Imagination, will, knowing and comprehension vs. belief and bias


Well, I would say that it’s the other way around, with intuition and intelligence being signs of more consciously expressed imagination, if we’re using the word imagination to refer to the breath and breadth of ourselves as infinity, unlimitedness and veyond…

Also to note, is that there is a massive difference between knowing and knowledge. Knowledge is information. Knowing is being intimately and intuitively aware of the essence, while comprehension is being aware of the details of through which the essence is expressed. Knowing is awareness. Comprehension is a focusing iris. When the heart and mind are in harmony, with each other and with ourselves as soul and spirit, the individual expresses imagination, wisdom and insight, etcetera.


While I see that there are people who are (finally) waking up, in the advent and temporary continuation of this bullshit scamdemic (and likely other scams to come), I also see that for people to fully overcome the plague of belief and religion (blind belief) / cultism (blind belief, propagated through violence and coercion), they are to become aware of the deeper aspects of both the psychology and esoteric aspects of one’s being, as well as other things.

In this article, I want to touch upon some of the more deeply rooted aspects from which stems the desire to put anything at all on a proverbial pedestal, whether something perceived as internal or external.

The mind of a believer or cultist is a deeply traumatized one. Or rather their ego is, for an unconscious individual doesn’t really tap into their genuine mind.

Layers upon layers of trauma, since the moment of birth and sometimes prior, are attempted to be induced in relationship to the person. If the individual, on a soul level, chooses to be or become immune to such ploys, they always do. If the individual chooses to experience that depth of depravity, either for the rest of that particular life, or as a means of experiencing a “hero’s journey” of sorts, with the eventual outcome being that they overcome the hardship and strife, then that’ll be their experience. This happens with or without the ego being aware of it. Most people nowadays are more or less entirely in ego-mode, and thus on that level, they are unaware of the choices they make or have already made. If they choose to rise above that nescience or ignorance, they do.

Everything is always a choice, and the choice is always ours to make.

In terms of how some of those choices play out within the realm of “form”, in this case in the realm of one’s psychology and behaviour, here are some of the traits that pretty much everyone with a belief or belief system to defend expresses. In many ways, belief is the exact opposite of knowing and comprehension, so the part of the solution to overcoming belief is to do the exact opposite of what you’re doing, in whatever regard you have a religious behaviour. Of course, there is nuance and variation, but that’s the general gist of it.

  • Knowing is consistent and evolving, while belief is inconsistent and stagnating.

No matter how much information is presented to someone, exoteric, esoteric, veyond esoteric or of whatever other kind, through the senses or veyond the senses, the cultist almost always derives two patterns of reaction or response, upon having formed a bias about it: blind dismissal (they don’t like their assumption or impression of the thing) or blind admission (they like their assumption or impression of the thing).

That’s about the only consistent element found in belief: ignorance. The desire to maintain a mental or emotional image about something, with which the believer has identified on some level or another. Shattering that belief system would mean destroying their false and illusory “identiteh”. The ego is scared shitless of “new stuff”, especially if they contradict the addictions it’s come to mutilate itself with. The ego perceives shattering its identity to be the equivalent of “death” (which doesn’t exist as people erroneously believe it does, but that’s another topic), like if a larva would be afraid to come out of its cocoon, unaware of the wings and more advanced form it would manifest upon breaking the walls of its shell or prison.

Knowing and comprehension though, and even if we’re talking about the relatively limited and skewed perception called science – which, if we’re using the term to refer not to the cult of “scientism”, but rather to genuine science –  is far more advanced than belief, but there are likewise far more advanced ways of knowing and comprehending, like intuition, intelligence, insight, spiritual awareness, spontaneous knowing, spiritual lucidity, among other things…

So, genuine science and research rely on evidence. What is evidence? Speaking veyond esoterically, evidence and anything that has to do with the erroneously dubbed “external” world, is a way, among many, for the individual to realize things in an indirect fashion through “experience”. Spiritual awareness is knowing and comprehending without the need for experience, because one taps into awareness veyond the manifested form’s perception. Kinda like breaking the fourth wall, so to speak. Funnily enough, if the fourth dimension is “time” (which doesn’t exist except as a measure of focused attention within the realm of perceived “dimensions”), then breaking the fourth wall implies seeing veyond the illusion of so-called “time-space”. I’m curious if that’s what whoever came up with that phrase meant.

