Posts by Edward Flores4

So then the little guy actually wrapped up the chocolate, did he? 🙂

placidharbor7 said:Honestly, you’re grasping at straws even more than someone who barely understands the basics—which is pretty typical for a truth seeker.

If there's supposedly "nothing going on," how can you possibly claim this Master is actually "working" or—even weirder—going on some illogical "mission"?😲

Why don't you go talk to Edward Flores4 instead? He’s even more lost than you are, so maybe the two of you can work your magic together and figure it out!

Now, look, unlike Master Mike over there, I’m not out here hunting for disciples, taking on students, or trying to diagnose "truth seekers." I don't call myself a "Master," I don't refer to myself in the third person, and I certainly don't act like I'm on some grand mission using old-fashioned, overly dramatic language just to make up for a lack of actual substance in my posts.

As for how much I actually know... well, given everything I just said... I suppose nobody is more qualified than you to make that kind of judgment call. 😉

Charles Diaz56 said:Quite so. Since I clearly lack the necessary wisdom.
The truly wise don't bother posting...🙂

Actually... I was just passing along an old aphorism!

I remember once reading where Alan Watts was quoting—if I recall correctly—Lao Tse, who famously noted:
"Those who know do not say, and those who say do not know"

...to which Alan quipped: "and yet he said it." 😁

So, really, I was just pulling that same little trick on you. 😁

steeleagle13 said:Quincy:

I don't know what to tell you—some people just love to hear themselves talk. It’s always the same thing with these types. They think they've cracked the code, but honestly? It's just noise. Just more static in an already loud world. steeleagle13 says: Your schizophrenic take on other people's personalities is nothing more than a reflection of your own internal fragments—stuff you've shoved under the rug of your own ambition just because you're desperately trying to believe your own projections are actually authoritative. Go ahead—keep churning out those empty posts. Just keep shuffling the same old fog from one sleeve to the other, talking about yourself in the third person like you're some kind of legend, and acting like the entire world is bowing down to your "grand spiritual presence." Please. Once you hit 10,000 posts, I’m personally handing you a diploma—just so you have some official certification of your own sheer incompetence. 😉

If you’re going to keep responding to every single one of Ivanov’s posts, you might as well just hand each other diplomas for hitting 10,000 posts or something. Seriously. 😂😂

He finally decided to show up... right after dropping five posts in a row. 🤣

Just a quick heads-up—Master Mike is one of my longtime regulars, so I tend to give him a little extra attention compared to everyone else. I’m sincerely hoping he can make a full comeback soon. 😉

Marshall McLuhan,


Terence McKenna,


Joseph Campbell,

Charles Diaz56 said:True wisdom isn't something you broadcast to the world—it’s better left unsaid.

And there you go again, saying the exact same thing. 🤣

placidharbor7 said:Your whole argument just highlights your total inability to handle placidharbor7's "insights" and your own personality flaws.
Come on, man, just get back to your usual nonsense and pointless debating.

Honestly, your bizarre way of judging other people's personalities is just a mirror reflecting your own fractured psyche—the parts you’ve tried to sweep under the rug of your own ego, all while desperately hoping you can actually believe your own hype.

Please, feel free to keep flooding the forums with these empty posts—just moving the goalposts from one side to the other, talking about yourself in the third person, and acting like the entire world is bowing down to your "magnificent" persona.

Once you finally hit that 10,000-post milestone, I’ll personally hand you a diploma—it’ll be official proof of your sheer incompetence. 😉

Michael Anderson2 said:See, you're already making progress! 👍

I would have appreciated it if you’d actually addressed my take on the topic at hand, rather than just circling back to your own little ego trip. Ego? Coming from someone supposedly enlightened? Or did you just run out of things to say?

How is that hard to grasp?

The thing is, this guy operates on a very specific communication frequency—one where the prerequisite is that you have to view him as some kind of guru, someone whose every word is gospel. Once you accept that premise, everything he says becomes absolute fact.

But, of course, if you don't play along with that dynamic, our resident "expert" at the camp always has three or four canned, condescending phrases ready to go—designed specifically to discredit anyone who doubts him while simultaneously shielding his massive ego.

If you take a moment to dig through the older posts from placidharbor7, you'll see the pattern clearly: the man has churned out thousands of entries, basically just recycling the same five sentences in different orders. Every other post ends with a nod to a "truth seeker," and nearly every single one features him talking about himself in the third person.

