|
Richard’s Correspondence On The Actual Freedom Mailing List with Correspondent No. 78
RESPONDENT No. 25: (...) what you’re saying is that the body [sans the instinctual passions which are the identity] can very well react, defend and survive to danger by generating a quick reaction without the ‘psychic’ survival program. Okay, but in doing so does it use the same hormones/chemicals as the ‘quick and dirty’ way? RICHARD: I refer you to the following: [snip a description of no hormones/ chemicals being generated in such a situation]. RESPONDENT No. 25: I ask this as I can see the difference between an actual danger (a snake, a hot plate, a thief) and an imagined danger (when fear is the culprit, i.e. after watching a horror movie alone) ... RICHARD: It makes no difference, whilst there is an identity in situ, whether a danger be current, being remembered, being watched/read about via media, being informed about face-to-face, or being fantasised about. RESPONDENT No. 25: ... but I also wonder what happened to all those actual (physical) hormones linked to the psychic program in your body. Did they vanished (the body stopped producing them) or are they still present but inactive (disconnected from the brain circuitry)? RICHARD: As, normally, such chemicals are produced on demand, as it were, it is neither of the above – there has to be a catalytic activation process in order for them to come into existence – but rather the catalyst is null and void. RESPONDENT No. 25: What do you mean by a ‘catalyst’? RICHARD: This: [Co-Respondent]: ‘... the psychic program in your body’. [endquote]. I was answering your query as asked. RESPONDENT No. 25: An outside situation like the one described at the supermarket? RICHARD: No ... and neither the coiled snake situation described on a country lane either (neither event generated hormones/ chemicals such as cortisol and adrenaline). RESPONDENT No. 25: I understand from that description that your body produced an extra quantity of caloric energy and no hormonal substances. Does your body produce any hormones at all and if yes, what type of? RICHARD: This is what I do know via self-observation: as there is no identity (no psyche) whatsoever in this flesh and blood body there are no instinctual passions (no fear, no aggression, no nurture, no desire) either – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – thus no such hormones as cortisol and adrenaline are being produced. RESPONDENT: Richard – I see a few flaws in your description of a lack of adrenaline (now called epinephrine). RICHARD: Here is the essence of that description:
And here is the essence of the earlier description:
If you can point out the ‘few flaws’ you see in either of those descriptions I will be most interested. RESPONDENT: First of all, can you detect exactly the forms of the molecules that flow through your body? RICHARD: No ... and, given that ‘molecules’ (just like ‘atoms’) are mathematical models of the universe, neither can anybody else. Moreover, as I am an actualist, and not a scientist, my reports/ descriptions/ explanations are experiential, not scientifical, and any reference I may make to matters scientific on occasion are secondary. Did you not take in the import of what [quote] ‘via self-observation’ [endquote] conveys in my further above explanation? Viz.:
RESPONDENT: Also, I am not sure what scientific claims you are consulting ... RICHARD: I am not consulting any scientific claim in either the later or the earlier description ... they are, quite clearly, self-reports. Viz.:
I was sailing over a supermarket garden-bed/strolling along a country lane ... I was *not* in a laboratory somewhere, wired to some machine, on either occasion. RESPONDENT: ... [I am not sure what scientific claims you are consulting] but studies done by Schacter provide strong evidence for the conclusion that epinephrine is NOT linked to specific emotions. RICHARD: You may have missed what I wrote in my initial response in this thread:
In essence what you are doing is singling out one person, with training/ expertise in some ‘-ology’ or another, among many such persons ... only to have me research what that person has to say (in lieu of you conducting a ‘self’-investigation). RESPONDENT: I suggest you research the studies of this man. RICHARD: I have had all manner of peoples advise me to research all manner of things since I first went public on the internet in 1997 ... each and every one of them conveniently overlooking the fact that, being already actually free of the human condition, I have no personal interest whatsoever in doing anything of the sort. RESPONDENT: One of the most important conclusions he made is that if a person could be persuaded that the arousal they received (from ep. injections) was not due to an emotional factor, they would not experience it as emotional. RICHARD: To use a modern colloquialism: that would have to be a no-brainer if there ever was. RESPONDENT: Furthermore, epinephrine signals cells to increase cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilization, and glyconeogenesis, all needed for increased energy availability. This IS the signal for more energy: you still insist that ‘necessity’ gave you the energy you needed? RICHARD: I never insisted upon it in the first place – I provided a report/a description/an
explanation out of my direct experience Neither was there any cortisol-induced heightened awareness either – each and every thing specifically looked at, here in this actual world, is already seen in detail – and, as time does not move in actuality, neither did time all-of-a-sudden stand still either. Incidentally (in regards adrenaline injections): whenever I have a dental injection to anaesthetise the jaw, these days, I make sure the dentist uses a procaine mixture which does not contain adrenaline, which most such mixtures do, because its effect is to set-off a psychotropic episode (lasting up to 5-6 hours). As does caffeine (a chemical cousin to cocaine).
