NECROTIC NEOGENIAN MORGUE OFFICIAL

Sam Vaknin said,

“Necrotic, it’s when development, physiological development, somatic or psychological development slows down, slows down or is delayed. Necrotic, it’s typical of all modern humans.”

We live in a necrotic culture, where sick people who call themselves things like “Morgue” pop up!

In Woke World, people are refusing to grow up. No one matures, no one becomes an adult, and no one takes on adult responsibilities. People are infantilized and believe in infantile things. They live in infantile fantasy worlds. The entertainment industry churns out infantile content.

Vaknin wrote,

“The opposite of neoteny is progenesis. Progenesis also called pedogenesis is when development is accelerated, when someone is beyond their age, when they are premature, precocious, they have attained and obtained capacities which exceed their chronological age. But generally speaking, the entirety of humanity, every single individual and the collective, the species as a whole is neoteny. In other words, it becomes more and more childlike.”

Social media is based on everyone being childlike – screaming babies who believe everything revolves around them. The collective is totally demonized. It’s all about extreme individualism and absolute self-expression – and fuck the world! People now literally believe that they can order the world to address them in bizarre ways, using bizarre pronouns, and have the world arrested if it refuses to comply.

Vaknin said,

“Now neoteny results in something called pedomorphism, pedomorphosis. Pedomorphism is the retention in adults of traits previously seen only among the young. It’s when you grow up and yet as an adult you retain traits, behaviors, cognitive structures and even emotions which are much more typical of a much younger person. And this is called pedomorphism or pedomorphosis. It’s a form of heterochrony. Heterochrony is when there is a mismatch between chronological age and psychological or physiological age.”

Is this causing a massive rise in PEDOPHILIA? The very childish WOKE seem obsessed with corrupting children. They seem to closely identify with children and the fantasy behavior and expectations of children. They never say anything adult. Conservatives seem enormously more adult than the Woke.

Vaknin said, “Pedomorphism, the retention of traits, young youth traits, retention of childlike traits into adulthood…”

The whole of modern culture is about sanctifying CHILDISHNESS, and social media is all about childishness.

Vaknin said,

“Everything is slowed down, everything regresses, everything becomes more and more childlike, more and more infantile, everything is neotenic. Our institutions, our relationships, our ways of thinking, the way we emote, the way we are having sex, our impulse control, our choices, our decisions, they are all becoming more and more puerile, more and more infantile, more and more childlike. … It seems that adults are much less good, much worse at for example emotional communication, children are much better at communicating emotions. So there is an evolutionary advantage to remaining a child, emotional communication.”

And isn’t Wokeness, and isn’t social media, and isn’t “influencing”, all about hysterical, childish, deeply emotional communication?

What about narcs? Vaknin said,

“By remaining children psychologically they actually fit into neoteny but then of course their pathologies prevent them from taking full advantage.”

Vaknin said,

“And this process of sexual selection, which has been taking place at least since the agricultural revolution, possibly earlier, had resulted in neotenous males. Men are becoming more feminine and more childlike. They resemble females, they resemble women more and more.”

Look at how effeminate many men now are. Culture itself is MAKING them effeminate. It’s incentivizing effeminacy. It’s GROOMING boys and men to be effeminate.