Anyway, esoterically and exoterically, evidence is an interpretation of information and knowledge brought about through sensory or veyond-sensory means. Unless an individual being chooses to be infinitely aware of I and we, ourselves as infinite and unlimited consciousness, while still manifesting as an individual within the realm of form, no individual has a monopoly on being either fully right or fully wrong. Besides, being infinitely aware means we’re both all right and all wrong, simultaneously. Choosing to express rightness over wrongness is a focus of attention and a cherry picking of which aspects of ourselves as infinite consciousness we want to manifest in a particular “form”, with expressing the good aspects being obviously preferable over the fucked up ones. Of course, with good tending towards unlimitation and evil tending towards limitation, it’s no surprise that good always triumphs over evil. Besides that, there is not even any “competition”, because evil is self-depraving and doesn’t manage to manifest on its own anyway, while good is always self-elevating and self-evolving, so it always stands and does things on its own. Oh, and another funny bit is that evil, as being what it is, always tends towards scarcity, while good always tends towards abundance, by the very being of good. Thus, there is always infinitely more good than evil in everything.

Anyway, another thing is, evidence can be forged. Biases can come into play, especially if egos are involved. Even without that, different people have different ways and manifested aptitudes for disseminating and interpreting information, of varying veracity and intricacy at any particular point in their lives. Things can be seen as accurate when they are not, or inaccurate when they are accurate. They can also be rightly discerned as right or wrong. Information can be incomplete, but erroneously believed to be the opposite. Even if the information is “complete”, that is relative to the “puzzle piece” perspective to which it is compared. There is more to the puzzle than any puzzle piece, and there is more to everything than any particular imagery. Imagery, while fun and artistic, is still “form”. I and we are in-form and veyond form.

Besides that, what is “complete”? For something to be seen as “complete”, it needs to manifest a definite beginning and end. In other words, all “complete” information is “finite” by its very definition. In other words, illusory.

I and we are infinite consciousness. No beginning and no end of any kind, no limits nor limitations of any kind. Therefore, I and we do not begin with anything.

I and we always and already are everything and everythingness… I and we are all and always free and freedom, imagination, will and intent… infinity, unlimitedness and veyond… among other things…

Everything is always a choice, and the choice is always ours to make.

The illusion of “form” is manifested when we choose to cherry pick particular aspects of ourselves as infinity, and then create a stage to roleplay those “forms”, “stories” and “characters” which constitute the “reality” of our in-form or individual experiences. The point is to live the experience, but likewise remember who we are veyond it.

As for discernments, sometimes they can be right, but the means of having reached them, wrong. Other times, the discernments may be wrong, but the means genuine and good. Of course, the more genuine the means and intent, the more likely the discernment is to be right.

Through such genuineness, one can see that evidence is therefore an interpretation, which is based on perceived or conceived knowledge. As such, evidence is completely derived from what one is already aware or perceptive of, in some way, shape or form. How does one derive evidence about things they do not currently perceive, or even worse, don’t even manage to conceive of, at whatever point in their incarnate life? Or, in other words, what evidence does a blind man have of light? Does the light not exist, just because their body-vehicle doesn’t see it? Of course it still exists.

What evidence does a five-sense ego-mind have of knowledge that involves more than five senses to be recognized? What evidence does any level of perception-awareness have, about things veyond the realms of form and illusion? None at all, basically. Well, not through perception or evidence-based research, which are fine and dandy for deriving more refined impressions about the already-known or already-perceived, but doesn’t do much in terms of expanding awareness veyond that.

However, that’s where intuition and intelligence, imagination and creativity, as well as spirituality and wisdom come into play..

Intuition, in-tuition, is inner learning and inner knowledge. People sometimes erroneously use the term to refer to “gut instinct” or reflexive associations derived from repetitious exposure to particular stimuli and then having a sensory response; which is just body-level reflex – useful for deriving motor skills, and perhaps marginally when it comes to deducing behavioural patterns in case you’re interacting with people or entities who still operate on ego, and thus fall into “categories”, but kinda useless once we tap into non-linear feeling and thinking, and veyond.

Anyway, genuine intuition is remembrance and knowing of who I and we always and already are as freedom, infinity, unlimitedness and veyond, etcetera, while genuine intelligence is questioning and comprehending the awareness. Non-linear and veyond form, among other things…

The heart is the knower, while the mind is the comprehender. The heart sees everything, but without the mind, its vision is kinda blurry. The mind is like a focusing iris, seeing things sharply and in detail, but without the heart, it doesn’t really go anywhere beyond the breadth of what is already thinks it knows. When the mind and heart come together in harmony and excellence, in awareness, knowledge, comprehension, recognition and beingness with ourselves as soul and spirit, consciousness and so on, then both the vision and the focus become clear and vivid, utterly unbound.