VINEETO: As you say you quite enjoy the practice of ‘grooving on ecstatic vibes’ then clearly actualism is not for you because, as the very term expressively states, actualism is all about what is actual whereas vibes, being feelings, are not actual. RESPONDENT: Sorry I’m not hip to your lingo ... RICHARD: It is quite commonplace ‘lingo’ actually. Viz.:
And:
RESPONDENT: (...) I was not referring to ‘Psychic Vibes’ or vibes as ‘feelings’, sorry. RICHARD: That being the case then, for the sake of clarity in communication, it would be handy to use some other expression than ‘grooving on ecstatic vibes’ as that phraseology does not convey what you explain it to mean in this e-mail (more on this below). RESPONDENT: As you continue to put (unintended) meaning into my words you will continue to misunderstand me, making effective communication impossible. This has happened countless times now. RICHARD: As I also took your ‘grooving on ecstatic vibes’ as to be conveying that you were intensely enjoying (as in ‘grooving’) exalted (as in ‘ecstatic’) feelings (as in ‘vibes’) I checked with a wide range of dictionaries to see why I too had taken it that way ... given the (further above) definitions it is a quite understandable take and thus your remonstrations (above) are most definitely uncalled for. Here is what you say, in this e-mail, that you were conveying (from the parenthesised snip above):
And the following is how the universe ‘actually is’ (also from the parenthesised snip) according to you:
Thus ‘grooving on ecstatic vibes’ is your way of conveying that you are utterly delighting (as in ‘grooving’) in experiencing exalted (as in ‘ecstatic’) vibrations (as in ‘vibes’) of the nature proposed by theoretical physicists ... which, being but a mathematical model of the universe, cannot be experienced sensately. Here is what you go on to say:
Going by what your co-respondent has written it is most certainly not the realm where the following occurs (from the web site you provided a link to previously):
As compassion is unambiguously a passion it would appear that the [quote] ‘good vibrations’ [endquote] of the entire universe are affective in character ... as is evidenced by the following:
Thus the [quote] ‘metta vibrations’ [endquote] are indeed the ‘good vibrations’ being referred to and, furthermore, like all such vibes, are both transmittable and receivable. Viz.:
And:
And:
And:
As for the [quote] ‘bad vibrations’ [endquote] of the entire universe ... the following is quite clear:
And:
And:
Needless is it to add there there are no such vibrations, be they either ‘good’ or ‘bad’ vibrations, here in the actual world (the world of the senses)? I have provided those detailed quotes because the problem with the peoples who discard the Christian/ Judaic/ Islamic god is they do not realise that by turning to the eastern spiritual philosophy they have effectively jumped out of the frying pan into the fire. Eastern spirituality is religion ... merely in a different form to what people in the west have been raised to believe in. Eastern spiritual philosophy sounds so convincing to the western mind which is desperately looking for answers. The Christian/ Judaic/ Islamic conditioning actually sets up the situation for a thinking person to be susceptible to the esoteric doctrines of the east. It is sobering to realise that the intelligentsia of the west are eagerly following the east down the slippery slope of striving to attain to a self-seeking divine immortality ... to the detriment of life on earth. At the end of the line there is always a god/ goddess/ truth, of some description, lurking in disguise wreaking its havoc with its ‘ancient wisdom’. Have you ever been to India to see for yourself the results of what they claim are tens of thousands of years of devotional spiritual living? I did, back when there was a full suite of affections in this body, and it was hideous.