Vaknin said,

“We are converging gender-wise, sex-wise. We are converging on a neotenous, a universal, unisex, neotenous solution.
“We are all beginning to look the same. Gender is a socio-cultural construct, but our sexuality underlies it.
“If we are all becoming the same, if we are all beginning to look the same according to Doug Jones, this would have tremendous impact on our psychology, on our gender identity, on gender differentiation, and on our ability to maintain intimate relationships.
“And you already see in some cultures a preference for immature, neotenous, childlike people. In Japan, for example, you have kawaii. Kawaii in Japanese means lovely, cute, lovable, adorable. It pervades Japanese culture. It can refer even to objects and to animals, but when the Japanese use kawaii to refer to humans, they mean that these people are charming, vulnerable, fragile, shy, childlike. And so these people have cute handwriting, cute body language, cute psychology. They are very, very childish.
“And the Japanese have a preference for the kawaii aesthetic. It’s a prominent aspect of Japanese popular culture, entertainment, clothing, music videos, food, toys, personal appearance, mannerisms. Japanese women use childlike voices to communicate. It’s in the culture.
“Increasingly, neoteny, neotenous features, childlike cuteness is invading Western civilization. All you have to do is look at Tinder. Cuteness is also a clinical term in psychology. It’s a subjective term. It describes a type of attractiveness commonly associated with youth, with appearance, with children.
“But there is an analytical, scientific analytical model in ethology, the study of animal behavior. It was first introduced by who else? Konrad Lorentz.
“Konrad Lorentz proposed the concept of Baby Schema, what he called Kinchen schema. So baby schema.
“So baby schema is a set of facial features, body elements, body physiology that make a creature appear cute.
“He said that kinchen schema, child, baby schema, children schema, actually more precisely, child schema, this external appearance of a youthful childlike person coupled with appropriate immature retarded childlike psychology in an adult.
“He said that it’s actually an advantage because it activates, it releases in others the motivation to care for this person, to help this person, to provide support, to hug, to embrace, to contain, to hold.”

We live in a Baby Schema, Barbie Doll World – and that’s just the men! Masculinity is being eradicated from the world! Only adult men can be masculine – men who can fight in wars. A child-man such as Corey Rebhahn (MorgueOfficial) would die if he even saw a frontline in a war.

Vaknin said,

“So the childlike appearance, the childlike body, the baby face, the childlike psychology, I’m not a grown-up and I don’t want to grow up, as Peter Pan had said explicitly in the eponymous book, these trigger positive outcomes in the human environment. They trigger in other people behaviors which are helpful, behaviors which are productive and constructive and conducive to the progress and well-being of the childlike individual.
“When you are childlike people want to help you, people want to care for you, especially women, it provokes the maternal instinct.
“Cuteness is attractive and charming but it’s also adaptive in the sense that it motivates people to not harm you and on the other hand to provide you with things to provide to cater to your needs.
“And now I want to link neoteny, the preservation of childlike features and behaviors into adulthood.
“I want to link this to schizotypy.
“Schizotypy is in my view a form of neoteny. … schizotypy is refusing to grow up psychologically.
“When neoteny is mostly somatic, mostly concerned with body features, physiology, schizotypy is the psychological equivalent of neoteny.
“Schizotypy is a continuum of personality characteristics and life experiences which involves dissociative imaginative states up to the point of psychosis and schizophrenia.
“But what’s interesting in schizotypy, it is a regression. It’s a regression to childhood, pre-self childhood. Childhood before the child had a self, an integrated ego, very early childhood. …
“So schizotypy is when the person regresses psychologically to a stage before that person had a self or an ego.
“Of course schizotypy is most common among people who don’t have a self or an ego to start with.
“For example, narcissists, border lines, paranoid possibly, schizoids definitely.”

Neogenianism is a 100% infantile cult, ruled over by the most infantile person of all – Corey Rebhahn, who has the mental age of a two-year-old!

More Morgy Porgy idiocy from 2019:

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 6 Mar 2019

Hello! We have a big event coming up on March 23rd, where Peter Sjostedt-H will be speaking, and this will be filmed for the first episode in the docu-series. The episode will only be 7-10 minutes long, but I’ll have all the raw footage so I can release Peter’s talk in full, and even put together a Hyperian promo video, showing academic support. This is all really exciting and a good step forward in getting people to see many faces associated with Hyperianism rather than just my own. Things are moving along at an excellent trajectory.

If you have any ideas that could be good to implement for the evening, let me know. Also, we are going to have to start thinking of more episodes really soon as well, so if any ideas happen to strike you let me know as well. Here is a brief outline of the episode, though it’s a rough first draft (this outline was put together by the producer, not me).

