morphealist Manifesto (after Surrealism,...)
Morpheal
We, Morphealists, believe in Change. We, Morphealists, believe in
nothing else, as being absolute, other than Change.We, Morphealists,
believe that everything Changes. We believe that everything that
existed, in what is commonly referred to as "the past", that exists in
what is commonly referred to as "the present", or that could exist, in
what is commonly referred to as "the future", is subject to Change. In
fact, so is what is past, present and future, subject to Change. We
believe that anything, that is either imaginable or unimaginable, has
existed, or could exist, somewhere in the absolute of all of space and
all of time.
We believe that the limits of the human imagination are also completely
subject to Change. We believe that what was, what is, and what shall be
imagined, in its distinction to what is now considered real, is subject
to change. We believe in the power of Change as being the last and only
remaining genuinely supernatural power. The power of Change remains
supernatural, because Change and only Change transcends all previously
existing, now existing, and future existing, actual and potential,
natures and powers, as their only constant. There are no other, real,
constants in Nature or in Science. All other apparent constants are
subject to Change. We believe that the effective processes, that
existed, exist, or that shall exist, are all subject to Change.
Causalities, all causal relations themselves, are potentially subject
to Change. The fact that a particular observable cause gives rise to a
particular observable effect, and that that is commonly believed to be
predictably thus, is not necessarily thus in the past or in the future.
It was only thus at that moment of the observation and prediction. That
apparent thusness, no matter how many times the same is observed or how
carefully and closely it is scrutinized and measured, is subject to
Change. This is not negated by any fact of a continuous series of
similar or identical causal relations, having been apparently observed,
between any particular kind of presumed cause and any particular
presumed kind of effect, nor by how many times that same was observed.
The only certainty in causality is Change.
Change is not a theoretical principle, or an idea, or an existent, or
an energetic force, and yet there is nothing whatever, that ever
existed, that exists, or is yet to exist, that is not subject to Change,
and which does not exhibit the effects of Change. Change is everywhere,
and in everything, and yet change is not any particular thing, or any
particular principle. It is the most fundamental characteristic of
everywhere and everything. In fact there is no thought, and there are no
ideas, without Change. The very intention of keeping an idea in mind, as
it has arisen there, itself involves Change. Any mental activity
involves Changes. The mind is essentially Change. Minds constantly
Change.
We believe that everything that once existed, and everything that does
not now exist, is subject to the power of Change, such that that shall
somewhere, someday, exist again. In fact we believe that, subject to the
power of Change, that which did not ever exist and that which appeared
to have passed from existence, might subsequently have existed, or not
ever have not existed. We believe then, that neither the logical
proposition that it did not exist, nor the logical proposition that it
never did not exist, is falsified. This is a radical departure from all
previous beliefs and thinking. Similarly, we believe, with equal
resolve, that, subject to the power of Change, what exists and was
known, with absolute certainty, to have existed, might henceforth not
exist and then be known, with absolute certainty, as never having
existed. We believe then, that neither the logical proposition, it
existed, nor the logical proposition, it never existed, is falsified.
This is another radical departure from all previous thinking. We believe
that Change is the fundamental paradox, and that all paradoxes of time
and space are ultimately resolvable to that fundamental paradox. We
believe that Change is absolute and that all changing is itself subject
to Change. We believe that the rate of change might be stopped,
accelerated, or decreased, in any instance of anything changing, by
means of Change. The apparent limitations as to effecting this, whether
they are limitations as to thought or technology, are subject to Change.
Ultimately even the means of effecting such Changes could themselves be
effected by Change and could be themselves Changed. Morphealism is the
belief in the effecting of changes.
The advance forces of the Morphealist movement are the artists.
Morphealism is the successor of Surrealism. Where Surrealism dealt with
the idea and its transmutations and permutations of its possibilities,
Morphealism deals with the manifestation into reality of the Surrealist
Ideas. The Surrealists were the early prophets of Morphealism. Their
domain was the production of icons and symbols, within a language that
pertains to the transformations of the mind as its thoughts. This was
the first realization of the world as being a Morpheality.
We Morphealists recognize the fact that the mind is a mirror of the
external world. Thoughts are the mirror in which the world reflects. The
nature of the mind's processes reflect the nature of the world as
manifestations of the very same Morpheality. We Morphealists recognize
that the mind and its thoughts, as it was, is, and shall be, is subject
to being Changed as a part of the world as Morpheality. The stuff that
the world is made of, its matter and energies, its quanta, are the stuff
that Morpheality is comprised of. Morphealism in the arts is the
forerunner of Morphealism in those realities that go beyond the arts.
The arts provide the experimental basis for the implementation of the
techniques of Morphealism to the whole of the world as Morpheality.
Whereas Surrealism was a new school, a new style, a new genre, of art
and within the arts, we Morphealists announce the end of all schools,
styles, and genres of art. In Morphealism art is liberated from the
categories that human thinking imposed upon it and from all the
traditional categories that did, do, or ever could, define the arts. We
Morphealists believe that all transmutations and transformations, all
transubstantiations, of anything that was, is, or is yet to be, are an
art. That is the final art that is no longer art as it was known, and
the final art that is the culmination of all of the arts, and of all
artistic schools, styles and genres. It is not where art and life once
met, or meet, but instead where art and life become the same. It is
where art is life and where life is art.
Morphealism is the first advance in thinking that has no ancestry. All
of Morphealism's predecessors and ancestors are subject to Change. All
of Morphealism's methods, techniques, means and ways, are subject to
Change. This distinguishes Morphealism from all precedents. All of
Morphealism's results, products, effects, are subject to Change. Unlike
everything before it, Morphealism has no ideology, and refuses to be
used by any ideology. With the advent of Morphealism we Morphealists
believe that all ideologies are subject to Change. We Morphealists
announce the final end of art and the beginning of Morpheality where
Morphealism has no specific materials or effects distinctive unto
itself, unlike all previous arts and technologies, but instead is
inclusive of all the potentialities of all possible involvements with
all possible and imaginable past, present, and future materials and
means of Change. Morphealism is the culmination of the prophecies of
alchemy, and thus of the dreams of the sciences, as to the Great Work of
transmutation that becomes Morphealism's Changing of everything into
absolute Morpheality. Morphealism and the production of Morpheality is
the final purpose
of humanity. Morphealism is the final method inclusive of all methods
and thus the liberation from methods. Morpheality is the final result,
inclusive of all possible results and thus the liberation from
efficacies. Morphealism is the new and constant dynamism that is
productive of the world of human and non human beings, of all that
existed, exists or ever shall exist, as becoming the whole of the
Morpheality.
