A difficult question. An interesting topic I think.
"The auditory hallucinations of Socrates, which he attributed to a god (Apollo) and the interrupt his words or his actions, look for doctors Nineteenth century, with symptoms of insanity. Indeed, stories about some episodes of his life describe inexplicable behavior, such as the fact of interrupting a discussion, act as if alone, then resume the conversation as if nothing had happened. "
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrate
Thus the origin of philosophy would be the psychosis of a schizophrenic homme.Socrate, it is my intuition, a reality because I feel I understand his behavior or some of them. A psychosis that seems to have been diagnosed in his case. Yes but why this killing?
The denial of a crime, it is known ... Why and how the murder of Socrates? First through egregore screenings, slander, ridicule, insults, slander and libel .... until the trial for the killing.
Schizophrenia Socrates is visible to all, it gets worse with time. At first, it is not perceived as dangerous, but as an original, angry at a sharp tongue, etc. ... But it disturbs, it reads and souls and messages ... A person to be eliminated. The egregore those who wanted to eliminate it have been very successful to make it. The worst Counsel for Socrates? Itself! Further proof of his schizo real. Why do they project normal to a schizo they identify so easily?
The question is: Why does she feel Athens Socrates as a danger to sentence him to death? Well, this "idiot" from schizo,
, I joke, I joke, (you can laugh at yourself, right?) Wants to defend himself and he is not aware or too good to be the worst lawyer possible. Even his accusers were better lawyers than Socrates himself to defend himself. Was condemned and asked to fix their own pain. We do not want to condemn him to death then. This "idiot" will answer that he wants to be rewarded! It takes the death penalty. The question that Socrates was seeking? Or seeking the invisible behind Socrates?
At what point projections are normal in Athens it a real crime against Socrates, with a clear aim to "kill", to eliminate it? From the very beginning. Socrates schizo understood right away what it was and he develops his symptoms as a protection to say: "I am innocent." Was it so innocent is that?
In the indictment, he was accused of corrupting the youth, of not respecting the gods of the city, etc. ... All Is it wrong in this indictment?
more questions:
1. Aristophanes mocks Socrates openly in his plays with an intention to "kill". Yet his plays show enough is a humanist. So for this deliberate intention to "kill" Socrates? For what does he feel in danger?
2. Socrates did he not cause the situation itself. What idea to be crowned as the wisest man in Greece by the oracle of Delphi? Well, he's not making the request, but the result is the same: it is a form of provocation.
3. And why Socrates is attacking you it these vipers as Jesus would take Sophists the Pharisees. Is it free by doing this?
4. What is the degree of manipulation of the Invisible on Socrates? The normal
are they aware of their desire to kill? Yes, and even premeditated!
Good in their laws they do not risk anything, except ... But what do they protect themselves by doing this? From schizoaffective or invisible behind the schizo?
Socrates was accused of not honoring as it should be the gods of Athens. It is therefore seen as heretical. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/H% C3% A9r% C3% A9tique
This does not deserve the death penalty in Athens, except that Socrates leads the judges in his conviction. He wants to be rewarded, not punished. He has only good for his city! Al Capone also said that he had done well in Chicago. What would have happened if Jesus and Socrates had access to treatment for Schizophrenia?
In the case of Jesus and Socrates, you can see on the formation of a egregore fatal. It starts with taunts, insults, provocations and this only grow for one purpose, kill! The solution requires the elimination of schizo inconvenient.
Their stories are very similar unequivocal. Early in his ministry, Jesus is happy, he spoke of the kingdom of heaven, the Beatitudes. In the end it only to defend themselves against attacks that fly from all sides. Socrates did not expect such a trial that he finds absurd, baseless, except that this trial actually kills. This is reality, not as secondary problems would have us believe that normal people know very well what they are doing when this process projection-interlock egregore-fatal assassination (no matter how often a slow, characteristic of a egregore). The facts are there!
The key is behind the schizophrenic, as he sees or hears, which gives clear guidelines and accurate and that the normal does not see or hear: the invisible which is connected to the schizo. Do they seek to kill or to understand their ways?
For me Jesus and Socrates are trapped by the invisible sink and increasingly in private contact with the invisible. This isolates them from growing in the world and the city. They do realize how much more they cause normal. Hatred grows and is expressed during the trial. Sentenced to death, they feel abandoned by the invisible. As an alarm clock. Can schizo gets over and they turn to invisible to find salvation in a promise, just before dying.
It is not about theories but to build on for two famous examples from their cases, there is a vast literature, to draw useful elements for better understanding. To do this, I'm nothing of spiritual or philosophical side and I remain with schizophrenia that seems obvious in the case of Jesus and Socrates. Here
example, a first observation:
1. BEWARE OF INFORMATION YOU IN REAL INVISIBLE! Ask yourself the question of whether the invisible not trying to trick you that way.
2. It follows why most of the schizophrenic made inroads into the invisible, the more he sinks into his schizophrenia until irreversible.
issues they are in themselves a form of answers? It is not possible to answer by saying this is the truth. It is only possible to answer by saying this is an assumption and nothing else. It has the merit of being written and to be questionable. What is this assumption? It gives a kind of benefit to normal explanation for their criminal behavior. They have no access to the Invisible, but understand that it has a schizoaffective direct and privileged access. The normal are jealous. reread the Gospels and the words of the doctors of Israel
"God will speak to you, which is nothing, and we who are doctors, who know the scriptures, who respect the laws and commandments, He does not speak! "
This same type of natural jealousy against Socrates that we should remember that it was consecrated by the oracle of Delphi as the wisest man in Greece. Then the normal and want to know is why he will "tickle" the schizo. But as they often refer schizos harsh words, uncompromising lyrics that come from the invisible, in fact, the normal and quickly get upset hatred grows. The normal wanted hypocritical praise, all that pleases the powerful in society or it's part of the ritual of power. Except that the schizo as it retransmits what it receives from the invisible visible and it has very little regard for where those who are powerful in this illusion alive in this world. From there, the schizo sealed his fate. Good advice: beware of the invisible if you live long! (Just kidding ..)
The problem of schizophrenia is actually a problem to many. Let me explain:
1. His informative coming from the invisible is true.
2. more it connects to the invisible, the more is schizophrenic.