RICHARD: (...) the four-hour pure consciousness experience (PCE) in 1980, which initiated the remembrance of many such moments of perfection stretching way back into my childhood, and which set in train the entire process eventually resulting in an actual freedom from the human condition, was inadvertently precipitated by psylocibin (given to me by a well-meaning but somewhat misguided associate at the time who told me it was similar in effect to tetrahydrocannabinol only much stronger) ... RESPONDENT: So, instead of any method or ANY thing you have been discussing on your website, Richard – A Chemical precipitated your 4hr PCE. RICHARD: No, it was not ‘instead’ of (what has become known as) the actualism method – the only method on the web site – or any other thing discussed that psylocibin precipitated the four-hour pure consciousness experience (PCE) in 1980, which initiated the remembrance of many such moments of perfection stretching way back into my childhood, and which set in train the entire process eventually resulting in an actual freedom from the human condition ... it was *because* it did that the actualism method, and all other things discussed, came into existence. RESPONDENT: Great, that’s just great ... RICHARD: It is indeed great, just great, that peace-on-earth, in this lifetime as this flesh and blood body, is now not only apparent but accessible by all and sundry because of a well-meaning, but somewhat misguided, associate at the time giving me some psylocibin (along with the misinformation it was similar in effect to tetrahydrocannabinol only much stronger) that inadvertently precipitated the four-hour pure consciousness experience (PCE) in 1980, which initiated the remembrance of many such moments of perfection stretching way back into my childhood, and which set in train the entire process eventually resulting in an actual freedom from the human condition ... but I doubt that this is what you are being so effusive about. And here is why:
Somehow I am reminded of this exchange: Confidence; Friday 25/11/2004 AEDST). So as to inject some substance into this exchange: it was not just the psylocibin, it was not just the PCE, it was not just the remembrance of many such moments of perfection stretching way back into my childhood, which set in train the entire process eventually resulting in an actual freedom from the human condition, it was the identity within who was the key to all which transpired. In short: many, many peoples have ingested many, many chemicals over many, many centuries but only one of them, as far as I have been able to ascertain, has ever enabled the already always existing peace-on-earth into becoming apparent permanently. May I ask? Are you right-handed or left-handed (or even both)?
RICHARD: (...) This is what I do know via self-observation: as there is no identity (no psyche) whatsoever in this flesh and blood body there are no instinctual passions (no fear, no aggression, no nurture, no desire) either – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – thus no such hormones as cortisol and adrenaline are being produced. RESPONDENT: Richard – I see a few flaws in your description of a lack of adrenaline (now called epinephrine). RICHARD: Here is the essence of that description:
And here is the essence of the earlier description:
If you can point out the ‘few flaws’ you see in either of those descriptions I will be most interested. RESPONDENT: First of all, can you detect exactly the forms of the molecules that flow through your body? RICHARD: No ... and, given that ‘molecules’ (just like ‘atoms’) are mathematical models of the universe, neither can anybody else. Moreover, as I am an actualist, and not a scientist, my reports/descriptions/explanations are experiential, not scientifical, and any reference I may make to matters scientific on occasion are secondary. Did you not take in the import of what [quote] ‘via self-observation’ [endquote] conveys in my further above explanation? Viz.:
RESPONDENT: Also, I am not sure what scientific claims you are consulting ... RICHARD: I am not consulting any scientific claim in either the later or the earlier description ... they are, quite clearly, self-reports. Viz.:
I was sailing over a supermarket garden-bed/strolling along a country lane ... I was *not* in a laboratory somewhere, wired to some machine, on either occasion. RESPONDENT: ... [I am not sure what scientific claims you are consulting] but studies done by Schacter provide strong evidence for the conclusion that epinephrine is NOT linked to specific emotions. RICHARD: You may have missed what I wrote in my initial response in this thread: [snip remainder]. In essence what you are doing is singling out one person, with training/ expertise in some ‘-ology’ or another, among many such persons ... only to have me research what that person has to say (in lieu of you conducting a ‘self’-investigation). RESPONDENT: I suggest you research the studies of this man. RICHARD: I have had all manner of peoples advise me to research all manner of things since I first went public on the internet in 1997 ... each and every one of them conveniently overlooking the fact that, being already actually free of the human condition, I have no personal interest whatsoever in doing anything of the sort. RESPONDENT: One of the most important conclusions he made is that if a person could be persuaded that the arousal they received (from ep. injections) was not due to an emotional factor, they would not experience it as emotional. RICHARD: To use a modern colloquialism: that