Political Postscript:
As Morphealism gains precedence that bursting forth of unfettered
creativity brings about an ever increasing and more complex Chaos,
thwarting all attempts at determinism and totalism. Chaos as product of
Morphealism, understood as the manifestations of more, therefore less
and less predictable, creative interactions, and as the results of
unfettered creativity known as its products.
Morpheal Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Poet and visual artist.
--
Posted from tomts6.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.26]
via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Peter J Ross
news:3AA10DA4...@sympatico.ca...
> The MORPHEALIST MANIFESTO
<snip>
"Panta rhei" (Heracleitus) is a little more succinct, don't you agree?
PJR :-)
--
"YOU ARE JUST AN UNKIND MAN"
Babygro
Rex Savage
neverending suppy of bullshit philosophies continually pumped into the
world.
"Morpheal" <morp...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3AA10DA4...@sympatico.ca...
Morpheal
M.
Peter J Ross
> It isn't the same.
>
> M.
True. "All things change" has a meaning.
PJR
Rik Roots
Just one quick question. How radically has the Morphealist Manifesto
changed since the last time you posted it here?
Rik, evolving, but still knee deep
--
So, soon they topped the hill, and raced together
Over an open stretch of herb and heather
Exposed. And instantly the whole sky burned
With fury against them; earth set sudden cups
In thousands for their blood; and the green slope
Chasmed and steepened sheer to infinite space.
- taken from "Spring Offensive" by Wilfred Owen
j r sherman
> The MORPHEALIST MANIFESTO
>
>We, Morphealists, believe in Change. We, Morphealists, believe in
>nothing else, as being absolute, other than Change.
hey, wanna bet that if you jump off a 40 story building and hit the ground below
you'll die? that'll never change.
prove me wrong!
>We, Morphealists,
>believe that everything Changes. We believe that everything that
>existed, in what is commonly referred to as "the past", that exists in
>what is commonly referred to as "the present", or that could exist, in
>what is commonly referred to as "the future", is subject to Change.
bob, i hate to he stick in the mud here, but how does the past change? i mean,
what process does it go through? does Sherman and Peabody get in the Way-Back
machine and go and change the past? Michael J. Fox and the Flux-Capacitor? Rob
Taylor in his time machine(my personal favorite!).
i'm serious, how does the past change? how does this change of the past come
about? i'm not joking, i would really like to know.
>In
>fact, so is what is past, present and future, subject to Change. We
>believe that anything, that is either imaginable or unimaginable, has
>existed, or could exist, somewhere in the absolute of all of space and
>all of time.
didn't U2 write a song about this?
>We believe that the limits of the human imagination are also completely
>subject to Change. We believe that what was, what is, and what shall be
>imagined, in its distinction to what is now considered real, is subject
>to change. We believe in the power of Change as being the last and only
>remaining genuinely supernatural power.
boogie-boogie-boogie.... sorry, i was channeling Groucho Marx.
>The power of Change remains
>supernatural, because Change and only Change transcends all previously
>existing, now existing, and future existing, actual and potential,
>natures and powers, as their only constant.
does this mean i can get my viriginity back somehow? that would be cool. think
of kinky dating potential of this! to still be a virgin, but have all the
knowledge of my past experiences!
>There are no other, real, constants in Nature or in Science. All other >apparent
>constants are subject to Change. We believe that the effective >processes, that
>existed, exist, or that shall exist, are all subject to Change.
no, really, try my 40 story leap idea on this theory.
>Causalities, all causal relations themselves, are potentially subject
>to Change. The fact that a particular observable cause gives rise to a
>particular observable effect, and that that is commonly believed to be
>predictably thus, is not necessarily thus in the past or in the future.
>It was only thus at that moment of the observation and prediction. That
>apparent thusness,
"thusness"?
>no matter how many times the same is observed or how
>carefully and closely it is scrutinized and measured, is subject to
>Change. This is not negated by any fact of a continuous series of
>similar or identical causal relations, having been apparently observed,
>between any particular kind of presumed cause and any particular
>presumed kind of effect, nor by how many times that same was observed.
>The only certainty in causality is Change.
WOW! this is a great way to around paying your taxes?
"sorry, mr. taxman, all of this is subject to change! SURE, it looks like i made
this much taxable income last year, but like EVERYTHING is subject to change,
so, ya know, maybe i DIDN'T make that much taxable income last year, ya know? so
there is no point in PAYING my taxes because whatever that amount from last year
could be, it could change at any minute, see?"
>Change is not a theoretical principle, or an idea, or an existent, or
>an energetic force, and yet there is nothing whatever, that ever
>existed, that exists, or is yet to exist, that is not subject to Change,
ya know, even Marxism doesn't repeat itself this much.
>and which does not exhibit the effects of Change. Change is everywhere,
>and in everything,
just like meals heavy in garlic.
>and yet change is not any particular thing, or any
>particular principle. It is the most fundamental characteristic of
>everywhere and everything. In fact there is no thought, and there are no
>ideas, without Change. The very intention of keeping an idea in mind, as
>it has arisen there, itself involves Change. Any mental activity
>involves Changes. The mind is essentially Change. Minds constantly
>Change.
you have NOT been on enough dates with enough women to KNOW this one!
>We believe that everything that once existed, and everything that does
>not now exist, is subject to the power of Change, such that that shall
>somewhere, someday, exist again. In fact we believe
what's this "WE" shit? it's just you who's dumb enough to believe this.
