Spirituality, philosophy, and mind-manipulation in academia?
I have become quite interested in the intersection between let's say spirituality/spiritual manipulation/spiritual mind-control, political mind control, and left-wing academic/educational mind control. It's a bit hard to get at, but I strongly suspect there is something there. For one thing, I go to a university where the teacher who is the most creepy-culty-indoctrinatey-type teacher I've ever had (a psychology teacher, with a particularly dogmatic/brainwashy attitude around radical gender ideology stuff) also was revealed by another teacher to be a former Satan worshipper (which she told him in turn she wished he hadn't shared and basically that she wanted him to keep it a secret going forward). Obviously that's just an anecdote but it struck a chord with me somehow. Another data point I have in this area is the connection between Alfred Kinsey, an academic who seemed to want to disrupt agreed upon norms around sex/masturbation in the culture and who also had some sort of creepy connection to Allister Crowley, who though I'm no expert seems to be basically some kind of dark occultist/possible satanist and who also had his own unconventional sex stuff going on.
I also watched the show "The Sinner" recently and it was kind of fascinating to see these very particular ideas around "transcending"/subverting morality/right-and-wrong show up so explicitly within the context of what seems to me to be left-wing propaganda while also of course containing pro-queer propaganda as part of that (season 3 of The Sinner literally is about showing parallels between queerness and being a murderous amoral person who is deep into the Nietzschean philosophy of "transcending" right and wrong and seems to basically subtly/perniciously make the case that both are good and wise and spiritual and cool actually and if you question that you are an ignorant, an idea further propped up at the beginning of season 4 if you wanna get the full effect).
This idea of subverting fundamental metaphysical binaries seems to be showing up in the culture/zeitgeist both in terms of blurring the lines between right and wrong and in terms of blurring the lines between male and female in the same kind of weird parallel motion and it seems to me to be coming down through systems of education and mainstream media and also maybe to some extent through therapy/the field of psychology (at least this is a hypothesis I have in regards to psychology).
I also think it is interesting to notice that foucault, who seems to be largely responsible for getting people to question the idea of truth as a valid concept in universities, also buys into and spreads his version of being "beyond" a good and evil binary while probably also being a pedophile... this may be a false inference I suppose but you can seemingly/arguably look at his arguments as a defense of pedophilia as not being wrong/bad. It seems like maybe there's a broader/deeper thing going on there too with French-philosophers-who-subvert-basic-truth-reality-and-morality-norms also being pedophiles/involved with pedophilia. I'll admit I need to look into this more.
Anyway, Nietzche and Foucault are obviously both pretty anti-God so there's your tie in with the spiritual dimension there.
It seems to me that there is some kind of pattern here and I just am wanting to know if there's any other data-points in this area y'all might be aware of? Thanks in advance to everyone who responds. I love you all.
a) ones consent (want or not want) towards suggested idealism shapes binary conflict (want vs not want) within ones mind/memory...this conflict is called "reason".
b) the foundation of IDEA (form; look of a thing) implies flow aka shaping of a formed thing to look at.
Being implies solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death), while ones consent to a suggested -ism tempts one to hold onto solid, while ignoring fluid.
PHI (want of) LO (logic/reason + logos/word) SOPHY (knowledge)
Knowledge implies perceivable (need); reasoning (want vs not want) implies over suggested. Ones consent to suggested (word) tempts one to ignore perceivable (sound), hence falling for spell-craft.
Suggested pattern (outline) tempts one to ignore being (life) within line (inception towards death).
a) suggested points (progressivism) imply end of sentence...consenting to it tempts one to ignore being sentenced to life.
b) wanting (suggested) tempts one to ignore needing (perceivable) aka KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists"...not the suggestions by others about it. Suggested tempts one to ignore self discernment as partial (perception) within whole (perceivable).
c) ones consent to suggested gives others the permission to define (idolatry); redefine (revisionism) and contradict (talmudic reasoning) the suggested information at will.
Nature doesn't suggest information; it moves perceivable inspiration towards each ones perception. The former tempts one to "want" to hold onto; while the latter inspires one to discern the "need" to let go of.
Sorry I don't follow
Free will is just some Bot that always comments like that. You can ignore it.