INTRO (THE HYPERIANS GATHER)
Mysterious music under black… b-roll of Los Angeles fades in and out… a title card reads “somewhere in los angeles”
More b-roll of Los Angeles… another title card reads “the hyperians gather”
Over-the-shoulder/following shots in and out of focus of Morgue walking to meetup venue… shots of Hyperians mingling (may choose to use non-descript shots of things like hands, feed, backs of peoples heads, to further illustrate mystery and secrecy, at least until the speakers start talking)
Interview/VO from Morgue answers “What is Hyperianism?/Who are the Hyperian?” + the goal of Hyperianism is to spread knowledge and wisdom
Interview/VO from Morgue transitioning to/setting up the idea of secret societies. Why do Hyperians choose to operate in secret?
ACT 1 (SECRET SOCIETIES)
B-roll of Hyperians in attendance + JC speaking
2-3 well-selected sound bites about secret societies (the power of operating in secrecy? effectiveness? danger of persecution by those who fear change? this will depend on what JC’s speech is about)
Connect JC/secret society speech to Johanna Hilla/Jungian shadow self speech
Interview/VO from Morgue elaborating on the danger of persecution as a result of fear… most people fear change… they fear the part of themselves that they don’t know… they fear the unconscious parts of their personality… they fear the shadow self
ACT 2 (JUNGIAN SHADOW SELF)
B-roll of Hyperians in attendance, images from Jung’s Red Book, + Johanna Hilla speaking
2-3 well-selected sound bites about Carl Jung and The Shadow Self (why is it so important to get to know and fully integrate the shadow self?)
Connect Johanna/the shadow self speech to Peter Sjostedt/psychedelics speech
Interview/VO from Morgue with final thoughts on the shadow self… various tools to explore/integrate the shadow self… perhaps the most powerful tools we can use to explore and integrate the shadow self are psychedelics
ACT 3 (PSYCHEDELICS)
B-roll of Hyperians in attendance, psychedelic imagery and artwork, + Peter Sjostedt speaking
2-3 well-selected sound bites about psychedelics (going beyond “recreational” use… beyond “escapism”… what wisdom/knowledge can be gained from using psychedelics as a tool?)
Connect Peter/psychedelics speech to the theme of the episode and the goal of Hyperianism: spreading knowledge and wisdom
Interview/VO from Morgue with final thoughts on psychedelics/shadow self/secret societies… the knowledge and wisdom one can gain utilizing psychedelics, exploring the shadow self, and being part of a secret society with shared goals to help connect all of these pieces
CONCLUSION
B-roll of Hyperians in attendance, the flamberge sword, + Morgue introducing sword-swallowing stunt
Interview/VO from Morgue elaborating on the Masonic Flamberge, how it was used by the Archangels, and what it represents at tonight’s gathering
Morgue final thoughts/speech (connecting with theme of Hyperianism spreading knowledge and wisdom)
Interview/VO from Morgue elaborating on final thoughts

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 11 Mar 2019

Self-help is the way to go IMO. I’d much prefer to talk about ontology but people are so interested in self help. But I can sneak ontology in there. I’m going to be experimenting with a mix. I did a YouTube video on Kant, and of course it wasn’t popular, however I got some private messages from people that had a background in philosophy that wanted to hear more, so videos like this may be worth it for finding a few diamonds in the mud. A video I did on Magick was very popular… Magick seems to get a lot of interest… So I’m considering doing some more videos on the rational perspective on Magick… There is also some potential for me to collaborate with some occult groups in los angeles. I’m extremely wary about being associated with Magick, but people really like it.

With regard to self help, I’m currently studying Jungian individuation, depth psychology, the Jungian perspective on tarot, dream work, and even the OTO path of initiation which is actually quite interesting. The first 4 sephirot are balancing the four Jungian functions. The next three are finding your purpose, actualizing your purpose, then inspiring others to find theirs. The final three are concerned with optimization of the collective. Of course, I am not a fan of the imagery and symbolism used but it is interesting nonetheless.