>that, subject to the
>power of Change, that which did not ever exist and that which appeared
>to have passed from existence, might subsequently have existed, or not
>ever have not existed. We believe then, that neither the logical
>proposition that it did not exist, nor the logical proposition that it
>never did not exist, is falsified. This is a radical departure from all
>previous beliefs and thinking.
(snippios)
blah-blah-blah.... christ, Canada, answer me, do you let this clown VOTE?
bob, you really are crazy. this theory of yours gets weirder every time you add
something to it.
but i have to admit, i was entertained. like watching tapes of the John Wayne
Gacy trial.
love and kisses,
j r sherman
Morpheal
There is a difference in the meaning.
M.
Rik Roots
>about? i'm not joking, i would really like to know.
>
The past cannot change. But the current interpretation of the past
can. Which is the most relevant?
For instance, what is the real truth of the Britain's Glorious
Revolution? Was it a national repudiation of everything Jacobean and
the start of Britain's (brief) ascent to world domination? Or was it
an uncontested invasion by William and Mary of Orange which saw London
garrisoned by Dutch troops for two years?
Rik, knee deep, and still being friendly with his fourth bottle of
cabernet sauvignon...
Rik, knee deep
icq 106282123
Copper Balls
foriegn power, your bases (even affording all possible future outcomes, as
established in your manifesto) will ever be free of said ownership? Even
(as put forth in your manifesto) if past owner ship of said bases changes,
what of the fight scenes in classic 80s video game Zero Wing? Every time
you turn on the game you are fighting the same enemies, to gain control of
the same base, which "belongs" to an enemy force. These facts are the same
each time you turn on the game- they do not change. Even if someone manages
to change the outlook or structure of the game, there is still the fact of
the game as it was released from Toaplan and exists in this reality.
enkidu
>
> The MORPHEALIST MANIFESTO
>
> We, Morphealists, believe in Change. We, Morphealists,
> believe in nothing else, as being absolute, other than
>
I couldn't change your mind on that, could I?
Cheers,
Cliff
j r sherman
>
>>about? i'm not joking, i would really like to know.
>>
>(ahem)
>
>The past cannot change. But the current interpretation of the past
>can. Which is the most relevant?
indeed. but whatever happened in the past, no matter how it's interpretated,
happened. the events that occured can't be changed. that's what i'm talking
about. in that sense, the past can't be changed.
i know this seems obvious to everyone but Bob.
now if Bob is using these strange theories of his to create a cult where he will
be able to have sex with lots of young women, then i shall encourage such a cult
and wish him well.
on the other hand, if he actually believes the crazy-ass shit he's spewing, then
i shall pray for the commonwealth of Canada and work hard to make sure that he
never enters the US!
>For instance, what is the real truth of the Britain's Glorious
>Revolution? Was it a national repudiation of everything Jacobean and
>the start of Britain's (brief) ascent to world domination? Or was it
>an uncontested invasion by William and Mary of Orange which saw London
>garrisoned by Dutch troops for two years?
indeed again. and is the elevation of appointed-not-elected President Bush a
sign that our(meaning american)systems works, or was this the second political
coup against the will of the American people in our history?
well, obviously it's the ladder statement, i mean all intelligent people know
that, and that will never change.
>Rik, knee deep, and still being friendly with his fourth bottle of
>cabernet sauvignon...
>Rik, knee deep
four?? man, have some coffee and dessert with that stuff, rik!
love and kisses,
j r sherman
>icq 106282123
Rik Roots
> All things will be changed.
>
You have no interest in listenin, but it some things don't change...
> There is a difference in the meaning.
>
No. There is a difference in the interpretation.
> M.
Lets us argue, it gives me another reason to live
Rik, knee deep
Victoria
> >cabernet sauvignon...
> >Rik, knee deep
You really should have moved on to the Muscat Canelli by this point, Rik.
Victoria
4. Ouch.
Scott Murphy
> well, obviously it's the ladder statement, i mean all intelligent people
know
> that, and that will never change.
The 'T' Key is in the TOP Row
__________________________
The ladder statement noted
I should never ever stand
on the top slat designated
for a bucket, not a man.
The warning was a dire one.
It said I'd break my neck.
But I couldn't reach the ceiling,
and thinking "what the heck,"
I ascended to the top step,
the last, forbidden rung.
There, en pointe I painted,
while in the balance hung
my life and off-white latex
in a heavy laden pail.
The former flashed before me
as I began to flail
and fumbled with the latter
by its flimsy wire bail.
I ended on the drop cloth
looking rather pale--
the paint a sort of bechamel
on my prone and writhing form.
The top rung now is not for me,
the last but one, the norm.
-Murphy
Dennis Lewis
Morpheal wrote:
> The MORPHEALIST MANIFESTO
>
The complete manifesto has been deleted but I will provide a summary:
EVERYTHING CHANGES ... that's it in a nutshell, three nutshells actually,
being scrambled.
The important question though is will being a adherent of the MORPHEALIST
MANIFESTO going to help in picking up women?
The second question is what do we call ourselves. Morphealist? "Catholic
you say... Myself, I'm a Morphealist!"
Morphealist - kind of a nice ring, the 'ist' at the end sort of identifies
you with a movement
Morpheal - I don't like this as much, sort of gets grouped with salamander
Morph - a little too cartoonish, sci fi kind of thing
The MANIFESTO - don't label yourself just always refer to "The MANIFESTO"
and after you've thrown it into every second sentence someone will finally
ask what the manifesto is and you can say in your best Jimmy Dean "It's just
change."
Being a Morphealist you don't want to tie yourself to a particular label so
size up the audience and pick the appropriate label. Here are a few guide
lines to help:
use "Morphealist" if the crowd is sort of geeky intellectual urban or older
divorcee
use "Morpheal" if the audience is in to causes or identifies with a
particular religion
use "Morph" if it's your 13 year old nephew
refer to the "MANIFESTO" in a whisper if it's a loose cannon (occasionally
you have to explain the difference between you and the Marxists, but not
often)
The best part of being a Morphealisterer is you can change your mind anytime
you please because after all you are a Morphopoo. See what I mean... it's
great. The next time you read the MANIFESTO it will have changed. Everything
changes, know what I mean Buddy? I mean everything!