3. more it connects to the invisible, the more it disconnects from reality and others.
4. more it disconnects the normal, more than this, as if they were interested in the attack.
5. as the invisible speaks a different language, to serve as schizo translator for converting the non-life language in the invisible (often a very informative pure) language of life (often descriptive) except that it only involved him in trouble.
In conclusion, many schizos realized it was better to be silent, invisible except that pushes them ....
What we see in the lives of people with schizophrenia likely Jesus and Socrates, is how normauxpathes push them to their extreme limits until the death "legalized" for access to the invisible. Watch what happens next. How many tens of thousands of pounds, if not hundreds of thousands have they not been written about Jesus or Socrates. Like what, for thousands of years later, normauxpathes always arise the question: What was behind these schizophrenics. They will never have the answer since they removed the door that allowed access. Any intelligence normauxpathes ....
So they were alive, they were laughing schizos, they were not taken seriously, or generated incredible hatred against them. Once dead, they are appreciated and loved ....
Certainly, will understand the normal!
It is highly likely that the prophets of Israel were schizos must even wonder if that little people do not have a predisposition to schizophrenia, which could be verified statistically, they lack no good doctors in Israel. If you look even in the case of Muhammad, he suffered a brain abnormality, he recognizes himself by saying he is not an element e revelation that is done without pain in his head. It even seems that he may die at the end of it. Schizophrenia is it the basis of religion "revealed?". Religions or are they schizophrenic?
A related intuition? Yes, to understand the meaning. A poltergeist is not a hallucination, it is a physical reality, it is measurable. Intuition comes to understand its meaning. In fact, I'm facing a real mystery. I have only questions, no real answer. A trust was established with the Mask of Divinity Without Face, I do not know who she really is, except it has a lot of humor and is able to do in reality Physical amazing things. But even if I have faith in this contact from the unseen, I keep my distance and I remain very cautious. I always check and I never accept anything without checking and wondering where the invisible is coming really. I think this is one of the great dangers of schizophrenia, one in which the schizo is facing a real informative from the invisible. What he really lose his head over it goes ahead ...
Other project and constantly distort ... therefore they can not really understand. to understand, we must remain as neutral as possible, do not be swayed, especially by oneself, what is worse, etc. .... It is a Athanatos and all Athanatos can affect physical reality dramatically and totally incomprehensible in the current state of our modest knowledge of physical reality, which we know scarcely more than 5% and still ....
must remain modest, and just take it very cool and as neutral as possible, or even humor, without taking ourselves seriously. this bcp already .... Physical reality is a reality observable and measurable, not so hallucinatory. in fact anyone can observe and measure ... except ... the changes are intentional and that intention comes from a Athanatos and therefore that the real intent is it not observable or measurable. only the consequences are observable, but with Athanatos should always remain cautious about everything.
For example, in the trial of Socrates, the main accusation is made, but it is question of fact to accuse Socrates of having caused the ruin of Athens. This comes from the fact that Alcibiades was a disciple of Socrates and Alcibiades is the same who had advocated the disastrous Sicilian expedition. Why so Socrates was the wisest man in Greece, did nothing to stop you it Alcibiades to launch his city into an adventure dangerous? This is where he is accused of having corrupted the youth and considered responsible for the misfortunes. The accusation is not false. And that is why we must be wary of Athanatos, "messages", the informative, especially if they are true because WE DO NOT KNOW THE ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND FINAL Athanatos.
is exactly what Socrates says he is not responsible for the actions of others, or even the use they can make their teaching or research. But the court that is responsible. Do not underestimate the impartiality and objectivity of the court. Think that Socrates is correct and the Court the Bad and the accusers crooks would be simplistic.
Socrates became "trapped" by the invisible is what should have been said publicly before this honorable court in Athens and explain why and how. Except there was nobody to defend this thesis.
is my point of view, but I think the accusations are not baseless, even if preceded by a series of campaigns of ridicule, slander. Similarly, the accusations against Jesus are well founded if one takes the side of the Pharisees, for example. The result will show that although attempts to create a movement that must be called sectarian which goes against the dominant system. I say this project is possibly a little in time and try to figure it out yourself forgetting versions belaboured for thousands of years. The Pharisees are they bad? Not so on.
Have they said something really new? for example the "love each other" Jesus is already in the Old Testament. Also new in the so-called Socrates in philosophy, it was millennia as philosophers explored, such as Thales, for example. Socrates and Jesus are considered "dangerous" because they go against the dominant system in which they are respectively. It's a classic reflex system dominant but schizophrenia becomes a hazard because schizos can not really defend themselves and for themselves are the worst lawyers, those who do worse. If in addition plays the Invisible giving systematically to schizos True, they will sink into contact with the Invisible in deep experiences in and out of the increasingly dominant system, causing their loss. They do not cause their own losses because ultimately what they are winners. They survive in the works and those who condemned them have disappeared into obscurity almost total.
This is not the schizos causing their losses but they are those who attack schizos issuing an informative or actions "true". Those who attacked Jesus, Socrates, Joan of France, etc. ... themselves have caused their own loss and this far beyond anything they could imagine and design at the time. Yet it was doctors, kings, generals, ... all people you would think "intelligent".
For my part, I do not regard them as scapegoats, although in the case of Jesus is used in the phrase "Lamb who takes away the sins of the world" or sth like that.
scenario is:
1. the schizo falls an informative or real actions. He wants to know more.
2. normal people are realizing this and also want to know or find out more.
3. The invisible gives the schizo is increasingly schizophrenic, normal people want to know more ... the subtle interplay of the invisible can not be stopped at any time.
4. Attacking the schizo is a major error that produces the opposite effect, spreading the fire instead of extinguishing it.