For a lot of people, "spirituality" acts as a convenient hiding spot—a way to wrap their personal complexes in a layer of spiritual ambition. They seem to think that because spirituality is supposedly so ethereal, their fabrications can somehow dodge any attempt at logic or real criticism.

Unfortunately for them, anyone with a bit of common sense can spot a "smoke merchant" from a mile away, even when they're using more subtle, mystical smoke, much like the spiritual illusions being spun by our grand "master" placidharbor7. ☕

placidharbor7 said:I truly believe that any "external change"—and I mean any external shift at all—is created and made possible solely by your own "self." If you find yourself doubting what placidharbor7 is saying, then why not try to debunk his claim? Go ahead, try to prove the existence of an objective reality! (Yes, really!)😂

Just what kind of wild entity is your imagination actually building all this stuff from?🤣

Is "perceptive" anything more than just my own personal point of view? Honestly, can the "self" ever truly be objective? I mean, what’s even the point of relying on your own subjective "perception" if it's always filtered through your own lens?😍

What are you even getting so worked up about? Seriously, why all the drama?😠 You came here ready to learn, and trust me—you’re going to walk away with plenty!😁
So, placidharbor7 showed up here acting like he’s some kind of ultimate expert, even going so far as to introduce himself that way! Meanwhile, you went ahead and called yourself Edward Flores4. Honestly, it feels a little shady—it really makes you wonder about your sense of self, doesn't it?🤷🤣😲

Why don't you take that whole idea of the 'self,' shove it right up your backside, and then subjectively perceive it as a 'given reality.'

Honestly, what’s even the point of having a brain if you aren't going to actually use it!?

placidharbor7 said:Heh, wait a second! If that external change is happening, then it's an OBJECT, my dear Truth-Seeker. And on the flip side, you can really only call that thing of yours a SUBJECT if there's actual self-awareness involved. And that’s where things get messy! See, self-awareness is simultaneously about judging and being judged; it's about personalization and that whole "ego" concept—which is really just one big, heavy word for MAYER. Now, if you want to believe we can escape from MAYER in little bits and pieces here and there, then sure, you'll be a beginner forever!

Listen, you pint-sized spiritual guru with a nasty streak... if you haven't managed to come up with a single coherent point by now, there’s really no need to start puffing out your chest just to prove something to me—trying to peddle your brand of mysticism like some street psychic reading palms at a carnival.

External change is indeed an object, sure, but you didn't create it—unlike that "controlled" entity, which is nothing more than a figment of your own imagination. Being able to witness change simply means being perceptive, but thinking you can actually "control" someone else is pure schizophrenia, and from the looks of it, you've got plenty of experience with that. External changes just reflect back on us; we don't manufacture them for our own amusement, unlike how you amuse yourself playing the "Jack of all trades."

And this is where your overblown spiritual fog starts to turn into a total mess, because you're tossing out concepts that fall way outside your own field of understanding—all while being deeply convinced that nobody will notice. You’re insanely persistent, repeating the exact same patterns unconsciously, hoping against hope that maybe, just this once, the outcome will somehow turn out better than usual. 🙄

On the other hand, you can only call that thing a SUBJECT if it possesses self-awareness.

Oh, so you'll be the one to tell me when I'm allowed to call the subject of control a "subject"? And what exactly does the subject of our actions need to have—aside from actually being the subject of our actions—to earn that title? 🤣

one BIG word—MAYER.

wow... I have never heard that bit about MAYER before!!! That is a completely new concept to me... thanks for introducing me to such a rare and absolutely fascinating construct.

Got any more "revelations" for us, Inspector Sherlock? ☕

Michael Anderson2 said:What nonsense. So, self-control is bad because we have to ask who controls the controller? And that's why we should just be observers? Fine—but then who's observing the observer?

Once you actually dive deep, there isn't even a controller or an observer left. It’s all one thing...☕

Look... control is essentially manipulation—it's this conscious process where you try to steer some subject around.

Observation, on the other hand, isn't this forced, manipulative effort. It's more like a physical reaction to a change in your environment—something that happens naturally without us having to step in and force it.

So, observing and controlling are two completely different animals. Control is an action, while observation is a reaction. An action requires a subject, which means you end up with two subjects: the one doing the controlling and the one being controlled! Observation is just you—the single subject—reacting to an external shift (which isn't a subject at all).

Which brings me to this... honestly, your question doesn't really hold water, and it seems like you haven't quite grasped what the actual issue with the "controller" is.