would have to be a no-brainer if there ever was. RESPONDENT: Furthermore, epinephrine signals cells to increase cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilization, and glyconeogenesis, all needed for increased energy availability. This IS the signal for more energy: you still insist that ‘necessity’ gave you the energy you needed? RICHARD: I never insisted upon it in the first place – I provided a report/a description/an explanation out of my direct experience – and, not only did I experience no feelings/ emotions/ passions whatsoever, neither was there any receival of an adrenaline arousal at all (as expressed in, for example, phrasing such as ‘rushes of adrenaline’ or ‘an adrenaline hit’ and ‘an adrenaline junkie’ and so on). Neither was there any cortisol-induced heightened awareness either – each and every thing specifically looked at, here in this actual world, is already seen in detail – and, as time does not move in actuality, neither did time all-of-a-sudden stand still either. Incidentally (in regards adrenaline injections): whenever I have a dental injection to anaesthetise the jaw, these days, I make sure the dentist uses a procaine mixture which does not contain adrenaline, which most such mixtures do, because its effect is to set-off a psychotropic episode (lasting up to 5-6 hours). As does caffeine (a chemical cousin to cocaine). RESPONDENT: You have still not addressed the silliness of this claim: [Richard] ‘This is what I do know via self-observation: as there is no identity (no psyche) whatsoever in this flesh and blood body there are no instinctual passions (no fear, no aggression, no nurture, no desire) either – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – thus no such hormones as cortisol and adrenaline are being produced’. [endquote]. RICHARD: As you have not established that there is, in fact, any ‘silliness’ to my (reposted just above) report/ description/ explanation I would suggest you refrain from adding such commentitious nouns to your assertions as they have the effect of turning them into loaded assertions. Here is an example of an assertion that can be responded to as-is (without preliminary qualifications):
I have indeed addressed the flaw you say you saw ... to wit: not only did I experience no feelings/emotions/passions whatsoever, *neither was there any receival of an adrenaline arousal at all* (as expressed in, for example, phrasing such as ‘rushes of adrenaline’ or ‘an adrenaline hit’ and ‘an adrenaline junkie’ and so on). I phrased it that way because this is what I was responding to:
RESPONDENT: I have previously stated: [Respondent] ‘Furthermore, epinephrine signals cells to increase cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilization, and glyconeogenesis, all needed for increased energy availability. This IS the signal for more energy: you still insist that necessity gave you the energy you needed?’ [endquote]. That is, according to empirical evidence obtained by modern biochemistry, adrenaline is NEEDED for any kind of energy increase in the body: to get up from the couch, to move your arm from resting, etc. RICHARD: If I may point out? According to empirical evidence obtained by modern biochemistry – provided that what you say just above is accurate – it is an increase of cAMP levels (Cyclic Adenosine MonoPhosphate ultimately controls the level of fructose-2,6-bisphosphate, the most potent allosteric regulator of glycolysis and gluconeogenesis, through the action of cAMP-dependent protein kinase to interconvert PFK-2 and fructose-2,6-bisphosphatase by phosphorylation), Triacyglcerol mobilisation (TAGs are storage lipids stored mostly in adipose, or fat, cells and tissues, which are highly concentrated stores of metabolic energy), and Glyconeogenesis (the formation of glycogen from glucose which, in skeletal muscle, is used to provide a source of ATP, a nucleotide derived from adenosine that occurs in muscle tissue and which is the major source of energy for cellular reactions, to power myofibrillar contraction), which is needed for any kind of energy increase in the body ... to get up from the couch, to move one’s arm from resting, etcetera. RESPONDENT: It is the signal to make more energy to do these things. RICHARD: Adrenaline is the signal in normal human beings (provided that what you say further above is accurate) ... yes; in a human being sans identity/ instinctual passions ... no. Viz.:
Obviously some other avenue of triggering-off increases in cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilisation, and Glyconeogenesis (provided that what you say further above is accurate) is occurring in this flesh and blood body, non? Because this is what I do know via self-observation: as there is no identity (no psyche) whatsoever in this flesh and blood body there are no instinctual passions (no fear, no aggression, no nurture, no desire) either – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – thus no such hormones as adrenaline (and cortisol) are being produced. RESPONDENT: Indeed, chemicals such as adrenaline (correctly known as epinephrine) ARE being produced ... RICHARD: I see ... you know what is occurring in this flesh and blood body better than what this flesh and blood body being apperceptively aware does, then? RESPONDENT: ... [Indeed, chemicals such as adrenaline (correctly known as epinephrine) ARE being produced] – that is, unless you do not ever move an inch from the same position. RICHARD: Hmm ... and does that last comment also look trite to you, upon sober reflection, when read as-it-reads?