Jesus is visited by night from Nicodemus who was a prominent doctor and a Jewish scholar and the latter does not understand what Jesus said. Nicodemus, however, will only take a little defense of Jesus during the trial: the Jews led by Caiaphas. Socrates is well surrounded by the intellectual elite of Athens, Plato is not the only one to listen assiduously and to realize that the information is true of Socrates. This is also what is the basis for the charge for trial: Socrates corrupts the youth and the intelligentsia. The irony of Socrates or Jesus, the latter did not lack, it is part of an educational process. So it's a secondary thing to the problem posed by information and real actions. Socrates and Jesus are mortal, what I mean by that is that their bodily vehicles are in the temporal and those that must disappear at some point. Earlier, later, does not alter this aspect of a fatal destiny. No one can escape that and is the basis of this distinction very clear very early understood by the Greeks between these two concepts: Athanatos and Thanatos.
It is an important thing and that nobody, no historian takes the trouble to look at this is that Socrates is not the only schizophrenic has to go to Athens for messages coming from Athanatos. There are other less known, more spectacular is Gylippus. Just before the Sicilian expedition, the statues are mutilated and we will never know the truth on this matter will cost to Alcibiades the chief command of the expeditionary force of Athens and its allies. And Alcibiades was the only one who can lead this expedition very risky with chances of success. Nikias and Demosthenes who are replacing their best and Syracuse is about to capitulate. General Gylippus arrives in Sparta, armed with his stick and very thin and reinforcements which set the terms in Athens: "I leave you five days to completely evacuate Sicily. Of course, the Athenians laugh at him, do not take it seriously, but they quickly disillusioned. They lose the key battles of Epipole and Plemmyrium, and find themselves surrounded. They lose even naval battles, seeking to escape the ground and are exterminated or enslaved. A total disaster. Then comes the fall of Athens to shave his long walls. That is what we want to indirectly accuse Socrates at his trial, not as a scapegoat, but as a corrupter of "values" of a people. Alcibiades, his disciple has joined Sparta and played a large role in the defeat of Athens, including the fortification of the strategic position of Dekel. Athens is the confusion total. Men feel as a victim of the wrath of the gods. Blame Socrates is to attack the gods who are behind him and we can not reach. A common mistake due to blindness. All is not false in the trial, except that this is the key trial. In this, Socrates and Athens have been trapped by the Gods. The schizo
Socrates, that of reality, not the fairy tales in nerd circles, was a quasi-homeless, very poor, who heard him speak a daemon in his head, unable seen his handicap to his family and who suffered from chronic verbal diarrhea.
And how can we not suspect Plato, the town nerd who gives himself the starring role, which makes Socrates a martyr after death, only to sell his books, his insipid platoniscisme
sometimes (often? very often?). Plato is there a more normauxpathe that reflects the creativity of schizo Socrates and who seeks to steal, which is always easier once and even death, the story of Van Gogh shows, it pays more it mildly.
No, Plato, it is questionable if not involved in criminal conduct in the trial of Socrates as it drew a clear interest. Before meeting the unclassifiable Socrates, Plato has the honesty to admit, it was the most nullissime writers. So to think outside the beaten by the massive propaganda normauxpathes, Plato he murdered Socrates way for legalized stealing? He had ample means in view of his social position.
Socrates is a schizo lost in a fierce struggle between normauxpathes to gain control of Greece. A military conflict between two political parties, the Conservatives, oligarchs, and landlords could be classed as right or often even in the extreme right, and on the other hand, the Democrats, the "careerists" of the people (demos almost daemon) that are entrepreneurial, demand rights, doing business etc ... The mutilation of the statues before the departure of Alcibiades, a wealthy patrician who, like Caesar in Rome, chose the camp of the demos, by political opportunism, is likely once the opponent, the Conservatives, to overthrow democracy and defeat the 'Sicilian expedition and they will succeed. Poor schizo Socrates, who lives in his own world to escape may be in this ruthless world. It innovates, creates and he gets no benefit for himself other than a death sentence that suits those who in some way (with certainty) the fly. They will do just that, tap into that ....
I think are creative schizos because they do not seem afraid to address assumptions, even the wildest, without forgetting that these are only assumptions. Socrates suffers from chronic verbal diarrhea and I understand it a little because I have this problem too in my diagnosis. Writing is a very good treatment. Speaking only amplifies this schizophrenia and particular symptom. Here, it is only that. But the case of Socrates is very interesting because it is incredibly modern, one might even say news or almost. Issue of copyright and intellectual property, it is very heavy but it's virtual view of the law because words can not justify rights. Because Socrates, Plato document everything and then publishes and teaches by charging ....
Schizophrenia Socrates, that I "meaning" I am not able to diagnose it at all, but talking is very instructive. I even think it really helps to understand his own case and the interest is there is a vast literature, more or less accurate, whatever, talk is no wrong, however, can be seen clearly with the countless reviews of their books by Jews and are deemed to be a people intelligent. So another question about the schizophrenic Socrates. Is it left or right? Because it was the basis of all this turmoil in Greece, these wars between cities, the major political conflict between conservatives and Democrats. Sarkozy wants to eliminate the mind 68. Finally nothing new under the sun? This issue of the projections is a real problem that often prevents progress. This is to circumvent that Jews have understood the need to discuss these cases in their long history, how to understand through others that do not project anything, since there remains the memory of them and their lives.
Socrates could be violent, he was virtually homeless, unable to support his family, unfit for any manner of things, suffering from verbal diarrhea, hearing a voice in his head, her daemon, which gave him the "No" or "false". And the big problem of Socrates, a huge problem is that the false given by her daemon was always just right. The fake was very wrong. Here, I find no wisdom in that. Just a schizophrenic, handicapped, maladjusted, sinking more and more in his schizophrenic, and facing a big problem: it gives a false correct and why? The normal they are as wise as Socrates to apologize for the crime and it is a crime and it is even a crime against humanity. Easy to steal, rob, or murder schizos who can not defend themselves. The gods are
as a gift to Socrates, the "No", this "False" he perceives accurately in his head. It is the only truly understand what it is and that is why the Gods (Athanatos) were chosen. This makes it the most creative philosophers but he derives no benefit. Is that normal people who want to reduce the fly (that Plato will in my opinion) and then to kill and exploit the seam Socrates? This is part of the problems faced by people with schizophrenia among normals. Examples abound.
let's look at Plato. The hypothesis that I pose here is completely original, it is the sponsor of the assassination of Socrates for the fly, in complete impunity, a classical method normauxpathes facing a very creative schizophrenia.