Once you've actually procured a date you might want to tone down the
Morphealist thing, in fact don't mention it at all until way later.
Later when the relationship has deteriorated to the point of name calling
that is the time to envoke the creed of the "MANIFESTO" Hey baby, I'm
sorry, things change. Careful with that hammer. You know things can change
back. ouchhhhh...
j r sherman
>
>
>
>
>> The MORPHEALIST MANIFESTO
>>
>
>The complete manifesto has been deleted
thank you.
>but I will provide a summary:
it took five seconds, i'm sure.
>EVERYTHING CHANGES ... that's it in a nutshell, three nutshells actually,
>being scrambled.
so it would seem. an excellent summary.
>The important question though is will being a adherent of the MORPHEALIST
>MANIFESTO going to help in picking up women?
dennis this is the ONLY relevant and important question in this entire thread.
>The second question is what do we call ourselves. Morphealist? "Catholic
>you say... Myself, I'm a Morphealist!"
>Morphealist - kind of a nice ring, the 'ist' at the end sort of identifies
>you with a movement
>Morpheal - I don't like this as much, sort of gets grouped with salamander
>Morph - a little too cartoonish, sci fi kind of thing
>The MANIFESTO - don't label yourself just always refer to "The MANIFESTO"
>and after you've thrown it into every second sentence someone will finally
>ask what the manifesto is and you can say in your best Jimmy Dean "It's just
>change."
i think they should call themselves "Morphealites". it has a certain Old
Testament ring to it.
>Being a Morphealist you don't want to tie yourself to a particular label so
>size up the audience and pick the appropriate label. Here are a few guide
>lines to help:
>
>use "Morphealist" if the crowd is sort of geeky intellectual urban or older
>divorcee
>use "Morpheal" if the audience is in to causes or identifies with a
>particular religion
>use "Morph" if it's your 13 year old nephew
>refer to the "MANIFESTO" in a whisper if it's a loose cannon (occasionally
>you have to explain the difference between you and the Marxists, but not
>often)
>
>The best part of being a Morphealisterer is you can change your mind anytime
>you please because after all you are a Morphopoo. See what I mean... it's
>great. The next time you read the MANIFESTO it will have changed. Everything
>changes, know what I mean Buddy? I mean everything!
>
>Once you've actually procured a date you might want to tone down the
>Morphealist thing, in fact don't mention it at all until way later.
>
>Later when the relationship has deteriorated to the point of name calling
>that is the time to envoke the creed of the "MANIFESTO" Hey baby, I'm
>sorry, things change. Careful with that hammer. You know things can change
>back. ouchhhhh...
i think you've hit upon the biggest problem of this entire philosophy(besides
the fact that it was created by a man crazier than a shithouse rat), and that's
this change thing.
if things change, that means everyone changes as well, which creates chaos.
what we need for this joke religion is Dogma. rules to keep people in line so
that that we CAN use these ideas to get hip-deep in babes.
Dennis, in every religion there is a crazy lunatic, like St. Paul, or Augustine,
to give the movement it's rules.
be that man, Dennis. here's you chance!
because if we leave it to Bob, he'll totally overlook the chick-getting factor
in all this.
then, i ask you, what would be the point to any of this?
peter stewart richards
"j r sherman" <jr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:97u22...@drn.newsguy.com...
> in another time, another place, someone did say.....
> >
>
> i think they should call themselves "Morphealites". it has a certain Old
> Testament ring to it.
>
wake up in de mornin' same ting for breakfast...
p
Dennis Lewis
j r sherman suggests:
>
> i think they should call themselves "Morphealites". it has a certain Old
> Testament ring to it.
>
This does roll easily off the tongue but I'm afraid a name this cool would only
attract the already disenfranchised kooks from the other major religions. I was
hoping to attract something more upscale... like some of those rich beverly hills
Scientologists.
jr searches for a spiritual leader:
>
> Dennis, in every religion there is a crazy lunatic, like St. Paul, or Augustine,
> to give the movement it's rules.
>
> be that man, Dennis. here's you chance!
I'm seriously considering it. Going on the adage that the clothes make the cleric
I'm trying to decide on appropriate garb. Those robes are awfully appealing.
I'm also gonna need a title, a catch phrase, a motto, some devoted followers, a
mission statement, et cetera.
All suggestions are welcome but I might change my mind.
Dennis
j r sherman
>
>
>
>
>>
>> i think they should call themselves "Morphealites". it has a certain Old
>> Testament ring to it.
>>
>
>This does roll easily off the tongue but I'm afraid a name this cool would only
>attract the already disenfranchised kooks from the other major religions. I was
>hoping to attract something more upscale... like some of those rich beverly
>hills
>Scientologists.
The Church of Morphealology?
if you need to steal, steal from the experts on joke religions.
>jr searches for a spiritual leader:
>
>>
>>Dennis, in every religion there is a crazy lunatic, like St. Paul, or Augustine,
>> to give the movement it's rules.
>>
>> be that man, Dennis. here's you chance!
>
>I'm seriously considering it. Going on the adage that the clothes make the
>cleric
>I'm trying to decide on appropriate garb. Those robes are awfully appealing.
>
>I'm also gonna need a title, a catch phrase, a motto, some devoted followers, a
>mission statement, et cetera.
>
>All suggestions are welcome but I might change my mind.
here you go:
"change, it's what we're all subject to"
or,
"YES! I do have spare Change".
and from the Firesign Theatre people:
"What is Reality?"
and i better get my cut of the babes.
that's the slogan will use for the insiders....
Morpheal
It is there for you for whatever you want to make of it.
However, be careful, it might make something of you that you do not like.
M.
Dennis Lewis
>Yes J.R. it is there for you to laugh about.
