Mark Passio

Truth is kinda harsh

I am spending much more time watching Mark Passio vids than expected. For me, reading is preferred because one can go more quickly, skip fluff and go back more easily. I have never watched other peoples presentations for as long as Marks work. I like economy in words and Mark uses a lot of them, yet there seems to be purpose in his words with re-enforcement sometimes verging on excess repetition. When young I had a bit of a reading obsession and reviewed as many old and esoteric books I could find. There is a used book store in my university town that has old science and history texts along with some eccentric and esoteric writing. I like old books as a way of comparing what folk thought about emerging topics at the time and how those topics are treated by modern thinkers. My interest is in what makes what happen. In commentaries one must look for what is said between the lines, given needs for self preservation and desires for advancement. The esoteric writings that promised uncommon understanding was in riddles, over my head and corrupted by its association with power. I decided that if there was substance to the tradition, one had to find it on their own rather than through corrupt ‘schools’.

After a time a model developed in my head that relied on self training to replace reactive mind expressions with more creative mind expressions, by aspiring to balance order and liberty. The results are decent and do improve expressions in my life. It’s about learning through decision making, observing effects and creating processes that achieve better objectives. I assume that other folk also have hemispheric imbalances in the brain and try to balance things in their own ways , or not, and entrench themselves in unbalanced expressions with rationalizations, ego tricks and excuses. Mark Passio gets a big plus for stating clearly that the spiritual and the physical are the same thing. Mark considers that the only way to change our circumstances is for the broad population to understand moral law. I think he is right, yet sill do not see (what I consider to be ) the proper point of leverage in his presentation. What will it take for the broad population to understand and apply moral law?

What narrative will be robust and appealing enough to displace the current dominant narrative? This narrative that relies on propagating fear, as a means to program the subconscious to seek safety. Narrative controllers trust that folk will revert to what they know best, the dominant narrative, when push comes to shove. Even if a new narrative were to provide safety that the existing narrative claims to provide, yet never actually provides, it will appear scary because of the novelty. So the hurdle for adoption being high is one reason to be more charitable toward ignorance. Mark says if the information is available, and it is, that folk become culpable for their ignorance. The information may be ‘available’ but it is not psychologically available. Also, hearing truth, coming from an ex Satanist is probably not exactly comforting to most folk. Most people don’t care to get the kind of head start he has, so a little more sympathy toward the ignorant might be called for.

It needs to be understood how it is, that any initial assumption cannot be proven, because a consequent cannot prove an antecedent, therefor contrary to the current dominant narrative, that insists that the spiritual and the material are fundamentally different, it may be the case that the spiritual and the material are fundamentally the same, and this may be a more accurate way to represent reality. If we learn to model reality more accurately we will have better tools for decision making.

Thank-you for spending time to read this.