It is in any case certain that Plato belonged to an aristocratic family. The side of his father, however, genealogy is more questionable: Ariston claimed descent from Codros Indeed, the last legendary king of Athens. Genealogy is more certain of his mother's side, Périctionè: it descended from a Dropidès near Solon. She was also the cousin of Critias and the sister of Charmides, two of the Thirty Tyrants in Athens -404. Already
a clear link with those who decide or political reasons of the trial against Socrates.
Western philosophy is a series of notes in footnotes to Plato's dialogues.
Plato noted all interviews with Socrates. He knew the inestimable value of what he noted.
Plato had the closest relationships with the oligarchic party honnissait it, and seems not to have been indifferent to the celebrity of his family, he mentions in the Charmides and in the Timaeus. He is the nephew of Critias and Charmides's nephew, both of the Council of the Thirty Tyrants, a regime of terror imposed by Sparta the end of the Peloponnesian War, for nine months, -403. Critias and Charmides were also both disciples of Socrates.
disciples who wish you well as for Jesus?
Sick, he was not present at the death of Socrates -399. Worried about the fate of the disciples of Socrates . Plato founded in Athens, near Colone and gymnasium Academos in -387, a school, the Academy, modeled on the Pythagoreans. He taught there for forty years.
"Plato, I believe, was ill. "There is no better feeling to the uncertainty relations between Socrates and Plato than by what I believe written by Plato, about himself.
Cool, just questions from examples to try to understand ...
The daimon (δαίμων) In his dialogues, Plato shows that Socrates heard a voice in itself, the voice of conscience (see the episode's refusal to escape in the Crito) that appears related to the crises of paralysis. The good genius, or δαίμων, Socrates appears as the voice that told him he should not do, it is not protreptic but aprotreptique. The demon of Socrates has the same function vis-à-vis Socrates that Socrates himself vis-à-vis his interlocutors. I do not see this as informative truths have to do with the paranoia?
agreement includes a general amnesty, forbidding anyone to remember the past in the death penalty: "No one has the right to criticize the past, the Trent, the Ten, the Eleven and former governors Piraeus, nor even to them after their accountability "(Constitution Ath., XXXIX, 6). Under this, they are the accusers of Socrates, who should have been prosecuted and convicted.
My assumption is of course only a hypothesis, but it is a classic pattern, often obscured encountered in many schizophrenics who are famous and innovative in a much more valuable dead than alive, the normauxpathes understand quickly. Plato does not attend the trial, supposedly ill or well not appear in its true role as sponsor knows that Socrates is alive he can not freely publish everything he has carefully recorded and copied. Socrates a danger to Athens? Nonsense, his schizophrenia is degenerative, it's worse to the point where his last ten years are lost. It is what it is really a schizo who has lost touch with reality, easy to convict in a trial or as all schizos it is good for him even his worst lawyer in the face of normal majority over 99% and which will operate normal. No, the death of Socrates are interested and are likely to want the legacy of all its innovations. Except he seems to live again and again, even if more and more likely delusional and disconnected from reality.
"One of his disciples, Euclid of Megara in 405 BC., Founded the first school of" Little Socratic "the Megarian
The last ten years of Socrates' life are almost completely unknown . In 400 BC., another disciple, causing Antisthenes founded The second school of the Little Socratic cynicism. The following year, founded the third school Aristippus: Cyrenaica. "
Given the mental state of Socrates, his trial could not take place. Nowadays I think psychiatrists would have objected. The Plato's story does not seem consistent, especially since it was not there, it looks like Jeanne de France to a fake postcard to posterity, but where most improvement is not there.
Socrates like Jesus, like other schizos speaks but does not write. It is he who suffers from verbal diarrhea that had to be delusional as her schizo was not treated to the end of his life. It was no longer a danger to anyone, except his life itself was disturbing. Plato was fine. a pure aristocrat who knew very well speak, read, write and teach in his school. Although a gifted, but a suitable normal. And it is no more present at the trial that the apostles except John will be at the foot of the cross. Again, this raises questions .... It exists as a kind of synchronicity between this lack of "disciples normauxpathes" during the trial and execution, or crucifixion, and the most important moment of life that they chose to master, Rabbi, Messiah, whatever. They lack Basics! Strange in itself, right? Are they not capable of understanding or just more complicit in the killings say they want?
Maybe he does not want to "see". It was the most important thing to do yet, or that the schizo wakes up and understands, like Joan at the stake, Jesus on the cross, Socrates in his prison. One moment he realizes the schizo has very few real friends, those who love him for what he really is or not at all like Jane who is lonely. The voices were gone. They will die. So what else if not hope. They remember that the information they have received was true. They rely on this "invisible" that led them ....
And above all this case raises the issue of inheritance. As for Jesus, they are likely to realize the exceptional value of innovations launched by a schizophrenic, totally unsuited to the world in which he lives.
For Socrates, we see, many schools are created from his ideas. It only remains for us today as Plato or almost. But Plato is it true to Socrates, the real Socrates, who taught in the streets without getting paid for his lessons invaluable. I do not think at all. The version given by Plato is a pure version of Normopathy, towns that belonged to the aristocratic social and cultural elite of Athens and pays right if not more.
is very similar to where Jesus found the right recovery, good tone, very tame, very caviar of instruction provided free in the street by a schizophrenic, Jesus has all the behaviors and even the symptoms. Mais comment un Paul, l'apôtre autroproclamé dira de lui Jean qui le détestait, peut-il parler d'un Jésus qu'il n'a pas écouté.
We are in the presence of Normopathy intelligent, who understood that they were in the presence of a true vein and wanted to exploit it for their own benefit. Plato will succeed very well. He will succeed even better than Socrates was not there to make some contradiction whatsoever, as usual, in the street. For Jesus, the same question: Normopathy apostles, visible because they were not at the foot of the cross, they had no interest in the disappearance of their master? Nothing new under the sun ....
note, these are only assumptions. Plato was perhaps just a gifted aristocrat who sought, who discovers Socrates and became a regular visitor to his classes. He does not want to show the trial out of prudence, given his social position and therefore its good reading unwritten codes in society of Athens. It restores an extraordinary work which will contribute greatly to the legend of Socrates.