>It is there for you for whatever you want to make of it.
>However, be careful, it might make something of you that you do not like.
>
Yeah JR, be careful, cause something might make you (you should be so lucky)
besides I've already changed my mind (surprised?) and have now decided the
movement should be known as Morphealuddites. You know, like a antiluddite,
we embrace technological changes.
Dennis
who is already starting to change his mind plus no devoted followers
have signed up yet. It's hard to be a messiah without the minimum dozen
devotees.It's in the union contract under "Rules for Gurus"
Morpheal
> who is already starting to change his mind plus no devoted followers
> have signed up yet. It's hard to be a messiah without the minimum dozen
> devotees.It's in the union contract under "Rules for Gurus"
The reality is more often more like Cronenberg's film "Existenz" than bearing
any similarity to what you're saying.
M.
Morpheal
>
> Just one quick question. How radically has the Morphealist Manifesto
> changed since the last time you posted it here?
>
> Rik, evolving, but still knee deep
Not even one syllable.
I would like to have someone carve it in stone.
As some voices say, that all I really need is a tombstone.
Everything else, they say, is simply some more deferred gratification.
Some things never really change.
Manifesto's and epitaphs.
M.
Morpheal
> The past cannot change. But the current interpretation of the past
> can. Which is the most relevant?
Wrong as to interpretation of the Manifesto.
Future creativity is predicted as being atemporal. That is, it is not bounded by
linear time, but is able to shape more and more of the whole, past and future.
You got caught on your habitual assumptions, and the nature of the language which
supports those assumptions by means of its inherent structures. Linear time and
common usage language are congruent, but neither is congruent with the creative
and created universe as its totality, the ultimate morpheality.
> For instance, what is the real truth of the Britain's Glorious
> Revolution? Was it a national repudiation of everything Jacobean and
> the start of Britain's (brief) ascent to world domination? Or was it
> an uncontested invasion by William and Mary of Orange which saw London
> garrisoned by Dutch troops for two years?
However, in the future the fluidity of interpretation will also be the increasing
fluidity of facts with no way to really discern whether that fluidity is a
previously false interpretation or not, other than a vague nagging pseudo-memory
that continues to speak to the contrary. History becomes no longer the Truth, but
in fact becomes creative material. Events actually molded, shaped, in the past,
from a future vantage point, to create new branching many worlds futures along
their own time lines. Of course it seems utterly fantastic, but eventually, in
the future, it will be realized.
> Rik, knee deep, and still being friendly with his fourth bottle of
> cabernet sauvignon...
I would prefer Absynth.
They say that one sees clearly after some of that.
M.
Morpheal
> YEs, but what of the bases? Can it truly be said that once belonging to a
> foriegn power, your bases (even affording all possible future outcomes, as
> established in your manifesto) will ever be free of said ownership? Even
> (as put forth in your manifesto) if past owner ship of said bases changes,
> what of the fight scenes in classic 80s video game Zero Wing? Every time
> you turn on the game you are fighting the same enemies, to gain control of
> the same base, which "belongs" to an enemy force. These facts are the same
> each time you turn on the game- they do not change. Even if someone manages
> to change the outlook or structure of the game, there is still the fact of
> the game as it was released from Toaplan and exists in this reality.
Again, consider the meanings delineated in David Cronenberg's film "Existenz".
Since you utilize the virtual game metaphor, that metaphor would best answer
your particular concern as to the Manifesto.
M.
Morpheal
> on the other hand, if he actually believes the crazy-ass shit he's spewing, then
> i shall pray for the commonwealth of Canada and work hard to make sure that he
> never enters the US!
I am reasonably certain that that kind of entry will not happen. Seems Canada has
nothing to really hope for, dream of, or look forward to, within America. At least I
have no solid, well grounded, reasons remaining to me such as to make me think even
for a moment that it could or would happen that Canada would be absorbed into one or
another pattern of American life. At least not in my own lifetime.
Then again what do I really know. In matters of that kind, usually not that much.
Tomorrow I could wake up suddenly within the territory of Ontario, under United
States protectorate. A mere colony, switched over from London to Washington, but
still left standing in the same place. Same as it ever was.
I wonder what happened to Taiwan. Or perhaps Germany. Probably more difficult as I
do not speak Chinese or German. I wonder sometimes if I speak American.
Seldom understood due to writing with my British born accent.
> indeed again. and is the elevation of appointed-not-elected President Bush a
> sign that our(meaning american)systems works, or was this the second political
> coup against the will of the American people in our history?
It does not matter. Don't Americans know that the President is simply Commander in
Chief and the Elder Statesman ? Even Presidents seem to forget their real roles.
Though perhaps, in some ways, and Elder Statesman, the senior Diplamat, might dabble
in everything domestic as well as being involved in everything foreign. Seems a bit
much to take on effectively, and better to leave domestic matters to the House.
The latter as it was meant to be. The electoral system was another safeguard such
that a man who migtht be considered dangerous in the role of Commander in Chief and
Senior Diplomat, might be overturned by the Electoral College. Originally they were
NOT bound to vote for the same person as the popular vote had selected. It was a
clever and worthwhile safeguard. The popular vote could vote for a madman. They
could vote for Hitler, or Stalin, or Genghis Khan, but the electoral college could
still say no, if they really felt it was necessary to do so. Decreasing the
probability of a madman being elected on charisma by the beguiled people. Less
dangers where there are many elected, as with the House. One or two madmen in there
make little difference unless they can sway the whole. One madman in the White House
might destroy the whole world with a few wrong words in the wrong ear at the wrong
moment.
M.
Morpheal
No.
However, everything I really could commit to and make firm intentions
towards
was immediately then changed by someone else.
So the Morphealist Manifesto is partly a result of that. Though much
else also.
That is only a lesser manifestation of the Manifesto in the microcosm.
M.
nceg...@worldnet.att.net
taking a photograph of yourself, and as how you see that photograph of your
younger self looking younger than you look now you will reread your creed a
few years down the road and reflect upon it and compare it to today.