So, part of what I’m saying is that spiritual awareness and wisdom are greater than science, and that science is greater than belief. Indeed, just as the mind grows in conjunction with the heart, and intelligence with intuition, so does genuine science grow in conjunction with spirituality and wisdom. For that to occur, one is to shatter all belief, and make the choice to always question everything.

The more we know, the more we know, how much more there is to know.

The more we question, the more we know… and the more we know, the more we question, and so on… thus, through spirit, intuition, intelligence, etc, we question, remember, know and comprehend… among other things…

  • Consistencies and inconsistencies, part two

Consistency, in this context, means imagination,will and intent, creativity, persistence, vigilance and a drive to always learn, improve, create and evolve. Questioning everything and being willing to admit both when we are right and wrong, are essential to expanding awareness.

While we change our methods and discernments as we grow and elevate our awareness, knowledge and comprehension, what remains consistent is the creative drive and imaginative will to always question, know and comprehend all the more, with no attachment whatsoever to what we might discover; or rather, remember.

In contrast, belief is all about maintaining an image. Belief poses no other question, other than how to maintain its current identity.

Even though it was blatantly obvious before as well, in the “covid-19” scamdemic period, it became all the more easier for pretty much anyone with even a semblance of a mind of their own, to see who’s a piece of shit cultist and who isn’t.

“The virus is totally real!!! It’s so deadly!!! It really spreads from person to person like wildfire!!! Germs cause disease!!! AAAH!!!”

Oh, really? Did you look into the matter yourself? Did you study health and many other areas of knowledge, from an eclectic variety of sources, including those you disagree with or don’t like? More importantly, are you expressing your own intuition and intelligence to derive discernments of your own?

Most of the time, in terms of my experiences thus far, I’ve encountered these types of brainwashed cultists, when it comes to the issue at hand (although this applies to pretty much any context where there is a belief system):

  1. The retards – the ones who blindly believe what the media and slave farm tell them, and promote it. This includes “academic” morons who are ignorant about having let themselves indoctrinated, as well as the typical diaper-sniffing zombie, fuck-up and coward.
  2. The shills – the ones who know it’s bullshit, but promote it anyway. This includes the media and the sellout shill “doctors” and “scientists”, who operate like cult priests rather than actual doctors or scientists.
  3. The non-malicious, but gullible and lazy – the ones who sort of smell the bullshit, but fall into a hegelian dialectic ploy that still forwards the same agenda or belief, as part of controlled opposition. These people may have gone through the academic system.

For example, the “it was created in a lab” shtick, which still promotes the idea that germs “infect” and kill people. No, they don’t. No matter where you think it came from, if the thing in question isn’t actually a thing (or at least isn’t as portrayed), you’re still letting yourself duped.

Read these books on that, as well as others – you can find them on . Sources referred to therein.

“The Answer” – by David Icke

“The Contagion Myth – Why Viruses (Including Coronavirus) Don’t Cause Disease” – by Thomas S. Cowan and Sally Fallon

“What Really Makes You Ill? Why Everything You Knew About Disease Is Wrong” – by David Parker and Dawn Lester

“The Invisible Rainbow” – by Arthur Firstenberg

“Natural Cures They Don’t Want You To Know About” – by Kevin Trudeau

Anyway, always question everything, etc, etc.

  • Actual analogy, allegory or comparison, versus false equivalency

We can talk endlessly about philosophy and how we’re infinite and unlimited consciousness, which is very beautiful and something that I very much love to do, as well as about how all form is illusion. That said, we did come here to experience the illusion for a reason. If we thought it was pointless to have this in-form experience, we wouldn’t fuckin’ be here. So, in that sense, live the roleplay and be involved, but don’t be blinded by it; not by anything.

With regards to the illusion of comparison, and making various discernments about the differences and similarities between things, as well as referring to different concepts veyond words and imagery, through means of words and imagery that we interpret as being at least vaguely reminiscent of what we’re actually looking to communicate, there is such a thing as analogy and allegory.

For an analogy, allegory, or comparison to accurately portray or contrast that which it is meant to associate or disassociate with (by means of apotheosis), then it needs to either have significant enough similarity or intense enough contrast to actually get the fuckin’ point across.