"The auditory hallucinations of Socrates, which he attributed to a god (Apollo) and the interrupt his words or his actions, look for doctors Nineteenth century, with symptoms of insanity. Indeed, stories about some episodes of his life describe inexplicable behavior, such as the fact of interrupting a discussion, act as if alone, then resume the conversation as if nothing had happened. "
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrate
Thus the origin of philosophy would be the psychosis of a schizophrenic homme.Socrate, it is my intuition, a reality because I feel I understand his behavior or some of them. A psychosis that seems to have been diagnosed in his case. Yes but why this killing?
The denial of a crime, it is known ... Why and how the murder of Socrates? First through egregore screenings, slander, ridicule, insults, slander and libel .... until the trial for the killing.
Schizophrenia Socrates is visible to all, it gets worse with time. At first, it is not perceived as dangerous, but as an original, angry at a sharp tongue, etc. ... But it disturbs, it reads and souls and messages ... A person to be eliminated. The egregore those who wanted to eliminate it have been very successful to make it. The worst Counsel for Socrates? Itself! Further proof of his schizo real. Why do they project normal to a schizo they identify so easily?
The question is: Why does she feel Athens Socrates as a danger to sentence him to death? Well, this "idiot" from schizo,
, I joke, I joke, (you can laugh at yourself, right?) Wants to defend himself and he is not aware or too good to be the worst lawyer possible. Even his accusers were better lawyers than Socrates himself to defend himself. Was condemned and asked to fix their own pain. We do not want to condemn him to death then. This "idiot" will answer that he wants to be rewarded! It takes the death penalty. The question that Socrates was seeking? Or seeking the invisible behind Socrates? At what point projections are normal in Athens it a real crime against Socrates, with a clear aim to "kill", to eliminate it? From the very beginning. Socrates schizo understood right away what it was and he develops his symptoms as a protection to say: "I am innocent." Was it so innocent is that?
In the indictment, he was accused of corrupting the youth, of not respecting the gods of the city, etc. ... All Is it wrong in this indictment?
more questions:
1. Aristophanes mocks Socrates openly in his plays with an intention to "kill". Yet his plays show enough is a humanist. So for this deliberate intention to "kill" Socrates? For what does he feel in danger?
2. Socrates did he not cause the situation itself. What idea to be crowned as the wisest man in Greece by the oracle of Delphi? Well, he's not making the request, but the result is the same: it is a form of provocation.
3. And why Socrates is attacking you it these vipers as Jesus would take Sophists the Pharisees. Is it free by doing this?
4. What is the degree of manipulation of the Invisible on Socrates? The normal
are they aware of their desire to kill? Yes, and even premeditated!
Good in their laws they do not risk anything, except ... But what do they protect themselves by doing this? From schizoaffective or invisible behind the schizo?
Socrates was accused of not honoring as it should be the gods of Athens. It is therefore seen as heretical. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/H% C3% A9r% C3% A9tique
This does not deserve the death penalty in Athens, except that Socrates leads the judges in his conviction. He wants to be rewarded, not punished. He has only good for his city! Al Capone also said that he had done well in Chicago. What would have happened if Jesus and Socrates had access to treatment for Schizophrenia?
In the case of Jesus and Socrates, you can see on the formation of a egregore fatal. It starts with taunts, insults, provocations and this only grow for one purpose, kill! The solution requires the elimination of schizo inconvenient.
Their stories are very similar unequivocal. Early in his ministry, Jesus is happy, he spoke of the kingdom of heaven, the Beatitudes. In the end it only to defend themselves against attacks that fly from all sides. Socrates did not expect such a trial that he finds absurd, baseless, except that this trial actually kills. This is reality, not as secondary problems would have us believe that normal people know very well what they are doing when this process projection-interlock egregore-fatal assassination (no matter how often a slow, characteristic of a egregore). The facts are there!
The key is behind the schizophrenic, as he sees or hears, which gives clear guidelines and accurate and that the normal does not see or hear: the invisible which is connected to the schizo. Do they seek to kill or to understand their ways?
For me Jesus and Socrates are trapped by the invisible sink and increasingly in private contact with the invisible. This isolates them from growing in the world and the city. They do realize how much more they cause normal. Hatred grows and is expressed during the trial. Sentenced to death, they feel abandoned by the invisible. As an alarm clock. Can schizo gets over and they turn to invisible to find salvation in a promise, just before dying.
It is not about theories but to build on for two famous examples from their cases, there is a vast literature, to draw useful elements for better understanding. To do this, I'm nothing of spiritual or philosophical side and I remain with schizophrenia that seems obvious in the case of Jesus and Socrates. Here
example, a first observation:
1. BEWARE OF INFORMATION YOU IN REAL INVISIBLE! Ask yourself the question of whether the invisible not trying to trick you that way.
2. It follows why most of the schizophrenic made inroads into the invisible, the more he sinks into his schizophrenia until irreversible.
issues they are in themselves a form of answers? It is not possible to answer by saying this is the truth. It is only possible to answer by saying this is an assumption and nothing else. It has the merit of being written and to be questionable. What is this assumption? It gives a kind of benefit to normal explanation for their criminal behavior. They have no access to the Invisible, but understand that it has a schizoaffective direct and privileged access. The normal are jealous. reread the Gospels and the words of the doctors of Israel
"God will speak to you, which is nothing, and we who are doctors, who know the scriptures, who respect the laws and commandments, He does not speak! "
This same type of natural jealousy against Socrates that we should remember that it was consecrated by the oracle of Delphi as the wisest man in Greece. Then the normal and want to know is why he will "tickle" the schizo. But as they often refer schizos harsh words, uncompromising lyrics that come from the invisible, in fact, the normal and quickly get upset hatred grows. The normal wanted hypocritical praise, all that pleases the powerful in society or it's part of the ritual of power. Except that the schizo as it retransmits what it receives from the invisible visible and it has very little regard for where those who are powerful in this illusion alive in this world. From there, the schizo sealed his fate. Good advice: beware of the invisible if you live long! (Just kidding ..
) The problem of schizophrenia is actually a problem to many. Let me explain:
1. His informative coming from the invisible is true.
2. more it connects to the invisible, the more is schizophrenic.