I believe that our bodies and minds are dynamic. We rarely notice the
day-to-day, minute-by-minute changes happening to ourselves as we age, but
other people who don't see us regularly, perhaps even for years, notice how
we have aged or changed. We notice it too when we see our relatives and
friends for the first time in years. The greyer hair, the gaunter face,
the fatter or skinnier body are features instantly logged into the mind at
first glance. Unless an illness rapidly deteriorates us, we are utterly
blind to the physiological processes taking place that make our image of
say five years ago so noticeably different than how we appear today. I
think the same applies to our belief system.
There is a story in the works about a man facing harrassment charges that
relates to the topic of change. The people affected by his behavior can't
wait to see him suffer. One man hopes the stress of the process gives the
other man ulcers. The irony will be made visible, and this is fiction
only, when the man being charged comes to some epiphany through a process
of regret for the wrong reasons (i.e. lawsuit) first to finally regretting
his behaviour because of the suffering he has made others endure. He
changes into a decent person not only after losing his job, his house, the
life as he had once known it to be, but also after gaining some humanity
perhaps through the lessons of a child teacher. Meanwhile, the others
gloat. The ones affected by his harrassment get off on their revenge.
Their charge consumes them as they cackle like witches over their victory.
Perhaps they deserve to feel this way. Perhaps they become just as he had
once been -- hungry for power rather than justice. As far as he is
concerned, he no longer wallows in self-pity. He simply understands. It
is no longer about power. It is about what is fair, and he learns a hard
lesson. Life is not fair, therefore, he moves on while the former victims
wallow in smug victory. Such a cinderella story, eh? There are thousands
like it.
But I think another one can work. Well, that's what your manifesto did for
me. Thanks for the sparks in your post that turned me on to form the above
outline. I do like to write. I only hope to one day improve my writing.
That's an example of one change I hope for, but if your manifesto turns out
to be wrong for me in the case of my writing, at least I die trying to do
what I enjoy doing. :-) Hmmm, that's something to live for, I guess.
Sherrie Lee
--
Posted from mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.50]
j r sherman
>
thanks.
>It is there for you for whatever you want to make of it.
cool. how about if i drop you from the whole operation and just use it as a tool
to get babes?
>However, be careful, it might make something of you that you do not like.
what, the women might want to get married?
well, they can marry me like nuns marry the catholic church. i get all their
efforts and they get nothing but grief!
i like this new religion already!
love and kisses,
Everyone's Holiness, Pope Sherman I
Antti Luode
news:3AA447C6...@sympatico.ca...
> might destroy the whole world with a few wrong words in the wrong ear at
the wrong
> moment.
>
> M.
People have forgotten the nukes in the silos.. The kids do not believe they
are for real,
the memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are fading fast.
Antti
Morpheal
> Morpheal wrote:
> > The MORPHEALIST MANIFESTO
> The complete manifesto has been deleted but I will provide a summary:
> EVERYTHING CHANGES ... that's it in a nutshell, three nutshells actually,
> being scrambled.
Some say it was an accident, that I did not know anything about.
> The important question though is will being a adherent of the MORPHEALIST
> MANIFESTO going to help in picking up women?
Some say you have to drop them to pick them up.
The same say there is no other way.
They seem fragile, so I am concerned they might break if dropped.
So best not to pick them up. Leave them down where they are and want to be.
They will only want to be dropped again, if you do otherwise.
That and other similarly strange and morbid arguments.
> The second question is what do we call ourselves. Morphealist? "Catholic
> you say... Myself, I'm a Morphealist!"
What is that supposed to mean ?
I do have a small fragment of Catholicism in me, somewhere.
I also have a fragment of Buddhism. A fragment of Islamicism.
A fragment of Lutheranism. A fragment of Calvinism. A fragment of Wicca.
A fragment of Confucianism. A fragment of Taoism. Etc.
It is all shrapnel, from my point of view.
Most of it sits terribly near to vital arteries and organs.
All of that, at the very least, can spoil a good song.
> ask what the manifesto is and you can say in your best Jimmy Dean "It's just
> change."
Some would say a manifesto as such is simply chump change.
It represents something deeper than that.
> Once you've actually procured a date you might want to tone down the
> Morphealist thing, in fact don't mention it at all until way later.
And you say that a blind date would not be expected to read it.
In fact, in that instance, nothing could be put on paper.
Simply because I do not know any brail.
I do some photography and visual art, so a blind date is inevitable.
So they say. It explains much of her apparent disinterest in my works.
Did you know there are more blind women than sighted women ?
Don't let the lack of white canes fool you.
> Later when the relationship has deteriorated to the point of name calling
> that is the time to envoke the creed of the "MANIFESTO" Hey baby, I'm
> sorry, things change. Careful with that hammer. You know things can change
> back. ouchhhhh...
They say that one has to be wealthy and successful, before one can be really
loved.
I suggest that I created the Manifesto partly to avoid that kind of
circumstance.
If I really wanted to succeed I would have transubstantiated myself into a dead
fish, but I dislike dead fish too intensely, so my hopes have died on the
Romantic front.
Though unlike Rimbaud, I do not like men in the manner he apparently did,
perhaps
I can become a gun runner,.... making myself useful.
M.
Morpheal
> in another time, another place, someone did say.....
Except you will never know where, or when,... or even if.....
Perhaps it was a radio talk show. Or perhaps that is merely paranoia.
The answer remains, most likely, forever hidden. It is not unlike the
ambiguities and obscurantism of the Delphic Oracle.
> The Church of Morphealology?
The Church of the Morpheality ?
That seems acceptable. Penance for falling into uncreative actions will be works of
art. Do three paintings and recite four poems, and you will be forgiven. Of course
there will have to tithings of works of art for the glorification.
> if you need to steal, steal from the experts on joke religions.
Religion is no joke. I fail to see anything funny in any of it anymore.
One of the reasons why I do not belong. I refuse to be a part of any humourless
organization or group.
> here you go:
Perhaps I was gone before I came, and thus cannot really go.