A false equivalency is something that pretends to do that, but actually doesn’t.

An example of a false equivalency or bullshit argument: “Oh, b-but surgeons wear masks all the time…”

So fuckin what?! Firstly, it’s an entirely different context. Secondly, surgeons don’t wear it to prevent “infectious diseases”, but rather to prevent sweating, drooling or spitting from entering the open wound of the patient, or from having puss, blood or some other bodily fluid splash across their face. Thirdly, they don’t wear it when they don’t actually conduct an operation! Fourthly, they are mentally and emotionally prepared and aware of the health risks involved in wearing masks for extended periods of time, and often do something outside the operating room to compensate. They eat well, go on long vacations, engage in exercise, live in well ventilated or rural areas, etcetera, etcetera. Fifthly, varying from area to area, they don’t do it daily or, again, when they’re not fuckin’ operating!

That bullshit “b-but surgeons” party-line is like saying “well, people who work in nuclear power plants and handle plutonium… well, they’re wearing hazmat suits when they’re in the reactor, so why don’t we wear hazmat suits in daily life?”

That’s the level of ignorance and stupidity that some people exhibit nowadays. When you hear people say stuff like: “Well, my mom or grandma is old, and she is susceptible to viral infections, so…”

Was she wearing a face-diaper during any of the yearly flu seasons, prior to this year?

“Um… no…”

Even if she was, that’d mean she was just as ignorant and cowardly then, as she’s been this year. What is being dubbed as a “virus” doesn’t cause disease. Use your own fuckin’ discernment.

Anyway, fear and cowardice are what drive the cultists’ behaviour, for as long as they have that retarded mentality. Which they can easily rise above, if they so choose. A choice that would actually imply having a spine, as well as some self-love and self-respect.

Here’s another example of a false equivalency: “Oh, b-but I did my own studies, and I saw viruses in a laboratory! I saw them wiggle around in the platter! Then, when the vaccine was administered, antibodies showed up! Viruses are real and they are deadly! Vaccines totally work!”

No, you saw poisoned and genetically altered micro-organisms in a platter and you saw them interact with each other, in a sterile and non-natural environment. Then, you interpreted that interaction through the lens of a deliberately erroneous narrative concocted by a branch of the slave farm (the pharmaceutical cartels), which is meant to (on the surface) profit off of sick people and long-term to make the attempt at degrading the human genome (longer story, spanning since “ancient times”).

Also, the alleged covid-19 has yet to be identified or isolated.

“Lolololololol, of course it has!”

You know this, how? By reading a headline? Or did you actually look up the papers, none of which demonstrate its actual existence as a unique entity of its own? What about the now relatively many earnest doctors and independent journalists who actually looked into the matter, asked for the evidence that it exists, even offered upwards of 10.000 to 500.000 dollars to anyone who can demonstrate that the alleged “covid-19 virus” causes disease, or even that it has been isolated and separated from the genetic material.

What you have is a PCR test, which isn’t meant to test for or isolate individual viruses or diagnose “infectious diseases”, by the very means through which it works (cycles of amplification) and its large error margin the more you increase those cycles, and some general symptom based diagnosis – symptoms that can be there for a host of different reasons, and which can imply numerous other diseases; oh, and some of which diseases have magically either been cured or have been drastically reduced this year… when somewhat fewer people seem to have died in general compared to last year, both worldwide and in my own country. Pandemic, right? Fuck off.

I mean, I could go on and on about how the numbers are faked, how 5G and electro-pollution, distorted frequencies play into all this, but that’s another topic.

Anyway, another false equivalency: “Well, I saw a virus during a study about some other disease, years ago! This one definitely exists, too!”

That’s like saying “I heard on the news that Santa Claus is now a mass murderer! Mass murderers exist, so it must be true! Quick! Put Misses Claus’ used tampons on your face, and then Santa won’t get you!”

Just because murderers (or alleged murderers, in case of “viruses”) exist, doesn’t mean that Santa is a killer, nor that anyone dressed in a seasonal outfit is a murderer, if they walk by someone’s house when they’re killed by their spouse or drop a soup pot on their foot.

Could the man or woman in the outfit be a murderer? Perhaps, but the premise alone that they were near your house when hit your toes against the side of the door, does not mean they are to blame for that. Whether or not they are, it’s for different reasons, which should be investigated without bias or attachment to what you might find. That’s what “viruses” do. They’re “there”, with or without the person being sick by the way, but they’re not what causes disease.