I’m currently working on a system for integrating the shadow, the soul image, and the mana personality, for contact with the self. This should be coupled with inner work to realize one’s own divinity, first as a monad, then as the Absolute which will entail creating a new world. I’m thinking that the Seven Sermons to the Dead, and the Gnostic Hymn of the Pearl, will be excellent reading material for aiding people on this journey. If you have any suggestions on good books relating to individuation please let me know.

I am becoming quite adept at lucid dreaming and I will be incorporating this as well. People will be thrilled with the experience and it allows for exploration of the unconscious as well as revealing the illusory nature of reality.

By the way, I have a question. I understand the argument for Euler’s circle, and how every element of it is necessary for it to be closed, consistent, and complete. However, I need a little clarity on the argument for a monad. A monad is defined to be the container of every harmonic frequency, and that a monad is indivisible because every frequency is necessary to from a complete and consistent set of mathematics. Could you possibly point me to a GS book that explains that in a bit more detail? I am looking to understand more fully why every frequency within a monad depends on each other and is necessary to form a complete set of mathematics. I understand intuitively why a monad is indivisible, but I want to know it explicitly and concretely so that I can give a satisfactory answer to any skeptics.

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 12 Mar 2019 at 22:05

You’re right. Great point. For a big idea… What do you think of really emphasizing and making it a main feature that we are in a dream? Up to this point, we have done so, but it comes across as more of a metaphor. This would create a big idea and also guide the aesthetic.

I would work on a creating a process of innerwork, full of neologisms, to attain degrees of lucidity, involving Jungian individuation, lucid dreaming, psychedelics, and more.

The human brain/mind is a microcosmic reflection of the earth. The right and left hemispheres have developed in a similar way to the thought systems of the east and west. Just as the individual must integrate their shadow and soul image, so must the earth. Wars result from the failure to properly integrate the shadow, male/female disparity results in failure to properly integrate the soul image. The individual must make these elements conscious and integrated and so must the earth as our collective dream. As you go through our process to achieve higher levels of lucidity, you will become whole, and will be able to take control of your life and shape the dream. This is in line with Nietzsche’s will to power. The more lucid one is, the more power one acquires. We can create a version of Hegel’s system based on a dream. Reality is a dream that’s going through a process of becoming lucid and aware that it’s dreaming. Evolution is the process of increased lucidity. The different degrees of life reflect degrees of lucidity. Humans are more lucid than animals, which are more lucid than plants. This is compatible with the Bicameral Brain as well. Hyperians are the truly lucid ones, now going through a process of innerwork to achieve even greater lucidity to become whole and master their lives, and at the highest levels, master reality. We will become Archetypes. One day we will achieve gnosis and be able to create entire dream universes at our will, and explore each others worlds.

This is just a quick flurry of ideas but it has the potential to be really fleshed out. We could have all the elements of “magick” but under the trappings of altering the dream pattern, connecting with archetypes, etc. (Why do sigils work? because as you alter your inner world, the outer world alters). This is sparking a lot of ideas and has a lot of potential. “Achieve lucidity. Master your world” This world is a nightmare due to it’s failure to integrate. Your life is a nightmare due to a failure to integrate, but it can become a dream.

Thank you for addressing my question about monads. The first Stark book is my absolute favorite and I go over it many times. I’m familiar with what you mentioned but what you said adds greater clarity. At some point I will most likely be asking for a few more clarifications on this point, because I really want to be able to show precisely why it must be the case that individual, indivisible, monads exist rather than one monad that contains myriad copies of frequencies. I’m sure it must be frustrating that the books with technical details don’t have a large audience. I heard somewhere that Stephen Hawking was told not to include any equations in his book, because for every equation included it cuts the audience in half. This is too bad because I’m itching for these technical details. Every time I understand something further about ontological mathematics it’s like discovering a piece of gold, and the first Stark book is a goldmine.