It is one plausible explanation.
> "change, it's what we're all subject to"
Subject to, or objects of.
> "YES! I do have spare Change".
And I am sure she is cute, but I have given up on transexuals completely
after two less than happy experiences in my lifetime. So you can keep the
spare change, even if she is cute.
> and from the Firesign Theatre people:
> "What is Reality?"
It is a myth, mostly. Therefore an overvalued belief.
All my beliefs have always proven to be overvalued beliefs.
Now I don't have any. So no one can accuse me of overvaluing anything.
Besides, belief sets you up for disappointment.
If you live a dream you will never be able to open your eyes in the morning.
If you make a wish, there is wishful thinking to deal with.
Be leafs only fall from the trees when the autumn comes.
Trust me, that's all there is to know. And don't believe that either.
It too might be proven wrong.
> and i better get my cut of the babes.
> that's the slogan will use for the insiders....
Only if you are in the woods. That's where the babes are.
So the legend says.
If you were really an insider you would know why I say that.
M.
j r sherman
>
>
>>Yes J.R. it is there for you to laugh about.
>>It is there for you for whatever you want to make of it.
>>However, be careful, it might make something of you that you do not like.
>>
>
>
>Yeah JR, be careful, cause something might make you (you should be so lucky)
don't i know it!
>besides I've already changed my mind (surprised?) and have now decided the
>movement should be known as Morphealuddites.
WHAT!? you bloody fucking heretic! we're the Morphealologists!
and CHANGE has nothing to do with our movement.
it's all about NOT changing!
think about it. when you find the perfect wine, the best wine you've ever
tasted, do you WANT to change it? NO! you want that wine to ALWAYS taste that
way!
we're the Morphealologists!!! the ONE TRUE RELIGION!
be prepared to die a horrible death due to our Counter-Reformation measures. and
our measures will make the Jesuits look like a pleasantly bland self-help group!
There's no need to re-arrange, because there doesn't need to be Change!
>It's hard to be a messiah without the minimum dozen
>devotees.It's in the union contract under "Rules for Gurus"
indeed. and if all my apostles look like female porn stars, it's only a
coincidence, really!
love and kisses,
The Pontiff For All The People, Pope Sherman I
Morpheal
> in another time, another place, someone did say.....
> >Yes J.R. it is there for you to laugh about.
> thanks.
>
> >It is there for you for whatever you want to make of it.
> cool. how about if i drop you from the whole operation and just use it as a tool
> to get babes?
And what other fishing lures,.... there must be something in that tackle box.
> what, the women might want to get married?
She might say she does, but not really.
After all, everything changes. She loves me. She loves me not. She loves me. She
loves me not,.... pull a daisy. Same as Kerouac's poem. You know ?
I do not want to die of cheap Port wine rupturing my stomach and bleeding to death,
however. Kerouac went that way. Too many disappointments. Everything was always
changing.
> well, they can marry me like nuns marry the catholic church. i get all their
> efforts and they get nothing but grief!
Whenever you come to really love something it will be pronounced dead.
That's how one specious instance of the grief thing works.....
> i like this new religion already!
You won't. Remember everything changes.
As soon as you think you have worked at it hard enough to get to know her well
enough, knowing her long enough,.... she will no longer be whom she seemed to be.
It will be as if you never knew anyone at all. You see, everything changes.
> love and kisses,
> Everyone's Holiness, Pope Sherman I
Ah, death to the Demon J.R. I can hear them in the basements of existence, chanting
and intoning the sounds of those words arleady.....
M.
Morpheal
nceg...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> It's healthy to express your personal creed in writing. I think of it as
> taking a photograph of yourself, and as how you see that photograph of your
> younger self looking younger than you look now you will reread your creed a
> few years down the road and reflect upon it and compare it to today.
>
> I believe that our bodies and minds are dynamic.....
and other stuff likely dredged from Popular Mind Mechanics.
M.
Morpheal
It does not really matter anymore.
It did matter once upon a time. Everything changed.
After that it did not matter anymore.
In the end game I wonder if anything was really won.
On another level the chess game continues forever.
Adding another level to the game, hierarchically, exactly when a mate is
predicted.
Changing the entire strategic arrangement, and requiring entirely different
moves.
There is therefore no real mercy. Only the illusion of mercy.
M.
nceg...@worldnet.att.net
"That is an example of one change I hope for ..." What a funny ambiguity.
I mean /only/ to mean /simply/ or /humbly/. :-)
Sherrie Lee (still screwing up the word only and wondering about separating
/to/ from /improve/)
PAC
"Morpheal" <morp...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3AA4484E...@sympatico.ca...
Unfortunately, change has to be balanced with a resistance to change else
the entire cosmos would be terribly unbalanced. I advocated, for fun, a
real pure random change state as the prior big-bang state being that pure
change would have no inertial resistance for any object to be recognized.
This is interesting because a pure random state is not a nothing, as some
big-bang theories are unable to deal with, yet it appears as a nothing for
there is not a single vector alignment to where any type of matter has
enough resistance or pattern alignment to change to give it birth, until
certain patterns randomly line up to where an explosion of matter formation
is then possible. Pure change must be balanced with that type of resistance
else the universe would be intelligible.
The only absolute is probably nothing but the entire universe itself taken
as absolute, which is beyond any human interpretations of change, resistance
or any human category whatever. The entire universe only contrasts with
itself - hence absolute.
Phil C.
nceg...@worldnet.att.net
> Thankyou Mr. or Ms. Psychology.
> nceg...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
I have not heard of Popular Mind Mechanics, though I once had an encounter with someone who wanted to write a book called Bible Mechanics. I was not in the frame of mind at the time to appreciate such a thing especially when he demonstrated the United States as a cash cow when it came to accepting such a book.
Anyway, if you are not mocking me, I apologise for misunderstanding you. If you do mock me, I feel misunderstood, but I do understand. There is room for great improvement in my writing skills.