3. more it connects to the invisible, the more it disconnects from reality and others.
4. more it disconnects the normal, more than this, as if they were interested in the attack.
5. as the invisible speaks a different language, to serve as schizo translator for converting the non-life language in the invisible (often a very informative pure) language of life (often descriptive) except that it only involved him in trouble.
In conclusion, many schizos realized it was better to be silent, invisible except that pushes them ....
What we see in the lives of people with schizophrenia likely Jesus and Socrates, is how normauxpathes push them to their extreme limits until the death "legalized" for access to the invisible. Watch what happens next. How many tens of thousands of pounds, if not hundreds of thousands have they not been written about Jesus or Socrates. Like what, for thousands of years later, normauxpathes always arise the question: What was behind these schizophrenics.
They will never have the answer since they removed the door that allowed access. Any intelligence normauxpathes .... So they were alive, they were laughing schizos, they were not taken seriously, or generated incredible hatred against them. Once dead, they are appreciated and loved ....
Certainly, will understand the normal!
It is highly likely that the prophets of Israel were schizos must even wonder if that little people do not have a predisposition to schizophrenia, which could be verified statistically, they lack no good doctors in Israel. If you look even in the case of Muhammad, he suffered a brain abnormality, he recognizes himself by saying he is not an element e revelation that is done without pain in his head. It even seems that he may die at the end of it. Schizophrenia is it the basis of religion "revealed?". Religions or are they schizophrenic?
A related intuition? Yes, to understand the meaning. A poltergeist is not a hallucination, it is a physical reality, it is measurable. Intuition comes to understand its meaning. In fact, I'm facing a real mystery. I have only questions, no real answer. A trust was established with the Mask of Divinity Without Face, I do not know who she really is, except it has a lot of humor and is able to do in reality Physical amazing things. But even if I have faith in this contact from the unseen, I keep my distance and I remain very cautious. I always check and I never accept anything without checking and wondering where the invisible is coming really. I think this is one of the great dangers of schizophrenia, one in which the schizo is facing a real informative from the invisible. What he really lose his head over it goes ahead ...
Other project and constantly distort ... therefore they can not really understand. to understand, we must remain as neutral as possible, do not be swayed, especially by oneself, what is worse, etc. .... It is a Athanatos and all Athanatos can affect physical reality dramatically and totally incomprehensible in the current state of our modest knowledge of physical reality, which we know scarcely more than 5% and still ....
must remain modest, and just take it very cool and as neutral as possible, or even humor, without taking ourselves seriously. this bcp already .... Physical reality is a reality observable and measurable, not so hallucinatory. in fact anyone can observe and measure ... except ... the changes are intentional and that intention comes from a Athanatos and therefore that the real intent is it not observable or measurable. only the consequences are observable, but with Athanatos should always remain cautious about everything.
For example, in the trial of Socrates, the main accusation is made, but it is question of fact to accuse Socrates of having caused the ruin of Athens. This comes from the fact that Alcibiades was a disciple of Socrates and Alcibiades is the same who had advocated the disastrous Sicilian expedition. Why so Socrates was the wisest man in Greece, did nothing to stop you it Alcibiades to launch his city into an adventure dangerous? This is where he is accused of having corrupted the youth and considered responsible for the misfortunes. The accusation is not false. And that is why we must be wary of Athanatos, "messages", the informative, especially if they are true because WE DO NOT KNOW THE ACTUAL INTENTIONS AND FINAL Athanatos.
is exactly what Socrates says he is not responsible for the actions of others, or even the use they can make their teaching or research. But the court that is responsible. Do not underestimate the impartiality and objectivity of the court. Think that Socrates is correct and the Court the Bad and the accusers crooks would be simplistic.
Socrates became "trapped" by the invisible is what should have been said publicly before this honorable court in Athens and explain why and how. Except there was nobody to defend this thesis.
is my point of view, but I think the accusations are not baseless, even if preceded by a series of campaigns of ridicule, slander. Similarly, the accusations against Jesus are well founded if one takes the side of the Pharisees, for example. The result will show that although attempts to create a movement that must be called sectarian which goes against the dominant system. I say this project is possibly a little in time and try to figure it out yourself forgetting versions belaboured for thousands of years. The Pharisees are they bad? Not so on.
Have they said something really new? for example the "love each other" Jesus is already in the Old Testament. Also new in the so-called Socrates in philosophy, it was millennia as philosophers explored, such as Thales, for example. Socrates and Jesus are considered "dangerous" because they go against the dominant system in which they are respectively. It's a classic reflex system dominant but schizophrenia becomes a hazard because schizos can not really defend themselves and for themselves are the worst lawyers, those who do worse. If in addition plays the Invisible giving systematically to schizos True, they will sink into contact with the Invisible in deep experiences in and out of the increasingly dominant system, causing their loss. They do not cause their own losses because ultimately what they are winners. They survive in the works and those who condemned them have disappeared into obscurity almost total.
This is not the schizos causing their losses but they are those who attack schizos issuing an informative or actions "true". Those who attacked Jesus, Socrates, Joan of France, etc. ... themselves have caused their own loss and this far beyond anything they could imagine and design at the time. Yet it was doctors, kings, generals, ... all people you would think "intelligent".
For my part, I do not regard them as scapegoats, although in the case of Jesus is used in the phrase "Lamb who takes away the sins of the world" or sth like that.
scenario is:
1. the schizo falls an informative or real actions. He wants to know more.
2. normal people are realizing this and also want to know or find out more.
3. The invisible gives the schizo is increasingly schizophrenic, normal people want to know more ... the subtle interplay of the invisible can not be stopped at any time.
4. Attacking the schizo is a major error that produces the opposite effect, spreading the fire instead of extinguishing it.
Jesus is visited by night from Nicodemus who was a prominent doctor and a Jewish scholar and the latter does not understand what Jesus said. Nicodemus, however, will only take a little defense of Jesus during the trial: the Jews led by Caiaphas. Socrates is well surrounded by the intellectual elite of Athens, Plato is not the only one to listen assiduously and to realize that the information is true of Socrates. This is also what is the basis for the charge for trial: Socrates corrupts the youth and the intelligentsia. The irony of Socrates or Jesus, the latter did not lack, it is part of an educational process. So it's a secondary thing to the problem posed by information and real actions. Socrates and Jesus are mortal, what I mean by that is that their bodily vehicles are in the temporal and those that must disappear at some point. Earlier, later, does not alter this aspect of a fatal destiny. No one can escape that and is the basis of this distinction very clear very early understood by the Greeks between these two concepts: Athanatos and Thanatos.