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 15 Mar 2019

This definitely seems like the way to go. I did some tests and people are very interested in dreams. I’ll begin working on this and comment more on it in a moment. But something urgent has come up that I need your advice on, since I may have to make some last minute adjustments to the fast approaching docu-series film date. It seems the Hyperian event has caught some Masonic and OTO attention. Despite having agreed to speak, Y is now concerned and either wants to pull out or rebrand it to him speaking on the “western esoteric tradition” with no affiliation to any groups named or unnamed. It is very difficult for me to tell when Y is being accurate or when he is exaggerating. One name he mentioned was Lon Milo Duquette. I just need to know if you have any thoughts regarding stepping on any toes of these orders and if it is anything I need to be concerned about or if it doesn’t really matter. For example, I was going to swallow a sword to commemorate the evening and now I am considering whether I should remove the masonic symbols from the sword (which would be a pain to do). I’ve attached an image of the blade. It also brings up how much I should emphasize the “secret society” aspect in this episode and any Hyperian presentations/projects. I just need to know if I actually need to be concerned about these orders or if it doesn’t really matter, whether I should adapt to avoid upsetting them or if potential controversy could be beneficial, and if there is any danger. I appreciate your insight on the matter.

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 16 Mar 2019 at 00:00

Okay I appreciate your response, that is helpful. This is a bit of a bump in the road but I’ll talk with Jonathan, the producer, and get it straightened out story-arch wise.

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 21 Mar 2019

A production company (this is compete separate from the people filming the event) has taken an interest in Hyperianism and wants to put together a demo to pitch to various TV networks. This seems relatively safe as I won’t be signing anything over to them unless the project is a go. I’m attaching their proposal to this email. They are going to film me and 4 other Hyperians Friday night, talking about Saturday’s event and how it is exciting that Peter is talking and can add academic backing to our system, which would extend our reach. Then they will use that footage, plus the footage I am taking on Saturday, to create a demo to pitch.

I just need to quickly run something by you as they will be interviewing us and I’m sure, asking about the origins of Hyperianism. I was in a meeting with them two days ago and they asked me this question. My reply was that the foundation of Hyperianism is based on the mathematical system of the Pythagorean Illuminati, and that with this mathematical foundation, several years ago I began Hyperianism, synthesized with esoteric knowledge and inner explorations, for the purpose of bringing the truth of existence to the world at large.

I will never claim to be a part of the PI of course, unless they somehow edit it together to make it look like that. I’m not sure what kind of questions they are going to ask me tomorrow, but is there anything you do not want me to say? I’m assuming it’s acceptable to say I have made contact with the PI, as that is said in the Hyperian movie already? Just let me know if you have any concerns. As we extend into the real world, people are starting to take notice of Hyperianism. This is a very good sign. I’m quite excited for the future, regardless if this demo pans out or not.

A NEW EARTH
All people are seeking a higher truth. But only a select few are spreading it.
Logline:
This documentary series follows the inception and advancement of a new movement of forward-thinkers. It seeks to profile a leader and his/her efforts to build a following and spread his/her message to a wide audience.
Description:
In the age of the internet, it’s easier than ever to communicate to large groups of people. The web also allows us to learn more about the world around us. The combination of the two factors means new discoveries and secrets of the universe can be spread faster than ever before.
The question arises, if someone stumbles across a higher truth, how does he/she spread that message? How does a modern movement gain followers and grow? What are the hurdles along the way?
This documentary series profiles one visionary leader on a quest to spread their message far and wide.
Backroads Pictures is a documentary production company based in Los Angeles.
Composed of a team of producers, directors and creative thinkers, their mission is to tell stories that break boundaries and inspire the human spirit.
www.backroadspictures.co

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 24 Mar 2019

Both the event and the filming went amazingly. It was an absolute success. Now I just have to wait on the footage. So many non-Hyperians couldn’t stop talking about how much they enjoyed it. Finger’s crossed they got all the shots. I know they lost audio on about 5 minutes of my speech about the shadow self, luckily it wasn’t completely critical, but they should have all the rest. Moving into the real world is going to be huge in increasing the interest in Hyperianism.