Then, on a more personal note, here’s a more egregious false equivalency. I was talking to someone about how the scamdemic and bullshit censorship that’s going on are also a cover-up, for the rising wave of information coming out about pedophilia and child trafficking going on behind closed doors, and how basically everyone working in the slave-farm institutions are either doing it, condoning it and knowingly supporting it, or are unwitting accomplices.

This person got into tantrum-mode all of a sudden, likely because her ego doesn’t want to acknowledge that she and basically everyone who funnels any amount of money into the system (let’s say by paying “taxes”, which is just an emasculated term for theft and slavery – the only extortion fee I pay at this time is the VAT and inflation, which comes from just using federal money; in that sense, we’re all basically contributing more or less to maintaining the slave-farm, although some of us are actually doing something to thwart that, by actually exposing it and standing up against it, building something new, looking to go off-grid, growing our own food, etc, etc)…

Anyway, so she was adamant that “covid really, really exists and is totally isolated, and I promise there’s proof”, but after I showcased some arguments and information about how it’s all connected and why and so on, she just went all: “Show me a video of bill clinton or the [retarded bitch] of England, or [cuck-bitch-boy] Charles fucking a kid! Naow!”

Not gonna relay the whole discussion here, but when I told her that there aren’t any that I managed to find and that they probably wouldn’t be so careless as to actually film themselves doing it, she went all: “Ah-ha! See, you don’t have direct, in-your-face proof that they’re doing it! But, you say they did do it! Why don’t you apply that to covid, too? Huh? Huuh?!”

Usually, I would’ve been enraged by this… I mean, I was, but in light of her having thus far shown some signs of seeing through the bullshit and realizes there’s something afoot, and that she has at least taken the first steps towards improving herself as an individual (longer story), I just shook my head and sighed at her, with both pity at her ignorance, as well as with patience either knowing, thinking or assuming that she’s willing to outgrow her then-expressed stupidity.

Why is her argument a false equivalency?

For one, the inconsistency of her own “methodology” and criteria. If you know you know something, or at least are confident in your arguments or evidence, you’re not gonna have a fit of perceived “triumph” if you believe someone makes the same mistakes as you do.

Like, let’s say you know you have footage of Santa Claus (or someone dressed as such) actually murdering someone else; and information, direct, indirect, eclectic and anectodal alike, to discern or at least deduce that, most likely, the video in question is not a fake and the murder is not a misinterpretation; and, you of course question it as well, but decide to take action with regards to the current impression, which is that the guy is indeed a murderer.

Let’s say someone else comes to you and conveys much information about why someone else is also a murderer, both through linear and non-linear deduction and discernment, with documents, emails, leaked stuff, conceptual and contextual knowledge, the individual and their target’s history, how it relates to a heap of other stuff, both immediately related and seemingly unconnected (but actually deeply intertwined)… but they don’t produce an 80K, HDR, FPS video showing the person committing the murder.

Would you immediately burst with jubilant glee and draw the erroneous conclusion that they’re totally wrong, because they don’t have that particular video to show you? Most likely, you wouldn’t.

That is, unless your main point of tension in that conversation was that you knew you didn’t know for sure if Santa is a murderer, and you knew that not only didn’t you catch or even witness Santa killing the person, but you don’t even have footage of Santa at all. If you knew all that, but you still wanted to desperately believe that Santa is a murderer, because you believe you saw that other guy seemingly commit murder all those years back… then you would be jubilant, because you now believe you have a way out of having your belief shatter, and a way to misdirect the conversation towards other things. Or, you think the person would assume that you’re also doing just as diligent research, just that you also don’t have said footage. Or, you’d delude yourself into believing that you’re being diligent, when you’re actually a lazy-ass bitch.

As an aside, comparing the pedophilia thing to the scamdemic thing, the main element in common in both investigations (regarding the topic of this section of the article) is that there is no direct footage of the accused actually doing the act in the most obvious way, that even an amoeba would see it for what it is.

  • Here’s a few key differences between the two areas of investigation

Scamdemic: If the alleged “virus” has indeed been isolated, evidence should be easy to produce. You claimed you isolated it. It’s something you claimed to have done, yourself (talking about the institutions in question, here, who still claim that the “evidence is not available”). Why is it “not available”, when someone asks for it directly from them? Did the virus isolate itself from its own existence? Is the virus also scared shitless of the so-called “pandemic”, like the zombie hordes?