Trying to "control yourself" is a bit like practicing voluntary schizophrenia. People with schizophrenia don't choose their state, but "controllers" do it intentionally—they actually believe they're doing something productive, thinking they're "working on themselves." 🙂

placidharbor7 said:Clumsiness is just one thing, but being this oblivious? That’s a whole different level of mess.

Well, it looks like that dog bit you right where it hurts.🤣

You wouldn't recognize sarcasm even if it knocked on your front door and introduced itself with a formal handshake 🙄 Hmmm... ☕

Well, that’s that... Luke Skywalker is back in the fold once again 😁

Mark Torres14 said:It’s simple.

I can believe in God without needing to wrap my head around Him. He’s who I respect, who I love, and who I lean on when things get rough. Faith gives my life purpose.
Philosophy, at its core, is just humans trying to make sense of the world. In that context, God stops being an object of my devotion and becomes an object of my intellect. A "philosophical God" is the version of God that a philosopher tries to logically figure out.

So, if I'm following you correctly, is the phrase "philosophical God" basically just code for using your brain, whereas an "ordinary God" is just a placeholder for those emotional, perhaps even intellectually underdeveloped beliefs that take precedence over actual critical thinking?

I’m pretty convinced that human stupidity is basically infinite—though, to be fair, I can't say for certain if it's always been this way since I wasn't around to witness the beginning of time.

In that same vein, more or less 🙄

rowdyjackal5 said:Your way of thinking is borderline demonic: "I can do anything, and I'm accountable to no one." 👎

I am not copy-pasting anything, so don't throw false accusations my way. 👎

Asking who created God or who God is accountable to is honestly a pretty stupid question. 👎

The reason it feels silly is because it points directly toward a massive gap in your own belief system—one you probably feel the need to gloss over, which is why you're looking for an excuse to dismiss the question entirely, right? ☕

placidharbor7 said:Here’s the thing: consciousness can’t actually be NEUTRAL, because if it isn't, it isn't really consciousness at all!
I mean, what kind of CONSCIOUSNESS exists without an "I"?
The "I" is inherently BIASED, because that very bias is exactly what constitutes the "I."
Even if you try to go out of your way to pick a side, it doesn't change the underlying BIAS—it's been there all along, running in the background.

You guys keep crying out for more "consciousness," but don't you realize you're actually just asking for more sweat and blood? You're asking for more judgment, more condemnation, and more heartache and struggle in your own lives!

Anyway, has anyone seen shamantrixx lately? Where did they disappear to?

Oh, isn't that just precious... I knew at least one of you would be a hopeless romantic😍

Until you actually get your act together—and figure out how many of you are actually "home," which one is the master, and which one is just John... Edward Flores4 is out on vacation. You can't both reach enlightenment at the same time. I can only help one of you. Make a choice... either it's you, or it's the one in charge. This PDF is way too small to accommodate both of you🙂

wearymason36 said:Dear "expert,"

It’s unfortunate to see you spiraling into such an inferiority complex. Your posts suggest you're clinging to that tired "I'm enlightened while you're all mere mortals" trope just to mask a desperate need for validation. It’s classic ego-stroking—a psychological crutch used by people who lack genuine confidence. You hide behind this facade of "mystical insight" to pretend you've transcended life's struggles, when really, it’s just a defense mechanism against being an outcast. Like a cornered animal puffing itself up to look bigger than it is, you use this pathetic rhetoric to shield your fragility. I’d suggest popping this bubble before reality hits you hard enough to shatter that monument you've built to yourself.

I'm being blunt here: if you don't snap out of this, you're headed for a massive reality check. I'm not calling you an idiot, a narcissist, or any other label; I'm simply offering some honest advice.

I couldn't have put it better myself. It’s not everyday you run into someone who can lay it out this clearly and rationally. I'm impressed. 🙏

placidharbor7 said:That’s just how you roll—everything is just "as far as I know" with you.
KNOWING—to you, the whole government is just a total Google.

Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that you're constantly talking about yourself in the third person. It’s a weird little habit, and honestly, you're sharing that rare "virtue" with guys like Ljub Česić Rojs, the headman, and that one local political figure. 😁

By the way, I think it’s pretty obvious to everyone here how transparent you're being—trying to dodge criticism by pivoting the conversation and throwing out half-baked arguments.

Give my best to Ljub Česić Rojs if you run into him... though I'm sure you'll talk about him in the third person too. 🤣