It is an important thing and that nobody, no historian takes the trouble to look at this is that Socrates is not the only schizophrenic has to go to Athens for messages coming from Athanatos. There are other less known, more spectacular is Gylippus. Just before the Sicilian expedition, the statues are mutilated and we will never know the truth on this matter will cost to Alcibiades the chief command of the expeditionary force of Athens and its allies. And Alcibiades was the only one who can lead this expedition very risky with chances of success. Nikias and Demosthenes who are replacing their best and Syracuse is about to capitulate. General Gylippus arrives in Sparta, armed with his stick and very thin and reinforcements which set the terms in Athens: "I leave you five days to completely evacuate Sicily. Of course, the Athenians laugh at him, do not take it seriously, but they quickly disillusioned. They lose the key battles of Epipole and Plemmyrium, and find themselves surrounded. They lose even naval battles, seeking to escape the ground and are exterminated or enslaved. A total disaster. Then comes the fall of Athens to shave his long walls. That is what we want to indirectly accuse Socrates at his trial, not as a scapegoat, but as a corrupter of "values" of a people. Alcibiades, his disciple has joined Sparta and played a large role in the defeat of Athens, including the fortification of the strategic position of Dekel. Athens is the confusion total. Men feel as a victim of the wrath of the gods. Blame Socrates is to attack the gods who are behind him and we can not reach. A common mistake due to blindness. All is not false in the trial, except that this is the key trial. In this, Socrates and Athens have been trapped by the Gods. The schizo
Socrates, that of reality, not the fairy tales in nerd circles, was a quasi-homeless, very poor, who heard him speak a daemon in his head, unable seen his handicap to his family and who suffered from chronic verbal diarrhea.
And how can we not suspect Plato, the town nerd who gives himself the starring role, which makes Socrates a martyr after death, only to sell his books, his insipid platoniscisme
sometimes (often? very often?). Plato is there a more normauxpathe that reflects the creativity of schizo Socrates and who seeks to steal, which is always easier once and even death, the story of Van Gogh shows, it pays more it mildly.
No, Plato, it is questionable if not involved in criminal conduct in the trial of Socrates as it drew a clear interest. Before meeting the unclassifiable Socrates, Plato has the honesty to admit, it was the most nullissime writers. So to think outside the beaten by the massive propaganda normauxpathes, Plato he murdered Socrates way for legalized stealing? He had ample means in view of his social position.
Socrates is a schizo lost in a fierce struggle between normauxpathes to gain control of Greece. A military conflict between two political parties, the Conservatives, oligarchs, and landlords could be classed as right or often even in the extreme right, and on the other hand, the Democrats, the "careerists" of the people (demos almost
daemon) that are entrepreneurial, demand rights, doing business etc ... The mutilation of the statues before the departure of Alcibiades, a wealthy patrician who, like Caesar in Rome, chose the camp of the demos, by political opportunism, is likely once the opponent, the Conservatives, to overthrow democracy and defeat the 'Sicilian expedition and they will succeed. Poor schizo Socrates, who lives in his own world to escape may be in this ruthless world. It innovates, creates and he gets no benefit for himself other than a death sentence that suits those who in some way (with certainty) the fly. They will do just that, tap into that .... I think are creative schizos because they do not seem afraid to address assumptions, even the wildest, without forgetting that these are only assumptions. Socrates suffers from chronic verbal diarrhea and I understand it a little because I have this problem too in my diagnosis. Writing is a very good treatment. Speaking only amplifies this schizophrenia and particular symptom. Here, it is only that. But the case of Socrates is very interesting because it is incredibly modern, one might even say news or almost. Issue of copyright and intellectual property, it is very heavy but it's virtual view of the law because words can not justify rights. Because Socrates, Plato document everything and then publishes and teaches by charging ....
Schizophrenia Socrates, that I "meaning" I am not able to diagnose it at all, but talking is very instructive. I even think it really helps to understand his own case and the interest is there is a vast literature, more or less accurate, whatever, talk is no wrong, however, can be seen clearly with the countless reviews of their books by Jews and are deemed to be a people intelligent. So another question about the schizophrenic Socrates. Is it left or right? Because it was the basis of all this turmoil in Greece, these wars between cities, the major political conflict between conservatives and Democrats. Sarkozy wants to eliminate the mind 68. Finally nothing new under the sun? This issue of the projections is a real problem that often prevents progress. This is to circumvent that Jews have understood the need to discuss these cases in their long history, how to understand through others that do not project anything, since there remains the memory of them and their lives.
Socrates could be violent, he was virtually homeless, unable to support his family, unfit for any manner of things, suffering from verbal diarrhea, hearing a voice in his head, her daemon, which gave him the "No" or "false". And the big problem of Socrates, a huge problem is that the false given by her daemon was always just right. The fake was very wrong. Here, I find no wisdom in that. Just a schizophrenic, handicapped, maladjusted, sinking more and more in his schizophrenic, and facing a big problem: it gives a false correct and why? The normal they are as wise as Socrates to apologize for the crime and it is a crime and it is even a crime against humanity. Easy to steal, rob, or murder schizos who can not defend themselves. The gods are
as a gift to Socrates, the "No", this "False" he perceives accurately in his head. It is the only truly understand what it is and that is why the Gods (Athanatos) were chosen. This makes it the most creative philosophers but he derives no benefit. Is that normal people who want to reduce the fly (that Plato will in my opinion) and then to kill and exploit the seam Socrates? This is part of the problems faced by people with schizophrenia among normals. Examples abound.
let's look at Plato. The hypothesis that I pose here is completely original, it is the sponsor of the assassination of Socrates for the fly, in complete impunity, a classical method normauxpathes facing a very creative schizophrenia.