Damn, that’s one hell of a pandemic, if the very virus that allegedly produced it doesn’t wanna go anywhere near it. Maybe the “coronavirus” got infected and died off when people weren’t lookin’. Was it put on a ventilator, though? What if the virus died of something else and got mislabeled as “died from itself”? But, wait! What if it committed suicide? Then, the diagnosis would be accurate by mistake. Actually, what if the flu murdered covid? Oh, wait… it looks to be the other way around, doesn’t it? Or maybe it’s all just a scam and they’re faking the numbers by deliberately re-branding existing diseases. That seems more likely.

Get your shot of mercury and aborted kids, kids! Why not indulge in some cannibalism, while you’re poisoning yourself, huh? With a sprinkling of nano-bots and a dash of DNA splicing. NO! Fuck that shit!

Viruses are the main cause of disease, yes? If so, then why doesn’t everyone get sick when in contact with people who are sick of something allegedly contagious? Immune systems of varying strength, you say? Plausible. Then, why do many people with allegedly fucked up immune systems not get sick, or handle disease far better than other people with allegedly okay immune systems?

Pedophilia: A whole web of people, secret societies, entities both human and non-human, history and information not found in the indoctrination centers called “schools”, data that is deliberately hidden from the masses, information is connected across all aspects of society, exoteric and esoteric practices, etc.

Which, of course, can be easily overcome. All obstacles are meant to be surpassed. Stop feeding the system, expose it and be who you genuinely are, no matter what.

Scamdemic: Virtually all eclectic and anecdotal information (that I’ve so far come across), regarding the scamdemic directly and other conspiratorial, as well as other things, point to it being a complete and utter scam.

Pedophilia and child abuse investigations: Virtually all eclectic and anecdotal information (again, that I’ve looked at so far), as well as other things, point to there being a parasitic cult of little bitches, human and non-human alike, that uses psychological manipulation and minimum of knowledge more advanced than what’s publicly available, to deceive the general population.

No matter, though. We are the ones responsible for having let them do their bullshit. We are the ones responsible for overcoming it. And we will, and we are, both individually and as a species. As souls, we’re already way, waaay above them. As spirit and consciousness, well, we’re not susceptible to “time” and “space”, nor any bullshit.

  • Intricacy versus vagueness

Look, the human body is rather complex and intricate, and much more than that, all the aspects of ourselves that are veyond the so-called “physical” realm.

There’s the meta-“physical” and non-“physical”, the etheric, astral and ethereal realms, the linear, meta-linear, veyond-linear and non-linear, etcetera. The uni-multi-hyper-omni-dimensional-versal realms. There are infinities of “realities” (story-realms) and meta-“realities” (the spiritual writer’s room or painter’s shack, or rather an infinite valley because it’s an infinitely open “space”, so to speak, where we are aware of all realities and aspects of our being, while still manifesting in the realm of “form” to some extent).

Then, there is the veyond-form self, the infinite and unlimited “I am”.

Point being, yes, there is infinite intricacy in everything. However intricacy is not the same as complexity, which is not the same as complication.

Complication is something simplex dressed up in a lot of fluff. Academics who come up with a bajillion fancy words to “answer” a question they don’t know the answer to, is an example of a dishonest complication. Hubris is a complication.

Complexity is something intricate, manifested in a form that does something in an easy or effortless fashion. If an artist knows his or her craft very well, and also expresses love and care for what they do, they can make the process of self-expression through painting seem to be a fluke. It seems simple, but it’s actually effortlessness brought about by complexity.

There is a massive difference between intricacy and vagueness. Intricacy, in the context in question, means knowing and comprehending that which we are espousing, while also being open to elevating our awareness. Sometimes, it may be more relevant to express an idea through means of several books or other media. Other times, it’s more relevant to express it through an honest, child-like smile, or a painting, or a song, or whatever else.

Vagueness is when you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about, but you’re being dishonest about it and you don’t want to admit it to yourself.

I find it tragically amusing how cultists or people who desperately cling to a belief system, if asked to elaborate why they believe what they do, they’ll be super specific and detailed in their explanation, but when that explanation is confronted with information that contradicts or challenges it, they either go on a temper tantrum (which is to be distinguished from conscious rage and fury) or suddenly become vague and contradict what they said moments ago.