RESPONDENT: You have still not addressed the silliness of this claim: [Richard] ‘This is what I do know via self-observation: as there is no identity (no psyche) whatsoever in this flesh and blood body there are no instinctual passions (no fear, no aggression, no nurture, no desire) either – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – thus no such hormones as cortisol and adrenaline are being produced’. [endquote]. RICHARD: As you have not established that there is, in fact, any ‘silliness’ to my (reposted just above) report/ description/ explanation I would suggest you refrain from adding such commentitious nouns to your assertions as they have the effect of turning them into loaded assertions. RESPONDENT: I can certainly point out the silliness in a few of your claims. RICHARD: Au contraire ... all you can do is point out what occurs in a normal human being. Perhaps if I were to put it this way: I provide a report/ description/ explanation of what I know *via
self-observation* Not that this kind of reaction is something novel to me ... I have had people assert that my report/
description/ explanation about how the entire affective faculty – all the feelings, emotions, passions, calentures – vanished
completely, in 1992, cannot possibly be true for the self-same reason Furthermore, I have had people say that my report/ description/ explanation about how identity in toto – both ‘I’ as ego *and* ‘me’ as soul – simultaneously vanished, in 1992, also cannot possibly be true for a similar reason (it is not to be found in spiritual/ mystical text-books). To use a popular expression ... some peoples have difficulty in thinking outside of the box. * RICHARD: Here is an example of an assertion that can be responded to as-is (without preliminary qualifications): [example only]: ‘You have still not addressed the flaw I see in your description of a lack of adrenaline’. [end example]. I have indeed addressed the flaw you say you saw ... to wit: not only did I experience no feelings/emotions/passions whatsoever, *neither was there any receival of an adrenaline arousal at all* (as expressed in, for example, phrasing such as ‘rushes of adrenaline’ or ‘an adrenaline hit’ and ‘an adrenaline junkie’ and so on). RESPONDENT: Here you are again dancing around the subject. RICHARD: I am neither ‘dancing around the subject’ now nor before ... I am responding to the flaw you say you saw using the very same phrasing you used ... here it is in full this time around:
As no such arousal was received I am most certainly not ‘dancing around the subject’ ... either on this occasion or on any other. RESPONDENT: I did not say that that you did not experience ‘rushes’ of adrenaline ... RICHARD: I did not say you said that I did not experience ‘rushes of adrenaline’ ... I clearly used your phrasing and then, for the sake of clarity in communication, added three examples of how other people express such arousal. RESPONDENT: I think that if you are AF then you would not experience these arousals, we are in agreement here. RICHARD: Are you saying that you agree there was no arousal received (as contrasted, for example, to the arousal received upon having an injection of procaine, at a dentist’s surgery, containing a small percentage of adrenaline ... which arousal can itself be compared with no such arousal being received, these days, upon having an injection of procaine containing no adrenaline at all)? Please note that I am talking out of experience and not theory. RESPONDENT: Where you go wrong is where you say that there is no epinephrine being produced (at all). RICHARD: I also report there is no cortisol (a concomitant fright-freeze-fight-flee chemical) being produced either ... what do your text-books have to say about that? RESPONDENT: [Richard] ‘This is what I do know via self-observation: as there is no identity (no psyche) whatsoever in this flesh and blood body there are no instinctual passions (no fear, no aggression, no nurture, no desire) either – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – thus no such hormones as cortisol and adrenaline are being produced’. [endquote]. Below I have described how this can not be in anybody, Free or Not. RICHARD: Given that what you described below is that epinephrine (aka adrenaline) signals cells to *increase* cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilisation, and Glyconeogenesis, all of which are needed for *increased* energy availability, and that epinephrine is the signal for *more* energy, just what is your agreement, that these arousals would not be experienced by a person actually free from the human condition, worth? That is somewhat akin to those peoples already mentioned who tell me that, even though I may not experience feelings (emotions, passions, calentures), such feelings are still being produced ... just like some peoples also tell me that, even though I might not experience an ego/soul, an identity is still in situ anyway. It could be called, perhaps, a Clayton’s Agreement (the agreement you have when you are not having an agreement), eh? * RESPONDENT: I have previously stated: [Respondent] ‘Furthermore, epinephrine signals cells to increase cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilization, and glyconeogenesis, all needed for increased energy availability. This IS the signal for more energy: you still insist that necessity gave you the energy you needed?’ [endquote]. That is, according to empirical evidence obtained by modern biochemistry, adrenaline is NEEDED for any kind of energy increase in the body: to get up from the couch, to move your arm from resting, etc. RICHARD: If I may point out? According to empirical evidence obtained by modern biochemistry – provided that what you say just above is accurate – it is an increase of cAMP levels (Cyclic Adenosine MonoPhosphate ultimately controls the level of fructose-2,6-bisphosphate, the most potent allosteric regulator of glycolysis and gluconeogenesis, through the action of cAMP-dependent protein kinase to interconvert PFK-2 and fructose-2,6-bisphosphatase by phosphorylation), Triacyglcerol mobilisation (TAGs are storage lipids stored mostly in adipose, or fat, cells and tissues, which are highly concentrated stores of metabolic energy), and Glyconeogenesis (the formation of glycogen from glucose which, in skeletal muscle, is used to provide a source of ATP, a nucleotide derived from adenosine that occurs in muscle tissue and which is the major source of energy for cellular reactions, to power myofibrillar contraction), which is needed for any kind of energy increase in the body ... to get up from the couch, to move one’s arm from resting, etcetera. RESPONDENT: Ha. You have done a good job in convincing me you know very little about metabolic biochemistry. RICHARD: As I have no training/expertise in biochemistry at all – nil, zero, zilch – I have, of course, had occasion to seek advice from those with professionalism in that field ... if you have some difference of opinion with the above (that which is in parenthesises) it may be handy to bear in mind that you are differing with those whose expertise I sought. RESPONDENT: Glyconeogenisis and Gluconeogenisis are biosynthetic pathways, and are inhibited when ATP demand rises – in fact, cAMP inhibits the action of Fructuse 1,6-bisphosphotase, an important enzyme in gluconeogenesis. So you would not utilize glyconeogenesis for making ATP. For example, glycogen synthesis is inhibited under the same physiological conditions that promote glycogen breakdown. Do you propose that an AF causes your body to operate in futile metabolic cycles? RICHARD: No, all I am proposing is that increased cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilisation, and Glyconeogenesis are what is needed for increased muscular movement (provided that what you said further above is accurate) ... not adrenaline per se. RESPONDENT: Glycogen mobilization (Glycogenolysis, quite the opposite of glyconeogenesis) is the process whereby glycogen is broken down, for utilization in glycolysis, TCA cycle, and ETC for generation of ATP. I don’t need to describe how ATP is generated from here. Also, cAMP is a SECOND (or intracellular) messenger – what do you think is the extracellular messenger? RICHARD: What the extracellular messenger is, or is not, is irrelevant to what I pointed out (further above and, again, immediately above) ... here is what I am responding to:
All I am pointing out is that it is increased cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilisation, and Glyconeogenesis which are needed for increased muscular movement (provided that what you say further above is accurate) and not adrenaline per se ... why is this so difficult to comprehend? RESPONDENT: Glycogenolysis is controlled by Glucagon in the liver and *EPINEPHRINE* in muscle tissue – so if you want to ‘to get up from the couch, to move one’s arm from resting, etcetera.’, then you need epinephrine signalling for Glycogen mobilization. RICHARD: Adrenaline signalling is what is needed in normal human beings for increased Glycogen mobilisation (provided that what you say above is accurate) ... yes; in a human being sans identity/instinctual passions ... no. RESPONDENT: If you want me to explain how this signal transduction pathway works, I would be more than happy to elaborate. RICHARD: I do not want you to explain how that signal transduction pathway works in normal human beings. * RESPONDENT: It [adrenaline] is the signal to make more energy to do these things [to get up from the couch, to move your arm from resting, etc.]. RICHARD: Adrenaline is the signal in normal human beings (provided that what you say further above is accurate) ... yes; in a human being sans identity/ instinctual passions ... no. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: May I ask, what signal transduction pathways do you utilize if you want to move? RICHARD: At a guess (and having no training/expertise in this area at all it can only ever be a lay-person’s speculation) it could be neurohormonal – a process first observed in 1975 in the course of investigations into the mechanism of the action of morphine and other analgesics – as the neurosecretory cells, being structurally typical of the nervous rather than of the endocrine system, have a long evolutionary history of translating neural signals into chemical stimuli. I first became cognisant of this subject by necessity nearly a quarter of a century ago when my first wife, having had the entire hypophysis cerebri surgically removed because of a spreading tumour, was able to have the brain itself map new pathways, as it were, so as to reconstitute the production of all but two of the nine hormones which had ceased generation upon such radical, and life-saving, surgery (she has to ingest the other two orally to this very day). The surgeons/physicians I consulted with at the time were at pains to explain that much had been discovered about hormones and hormone production only in the preceding twenty years (this was in 1983) and the neurohormonal mechanism was one of these discoveries: essentially what happens is that neurohormones originate in the hypothalamic region of the brain and pass along nerve-cell extensions (axons) to be released into the bloodstream at special regions called neurohemal organs. A second group, called releasing hormones, also originates in the hypothalamus but are transmitted within the neural cells to a second locus in the brain, from which they pass in the bloodstream to the adenohypophysis. A third group, which, includes the encephalins and other endorphins, manifests their neurohormonal activity by an indirect process involving a site (other than the secretory neuron) in the central nervous system and have, at the very least, some relation to appetite control, the release of sex hormones, and the adverse effects of shock. Be that as it may: whatever the process is (being an actualist, not a biochemist, my report/ description/ explanation is experiential, not scientifical), the one thing I do know is that the human brain is remarkably adept at finding ways to map pathways and thus it comes as no surprise to me, given the experience of my then wife, that not only muscular movement but increased muscular activity as well – as required by the situation and circumstance – can still occur despite the total extinction of the instinctual passions/the identity in toto (and thus the fright-freeze-fight-flee instinctual reaction). In fact this body operates a whole lot better sans cortisol/adrenaline ... and this has been the case, night and day, for just over twelve years now. * RICHARD: Obviously some other avenue of triggering-off increases in cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilisation, and Glyconeogenesis (provided that what you say further above is accurate) is occurring in this flesh and blood body, non? RESPONDENT: I think that the only way this would be possible is for you to now be utilizing a completely novel hormone signal in every way similar to epinephrine. RICHARD: On what basis do you think that to be ‘the only way’ this flesh and blood body increases cAMP levels, Triacyglcerol mobilisation, and Glyconeogenesis (provided that what you say further above is accurate)? RESPONDENT: That proposal is very far-fetched, however. RICHARD: As it is your proposal – that this flesh and blood body would ‘now be utilizing a completely novel hormone signal in every way similar to epinephrine’ – then what you are finding to be very far-fetched is what you propose (if only because I have repeatedly pointed out that no adrenaline-typical arousal precedes/accompanies increased muscular activity). In other words, how can it possibly be ‘in every way similar’ to adrenaline when there are no adrenaline-similar symptoms? * RICHARD: [Obviously some other avenue ... is occurring in this flesh and blood body] because this is what I do know via self-observation: as there is no identity (no psyche) whatsoever in this flesh and blood body there are no instinctual passions (no fear, no aggression, no nurture, no desire) either – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – thus no such hormones as adrenaline (and cortisol) are being produced. RESPONDENT: I think you may have missed my initial intent of replying to this thread – what I meant to convey with Schacter’s studies was that adrenaline is not necessarily affective. RICHARD: This is what you wrote (in your initial response):
I got your intent that (you have also concluded that) adrenaline is not necessarily affective loud and clear ... what you may have missed is it was not me that said adrenaline is ‘linked to specific emotions’ but some (unnamed) scientists on some (unidentified) television documentaries another subscriber to this mailing list watched. Viz.:
What Peter is saying in the quote is that, because the arising of instinctually-sourced feelings produces a hormonal chemical response in the body (as in, for instance, the fright-freeze-fight-flee reaction), the affective feelings are falsely assumed to be actual when they are not ... as is evidenced in a pure consciousness experience (PCE) where no such feelings exist. RESPONDENT: You can have adrenaline flowing to signal energy needs without an affective response. RICHARD: This is what you went on to say (in your initial response):