Here is something to consider though… Peter’s interpretation of panpsychism seems to be radically different than the standard definition. In his talk, he said that he is a monistic panpsychist, that matter and mind are one thing, only viewed from different perspectives, and he considers Leibniz and Spinoza to be panpsychists. In his speech he outright said that he does not agree with materialism, dualism, or idealism.

Essentially, his entire speech was very much on point with our thoughts, almost 100% in content. If you replaced the word “panpsychism” with OM or Hyperianism you wouldn’t be able to tell a difference. But, of course, he kept saying panpsychism. Now this is a bit confusing for the viewers. So in my interview I said “I invited Peter here to speak this evening on panpsychism, because Hyperianism is panpsychism.”

We don’t have to use this of course, but it’s there if we need it. But it does seem pretty critical for the viewers to understand why he is talking about panpsychism so much. And if we use that interview clip, it automatically makes Peter’s ardent support of panpsychism become a support of Hyperianism.

So the question is, is there a way we can use the word panpsychism? For example, in the description on the YouTube video we could put “Note: Hyperianism can be considered an idealist panpsychism.”

Would that perhaps work? To refer to it as an idealist panpsychism in the “fine print”, so to speak? Or perhaps we could write something like “Hyperianism can be considered an idealist panpsychism, dual aspect monism, neutral monism, or a mathematical idealism. The differences are a semantic issue.” This way we can pick and choose the most strategic title based on the context, as well as still critique nonidealist versions of panpsychism.

Anyway, there is no hurry on this. It’s going to take some time to get all the footage together. The first Hyperian event was brilliant. I’m quite excited for the future.

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 25 Mar 2019

The Friday doc filming went great. They seem very interested. Interviews were provided by myself, X, Faith, Christina, and Arjun. Now it’s just a matter of providing them with the event’s footage, seeing how they want to present it and if a network is interested, which is always very unlikely due to the sheer number of offers they get, but who knows. I’ll connect with you again before deciding what sort of qualified panpsychist label we could attach to this. A sort of an aside… I speak much differently in front of a crowd than I do on YouTube videos. I speak in a high energy, passionate way. I could tell that many people were inspired to look into Hyperianism simply because of that. So I’m going to try to brainstorm ways to make that happen more often because the effect it had was quite substantial and could be key in getting people on board. It seems to engage an almost bicameral response in them.

I’m having a drink with Peter in about 4 hours. He has become interested in N-dimensional space so I may bring up our 6D system. He did mention in his talk, by the way, that he used to be an idealist. I’m going to try to feel him out to see where his mind is at and if there is any potential. I’ll be dropping hints and explaining our system in a subtle way. If you have any suggestions on ideas I could subtly drop, let me know.

Morgue morgueofficial@gmail.com 29 Mar 2019

Yes, as I said this was in the moment for the interview to make the episode make sense, with the possibility of adding the “fine” print in the comments that we are an “idealist holistic panpsychism. NK also suggested in the last that panpsychism would perhaps be strategic to use. But I can absolutely remove the line “Hyperianism is panpsychism”.

I also recorded a version that says “Hyperianism is *a* panpsychism”

But I can ditch that line entirely. So if I remove any association to saying Hyperianism is a panpsychism it would probably sound something like this:

“I invited peter here tonight to speak about panpsychism. It’s important for people to realize mind and matter are not separate, but are one”

Of course I realize that in our system matter is derived from mind. I’m not trying to say that Peters position is correct. He isn’t. He also does not believe in an enduring self. I’m just trying to make it all make sense from the viewers perspective as this is not an “explainer” video but meant to be entertaining.

What do you think? Shall I drop the line and leave it to what i quoted above?

======

Rebhahn, as we keep saying, NEVER understood Illuminism and ont math. We said to him, “So, your introduction to Peter should simply be: Our final speaker tonight is Peter S-H, philosopher of mind, and he will be speaking about mind, matter and psychedelics. Full stop.

“Peter is simply a philosopher speaking about panpsychism. He has nothing to do with Hyperianism. He is not advocating Hyperianism, so there’s no point in trying to talk as if he has some connection to Hyperianism. He doesn’t. You’re simply one freethinker introducing another.