Example: “Viruses are totally real and they are transamittable. Look at all this mainstream, “officially” sponsored study (sellout garbage, most of the time).”

You talk to them about the intricacies of nature, how extrapolating lab results (genetically altered samples, in an unnatural, isolated, sterile environment, with arbitrary and often erroneous criteria) and generalizing your impression of nature around that is an utter fallacy, what with nature being interconnected and definitely not sterile.

You explain and elaborate upon alternative viewpoints and potentialities, in depth and details, to such an extent that even they admit that they don’t know it all, and that viruses and germs, as well as health itself and basically everything, isn’t what’s being propagated by the “mainstream” narrative. In that moment, the person seems pensive and actually inquisitive.

Then, you tell them once again: “Therefore, doesn’t it seem likely that viruses aren’t what they claim they are? Or that they don’t cause disease? Or that they haven’t actually isolated this one, nor demonstrated it or any other to actually be a major cause of disease, if at all? Are you willing to question things more?”

“Pfft, it’s totally real and transmissible!” Said the cultist, foaming at the mouth, as if having completely forgotten what we just talked about.

Once they express some manner of coherence again, and then you ask them to elaborate upon their own claims and why they think they’re accurate, they more or less immediately start gas-lighting, changing the topic, misdirecting and going on a tangent and so on.

So, how do you know “covid” has been isolated and demonstrated to cause disease?

“Pfft, what? Do you think all doctors have gone mad?!”

Mad? No. Cultist pieces of trash, though? Well, a significant enough majority have already been that way, although there are many who range from “not complete fuck ups” to actually good people. You didn’t answer the question, though.

In the event of an actual discussion, they eventually seem to mentally and emotionally come to terms with the idea that they don’t actually know, because it’s a party line they memorized, instead of a discernment they actually came upon, themselves.

In this case, the person either earnestly ponders on the information and decides to learn more, or they start going on a bullshit spree, where they go all “Ooh, but it’s such a intricate and advanced issue, and let’s all love each other and…”

Yes, it is intricate. Yes, we should love ourselves and each other. You, however, are only using those words as a means of obfuscating your ignorance, from yourself.

Likewise when I wanted to show them videos with a naked kid climbing out of a room in buckingham palace, before falling off the sheet-rope, filmed by someone on the street with a cell phone,  or testimonies of abused children or survivors of MK-Ultra, like Cathy O’Brien and many others; the whole pizzagate thing, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, the Clintons and Bushes, the Red Shoe Society, the Podestas, the rothchilds, rockefeller and morgans, as well as those behind them, including basically all “royal” (little cuck bitch parasites) psychopaths and retards…

Yeah, the immediate reaction, without even actually looking at the information itself, was “Nah, that’s just stuff taken out of context.”

At that point, I just shook my head in disgust and pity for them, but at the same time it’s worth noting that…

  • The more someone clings to a belief, the less confident they are about it

The more desperation someone expresses towards something, the less they actually know about that particular something. Fear is born from ignorance, and ignorance feeds the fear.

On some level, the cultists or “believers” know that they don’t actually know, and that something is wrong about their approach, but they’re too wrapped up in their own ego and hubris to admit it to themselves. The whole reason for the constant and addiction-based repetition of “mantras”, the incessant ritualistic behaviour and petty hissy fits at something that’s different from what they want to believe, stems from the reason that they either have little to no confidence in what they’re saying; or sometimes they know they’re bullshitting, but don’t want to admit it.

What’s the cure for belief, and essentially every illness? Stop lying. Be genuine and fearless.

Rebellion, courage, honesty and defiance, are through what we always expand awareness, knowledge and comprehension, and thus express more and more of our genuine spirituality, creativity, intuition and intelligence, etc.

Nobody and nothing has a “higher claim” (nor any claim, whatsoever) to our lives than we do.

There can be no “chosen” ones. Only I and we can save ourselves, and only I and we are responsible for doing so. All pain and suffering are always self-inflicted, and all evolution and elevations are always self-facilitated. By us, from us, with ourselves, individually, infinitely and unlimitedly and in every way whatsoever, as well as veyond the very notion and concept of ways.

Freedom is never given. Freedom is never taken.

I and we are all and always free and freedom, imagination, will and intent… infinity, unlimitedness and veyond… among other things…

Everything is always a choice, and the choice is always ours to make.

MUAAAH, HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4 thoughts on “Imagination, will, knowing and comprehension vs. belief and bias

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back To Top