It is in any case certain that Plato belonged to an aristocratic family. The side of his father, however, genealogy is more questionable: Ariston claimed descent from Codros Indeed, the last legendary king of Athens. Genealogy is more certain of his mother's side, Périctionè: it descended from a Dropidès near Solon. She was also the cousin of Critias and the sister of Charmides, two of the Thirty Tyrants in Athens -404. Already
a clear link with those who decide or political reasons of the trial against Socrates.
Western philosophy is a series of notes in footnotes to Plato's dialogues.
Plato noted all interviews with Socrates. He knew the inestimable value of what he noted.
Plato had the closest relationships with the oligarchic party honnissait it, and seems not to have been indifferent to the celebrity of his family, he mentions in the Charmides and in the Timaeus. He is the nephew of Critias and Charmides's nephew, both of the Council of the Thirty Tyrants, a regime of terror imposed by Sparta the end of the Peloponnesian War, for nine months, -403. Critias and Charmides were also both disciples of Socrates.
disciples who wish you well as for Jesus?
Sick, he was not present at the death of Socrates -399. Worried about the fate of the disciples of Socrates . Plato founded in Athens, near Colone and gymnasium Academos in -387, a school, the Academy, modeled on the Pythagoreans. He taught there for forty years.
"Plato, I believe, was ill. "There is no better feeling to the uncertainty relations between Socrates and Plato than by what I believe written by Plato, about himself.
Cool, just questions from examples to try to understand ...
The daimon (δαίμων) In his dialogues, Plato shows that Socrates heard a voice in itself, the voice of conscience (see the episode's refusal to escape in the Crito) that appears related to the crises of paralysis. The good genius, or δαίμων, Socrates appears as the voice that told him he should not do, it is not protreptic but aprotreptique. The demon of Socrates has the same function vis-à-vis Socrates that Socrates himself vis-à-vis his interlocutors. I do not see this as informative truths have to do with the paranoia?
agreement includes a general amnesty, forbidding anyone to remember the past in the death penalty: "No one has the right to criticize the past, the Trent, the Ten, the Eleven and former governors Piraeus, nor even to them after their accountability "(Constitution Ath., XXXIX, 6). Under this, they are the accusers of Socrates, who should have been prosecuted and convicted.
My assumption is of course only a hypothesis, but it is a classic pattern, often obscured encountered in many schizophrenics who are famous and innovative in a much more valuable dead than alive, the normauxpathes understand quickly. Plato does not attend the trial, supposedly ill or well not appear in its true role as sponsor knows that Socrates is alive he can not freely publish everything he has carefully recorded and copied. Socrates a danger to Athens? Nonsense, his schizophrenia is degenerative, it's worse to the point where his last ten years are lost. It is what it is really a schizo who has lost touch with reality, easy to convict in a trial or as all schizos it is good for him even his worst lawyer in the face of normal majority over 99% and which will operate normal. No, the death of Socrates are interested and are likely to want the legacy of all its innovations. Except he seems to live again and again, even if more and more likely delusional and disconnected from reality.
"One of his disciples, Euclid of Megara in 405 BC., Founded the first school of" Little Socratic "the Megarian
The last ten years of Socrates' life are almost completely unknown . In 400 BC., another disciple, causing Antisthenes founded The second school of the Little Socratic cynicism. The following year, founded the third school Aristippus: Cyrenaica. "
Given the mental state of Socrates, his trial could not take place. Nowadays I think psychiatrists would have objected. The Plato's story does not seem consistent, especially since it was not there, it looks like Jeanne de France to a fake postcard to posterity, but where most improvement is not there.
Socrates like Jesus, like other schizos speaks but does not write. It is he who suffers from verbal diarrhea that had to be delusional as her schizo was not treated to the end of his life. It was no longer a danger to anyone, except his life itself was disturbing. Plato was fine. a pure aristocrat who knew very well speak, read, write and teach in his school. Although a gifted, but a suitable normal. And it is no more present at the trial that the apostles except John will be at the foot of the cross. Again, this raises questions .... It exists as a kind of synchronicity between this lack of "disciples normauxpathes" during the trial and execution, or crucifixion, and the most important moment of life that they chose to master, Rabbi, Messiah, whatever. They lack Basics! Strange in itself, right? Are they not capable of understanding or just more complicit in the killings say they want?
Maybe he does not want to "see". It was the most important thing to do yet, or that the schizo wakes up and understands, like Joan at the stake, Jesus on the cross, Socrates in his prison. One moment he realizes the schizo has very few real friends, those who love him for what he really is or not at all like Jane who is lonely. The voices were gone. They will die. So what else if not hope. They remember that the information they have received was true. They rely on this "invisible" that led them ....
And above all this case raises the issue of inheritance. As for Jesus, they are likely to realize the exceptional value of innovations launched by a schizophrenic, totally unsuited to the world in which he lives.
For Socrates, we see, many schools are created from his ideas. It only remains for us today as Plato or almost. But Plato is it true to Socrates, the real Socrates, who taught in the streets without getting paid for his lessons invaluable. I do not think at all. The version given by Plato is a pure version of Normopathy, towns that belonged to the aristocratic social and cultural elite of Athens and pays right if not more.
is very similar to where Jesus found the right recovery, good tone, very tame, very caviar of instruction provided free in the street by a schizophrenic, Jesus has all the behaviors and even the symptoms. Mais comment un Paul, l'apôtre autroproclamé dira de lui Jean qui le détestait, peut-il parler d'un Jésus qu'il n'a pas écouté.
We are in the presence of Normopathy intelligent, who understood that they were in the presence of a true vein and wanted to exploit it for their own benefit. Plato will succeed very well. He will succeed even better than Socrates was not there to make some contradiction whatsoever, as usual, in the street. For Jesus, the same question: Normopathy apostles, visible because they were not at the foot of the cross, they had no interest in the disappearance of their master? Nothing new under the sun ....
note, these are only assumptions. Plato was perhaps just a gifted aristocrat who sought, who discovers Socrates and became a regular visitor to his classes. He does not want to show the trial out of prudence, given his social position and therefore its good reading unwritten codes in society of Athens. It restores an extraordinary work which will contribute greatly to the legend of Socrates.
0 comments:
Post a Comment