Sherrie Lee
Morpheal
I have not heard of Popular Mind Mechanics,
Humans will simply be perceived as another kind of machine to be tuned, tinkered with, souped up, raced around..... driven..... even driven down. Mostly simply traded in, or scrapped.
Values always change, along with everything else.
Anyway, if you are not mocking me, I apologise for misunderstanding you. If you do mock me, I feel misunderstood, but I do understand. There is room for great improvement in my writing skills.
I was not mocking you. I was being cynical about certain trends and elements in popular versions of psychology that are largely propaganda, ideology. Some of them very damaging to those who become its true believers, or oppressed towards becoming that.
M.
nceg...@worldnet.att.net
nceg...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
"I was joking. There is no such publication yet, but I am sure one day there will be. "
"Morpheal" <morp...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:3AA4C4E2...@sympatico.ca...
"Humans will simply be perceived as another kind of machine to be tuned, tinkered with, souped up, raced around..... driven..... even driven down. Mostly simply traded in, or scrapped. "
"Morpheal" <morp...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:3AA4C4E2...@sympatico.ca...
"Values always change, along with everything else. "
nceg...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
"I was not mocking you. I was being cynical about certain trends and elements in popular versions of psychology that are largely propaganda, ideology. Some of them very damaging to those who become its true believers, or oppressed towards becoming that."
Sherrie Lee
M.
j r sherman
>
>j r sherman wrote:
>
>> in another time, another place, someone did say.....
>> >Yes J.R. it is there for you to laugh about.
>> thanks.
>>
>> >It is there for you for whatever you want to make of it.
>>cool. how about if i drop you from the whole operation and just use it as a tool
>> to get babes?
>
>And what other fishing lures,.... there must be something in that tackle box.
um...yeah. (???)
>> what, the women might want to get married?
>
>She might say she does, but not really.
don't be such a cynic.
>After all, everything changes. She loves me. She loves me not. She loves me.
>>She loves me not,.... pull a daisy. Same as Kerouac's poem. You know ?
>
>I do not want to die of cheap Port wine rupturing my stomach and bleeding to
>>death, however. Kerouac went that way. Too many disappointments. Everything
>>was always changing.
perhaps. but to turn the fact that you have dating problems into some
psuedo-philosophy is just silly.
>> well, they can marry me like nuns marry the catholic church. i get all their
>> efforts and they get nothing but grief!
>
>Whenever you come to really love something it will be pronounced dead.
not so, smacky-ass. just because the chick says no doesn't mean she's dead, it
just means that you're not interesting enough.
>That's how one specious instance of the grief thing works.....
um, yeah. (???)
>> i like this new religion already!
>
>You won't. Remember everything changes.
i told you, try my 40-story leap theory.
>As soon as you think you have worked at it hard enough to get to know her well
>enough, knowing her long enough,.... she will no longer be whom she seemed to
>>be. It will be as if you never knew anyone at all. You see, everything changes.
just because you get dumped a lot, this means we all have to get on the
bandwagon of a silly idea?
>> love and kisses,
>> Everyone's Holiness, Pope Sherman I
>
>Ah, death to the Demon J.R. I can hear them in the basements of existence,
>>chanting and intoning the sounds of those words arleady.....
bob, i think you need to get out more.
PAC
"PAC" <phi...@email.com> wrote in message
news:981ml...@news2.newsguy.com...
Hmm, I think I meant unintelligible here. It's my spelling checkers fault
however. But as a sidelight, modern physicists who believe in the universe
going to a heat death, which I think is a real simplistic way of looking at
the total reality, are actually more advocating the idea of sameness rather
than change. In that as all processes unwind to the fundamental particles
(that might unwind even further); everything will become remarkably the
same. Scientists and more normal folks often confuse a state of chaos with
a predicted end state of greater harmony and less change, albeit more
simplicity. Ordered systems that go to chaos really mean that they go to a
more ordered state being that their systems are progressively more similar
as they shrink their twads. For a heat death interpretation of the cosmos
anyway.
Morpheal
> perhaps. but to turn the fact that you have dating problems into some
> psuedo-philosophy is just silly.
I don't have dating problems. I am very selective. I only choose to spend intimate
time with someone if I know that woman well enough before that, from correspondence or
casual conversation that she has chosen to enter into and reveal herself within, and I
know the relationship has long term potential. Not worth it otherwise. Otherwise I
keep to rather casual coworking relationships with the often rather beautiful and
talented women whom I know. The artistic product is then all that really matters in
it. It isn't about bed hopping or having sex with someone. It is about the work of
art. Sure, sexuality is part of aesthetics and part of the project in many instances,
but it is not boyfriend / girlfriend and does not involve sexual intercourse. You see
the difference ?
When it isn't about art, or coworking on something else, with other people, of mixed
genders and various sexual orientations, usually, then it is coworking at grind that
makes money.
The Manifesto was never written with a woman in mind or with getting girlfriends in
mind. It was a pure work. It would pass the most stringent purity test with a perfect
score. On the other hand it came about out of experiences that involved a relationship
that could not happen. Ironic as that might seem. However it is not about that
relationship, and not about its loss, or about any attempt to regain it. It is about
art and about really believing that I have found a strand of thought, out of my
experiences, that is the successor to Surrealism's main insights.
> not so, smacky-ass. just because the chick says no doesn't mean she's dead, it
> just means that you're not interesting enough.
I didn't say that. I said something else.
I also said something with a certain amount of sarcasm.
Not that that is resolvable. It remains an unresolvable mystery. Doesn't it always ?
> just because you get dumped a lot, this means we all have to get on the
> bandwagon of a silly idea?
I am known to do a lot of destructive testing.
I don't want to get burned when and if the going gets tough.
I've been burned before, and when I least expected it.
> bob, i think you need to get out more.
I can honestly say that I can be more bored than Andy Warhol was.
Though I can also be as boring. <grin> After all, they were not really interested
in me so as to really get to know me. That is the laugh in it all. Not most of them. A
very few exceptions. It is the very few exceptions whom I can begin to really value.
Everything else necessarily changes.
M.