“I’m just trying to make it all make sense from the viewers perspective as this is not an “explainer” video but meant to be entertaining.” – but that’s not how it comes across. Anyone would imagine that you are endorsing panpsychism and especially Peter S-H’s take on the subject. That’s not “entertainment” – that’s what people will take away as the basis of Hyperianism.

“You shouldn’t touch panpsychism with a bargepole. It has no strategic value at all. It’s the last stand of materialism, on a par with Buddhism – for “spiritual” materialists that deny the existence of the self and deny any mental singularity as the origin of existence.

“Before Peter speaks, you could perhaps insert an explanatory caption that says, “Peter’s specialism is panpsychism, which claims that matter has a mental aspect.”

“You’re going to have to be extremely careful if you want to be taken seriously as a thinker. You can’t say, “Oh I spoke inaccurately because I was in entertainment mode. If you’re going to make a serious point, make it. If you’re going to be entertaining, be entertaining. But you can’t make a serious point badly and then offer “entertainment” as an excuse. Serious points being wrongly stated are not entertaining, just confusing and off-putting. They badly detract from your credibility.

“Peter himself is always very careful about what he says and ensures he never strays too far from his inherent materialism. He’s always at pains to deny the existence of the self, the mind, the soul. You have to be just as careful and precise as he is. Your exposure to Peter caused you to pick up some of his ways of speaking – specifically that mind and matter “are one” – and you thus echoed his position rather than stating the Hyperian position, which is an idealist position based on the eternal mind as the source of all.”

Rebhahn was forever getting things wrong about Illuminism and ont math and of course now more or less everything he says is absurd. Rebhahn – as both a somatic and cerebral narcissist – has NEVER been able to work out if he is in the entertainment business or the education business, and he plays both games to try to secure maximum narc supply. But you CANNOT play these games together since they are totally different things.

Rebhahn has already failed utterly and a central reason for that is that absolutely no one in the real world takes him seriously as any kind of intellectual, yet Rebhahn’s insane cerebral narcissism is all about being recognized as some sort of “genius”. Yet, at the same time, he’s a somatic narc consumed by his image and trying to “entertain” the masses, as if he’s still on the Freakshow. There’s an inherent contradiction in everything Rebhahn does and he has in effect self-sabotaged. He’s NEVER going to be treated as an intellectual – he has no education, no qualifications, and is a plagiarist canceling wondrous intellectual books by actual intellectuals – but he just can’t give up the dream of being told he’s smart and amazing by the world (as opposed to being told this by his groomed cult slaves who will unconditionally tell him whatever he wants to hear). Rebhahn’s only chance last summer was to rebrand as an entertainer only or a spokesthing on behalf of the non-binary and vegan community. But his cerebral narcissism wouldn’t let him, and so he has destroyed himself. So it goes. Good riddance.

“…why it must be the case that individual, indivisible, monads exist rather than one monad that contains myriad copies of frequencies” – Porgy

Porgy absolutely NEVER grasped what a monad is and started to believe that there is only ONE MONAD, which could then divide itself into many “sub” monads, and that’s where all his One and Many nonsense originated, and his absurd fallacies concerning Leibniz’s law and the Hegelian Absolute (viewed from the OM perspective). Basically, Rebhahn never understood the most basic tenets of OM, and wasn’t interested. He was always interested in how to abuse OM to make it secure him max narc supply.

“Every time I understand something further about ontological mathematics it’s like discovering a piece of gold, and the first Stark book is a goldmine.” – Porgy

Never forget that Rebhahn canceled all the OM books, as well as the first Stark book, which he himself called a “goldmine”. It’s ASTOUNDING how mentally ill this person is. You cannot take seriously a single thing he says. He will say and do ANYTHING to maintain narc supply, the drug he can’t do without. He is a manifest psychopath, attacking the very books he stole from. You couldn’t make it up!

This man is the uttermost ENEMY of ontological mathematics, as his actions prove definitively.