//

Ra's Law of One teaches cynical complacency rather than disciplined discernment

I teach test prep: SAT ACT GRE GMAT. The reading passages of those tests are surprisingly similar to spiritual info warfare. The author of the passage is well-intentioned. The writers of the test questions, however, display a deviousness worthy of the Devil himself. Students often refer to them as evil, only half-jokingly.

How did I achieve a near-perfect score on the GMAT, the most difficult of those tests? At first, I didn't. I went with my gut, proud of my reasoning skills, and got wrecked. Used to being the smart kid, confident in my interpretations, I was incredulous at the answer key. But eventually I learned how to turn the Devil's tricks against him, gaining useful information from his lies.

In order to do this, I first had to understand myself, the Devil, the other test takers, and the laws and norms limiting the test. Doing so required shedding the naivete that made me like all other test takers, and therefore predictable. I had to stop believing that I would notice all the logical twists on the first reading. This is discipline. But I also had to confidently trust my intuition on the overall meaning of the passage. This is discernment.

Please understand, I'm not talking about the literal Devil. I don't believe in one. I'm talking about any professional, institutional adversary, with lifespans worth of experience, dedicated to deception, operating under legal constraints.

The classic Devil is a bureaucrat. He is just doing his job. One needs to bring a similar level of dispassion in order to defeat him. Otherwise he will fool you all day.

My basic strategy for a reading passage is as follows:

  1. Read the whole passage.
  2. Summarize it in your own words, BEFORE reading any of the devious questions, designed to misdirect.
  3. Carefully focus on one question at a time.
  4. Eliminate each answer choice with hard proof of a lie.
  5. Select the remaining answer, no matter how counterintuitive.

What if someone told you to just trust your gut, and that you are the only one who knows the right answer to a question? That person would be trying to lower your performance on the standardized test.

Disinfo is not only designed to misinform. It is also meant to destroy trust and cause learned helplessness. When all info is regarded as equally unreliable, then the target can no longer effectively participate in an organization that threatens the interests of the propagandist.

Some seekers are proud that they have learned not to trust any external source of spiritual guidance. A Law of One fan commented on my last post: "yeah dont trust books its like one of the first rules". The subject of that post, a person guided by Ra spirit guides, concluded she "shouldn't trust any external entity, no matter how benevolent or honest they may seem."

At that point her guides left, because what more could they accomplish?

From domestic abuse sites:

  • "Increase Your Support Network- manipulators often work to isolate you from others in your life and prey on your loneliness. "
  • "Isolation is a pivotal tactic that controlling partners use in order to weaken their victims, prevent them from hearing others’ perspectives, and to bring them into line with his own beliefs and requirements. "

The Law of One encourages intellectual complacency in its adherents. They are uninterested in searching carefully for the logical flaws in the Devil's lies. They believe that, since All is One, they can trust their fuzzy emotional intuition. Yet any standardized test taker quickly learns how easy this emotional intuition is to deceive. One must combine intuition and reason in order to beat the curve.

Another commenter exemplified the typical complacent Law of One fan response to a critique: "All is One." Well, who said it wasn't? False books can have true titles. "All is One" is not a reason to cease rational thought. Breathing and not breathing are one, but how long can you hold your breath?

Publish At: Author:Cyberthal

Read more posts by this author

Github
comments powered by Disqus