Just because a person in a laboratory somewhere has an (adrenaline-typical) arousal from an injection of adrenaline it does not demonstrate that it is not the hormonal chemical response which produces the (instinctually-sourced) feelings: it simply demonstrates that it is handy to bear in mind, on occasions such as this, that a scientist is an identity inhabiting a flesh and blood body ... just as you are. Your conclusion, based upon Mr. Schacter’s conclusion based upon what happened in a laboratory, that I can have ‘adrenaline flowing to signal energy needs without an affective response’ is an assumption so egregious as to be staggering in its magnitude for a person who has advised, in a previous e-mail, that they are a chemist. RESPONDENT: In light of this, your logic is flawed: ‘... thus no such hormones as adrenaline (and cortisol) are being produced’. You cannot conclude such a thing from the fact that you are free of any identity – there is no support for such a correlation. RICHARD: If I may point out? The ‘light’ you are appealing to, in order to justify your
assumption that my reasoning is flawed, is a preposterous RESPONDENT: Fine, you are free of ‘feelings’ ... RICHARD: It is indeed ‘fine’ to be free, not only of feelings but the identity they form themselves into, as the immediate result is, not only the marked absence of an adrenaline-typical arousal, but a remarkable dearth of the trait so common to many an identity/ feeling-encumbered person (which includes scientists) ... to wit: jumping to conclusions which conveniently ignore their role, as a feeling-formed identity, in what occurs. For what is implicit in saying that – if one could be persuaded that an adrenaline arousal is not necessarily affective, as in not sourced in the instinctual passions, and thus adrenaline can flow to signal increased muscular activity without an affective response – is one need not root out the (deemed to be not-instinctual) passions after all in order to bring to an end all the wars and murders and rapes and tortures and domestic violence and child abuse and suicides, and so on, and thus ensure peace and harmony. In short: disassociate the feelings from arousal (by first linking them to arousal and not the other way around) via proving one’s hypothesis, that there is no such correlation, in a laboratory situation with an (artificially) injected substance and ... !Voila! ... QED (case closed). RESPONDENT: ... [Fine, you are free of ‘feelings’] – You have already said that it is a no-brainer that epinephrine can be increased without an affective response, but now ... RICHARD: If I may interject? This is the exchange you are referring to:
What I have ‘already said that it is a no-brainer’ to is that if a person could be persuaded that the arousal they received from an injection of adrenaline was not due to an emotional factor they would not experience it as emotional ... and not that epinephrine (aka adrenaline) ‘can be increased without an affective response’ as you make out. And the reason why I said ‘that would have to be a no-brainer if there ever was’ is because most, if not all, truisms are ... for example:
Truisms can be so trite ... for needless is it to add that an injection-sourced arousal is not, of course, a (instinctually-sourced) feeling arousal? RESPONDENT: ... [You have already said that it is a no-brainer that epinephrine can be increased without an affective response, but now] you are just inventing metabolic pathways to avoid correcting your explanation of the state of your body. RICHARD: Perhaps if the latter part of your sentence was put into the context of what I actually said ‘that would have to be a no-brainer if there ever was’ to then something which will stand you in good stead, not only as a responsive correspondent but as a considerate chemist as well, might become obvious. Viz.:
Put simply: it is your (borrowed) explanation regarding the condition of this body which you are avoiding the correction of that is the issue ... to wit: asserting that the metabolic pathways utilised by normal human beings are still operational in a body actually free from the human condition. Have you ever considered what the phrase ‘peace-on-earth, in this lifetime, for this flesh and blood body’ would mean if it did not include the absence of, not only the instinctually-sourced feelings/identity, but the chemicals they/it persuade the body to produce which results in behaviour both personally insalubrious and socially reprehensible? Just curious.
CORRESPONDENT No. 78 (Part Three) RETURN TO THE ACTUAL FREEDOM MAILING LIST INDEX RETURN TO RICHARD’S CORRESPONDENCE INDEX The Third Alternative (Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body) Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.
Richard's Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust:
1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
