leonardcohenforum.com

wow! that was a stinger and yes I did miss it!

yesterday i did go to the dentist again. she took me in at the end of the day, the pain was intolerable. she suspected a damaged nerve that was undetected by her raygun. she said the only solution was to remove the nerve, but if she discovered a fracture in the root the tooth would have to be extracted. a local anaesthetic was administered to the tooth area and she started drilling into the tooth. unfortunately the raging inflammation, infection or whatever, caused the anaesthetic to lose much of its effect, and several times she had to tilt my head back into the head-rest on the chair. i was in a distraught situation, every time the drill touched the pulp it caused me to jump in agony. i was fearful, and even though had no intention of crying i could feel the tears welling up in my eyes and one by one rolling down to my ears. she was talking to me the whole time, but i couldn't register what was being said, all i knew was fear and unbearable pain.

after about 45 minutes she managed to put some temporary white filling in the cavity, removed all the equipment from my mouth and i was allowed to sit up and rinse with water. she sat down and wrote a long message into my journal on her computer, while i tried to make the blood circulate in my shaking fingers. i had squeezed my hands so tight that they felt like they were filled with needles rushing about. eventually she came and looked at me, and apologised for the experience i had endured. she said that she hadn't managed to complete the work because the infection had lessened the effect of the anaesthetic, and that she had made a new appointment for me this coming friday. then she said she will use a different, stronger anaesthetic, and maybe the inflammation has subsided a little by that time anyway. if so, she will complete the task of removing the nerve, and will know if one of the roots are fractured - if so the tooth will have to be removed.

she said the toothache should be less now, due to the work she had just done, and she was right. i still have a nagging pain today, but it is not above the threshold that i can stand, so no painkillers taken since then, and that is good, because i was worried about my liver and kidneys, how they could be damaged with such high doses throughout day and night. well, i left the surgery, saw how red my eyes were in the waiting room mirror, went outside into the town, still shaking. naturally am dreading returning on friday, but at least know the pain was not psychosomatic. i do have a dentist phobia, like many people, if they will admit it, but i am not crazy, just unlucky, and it is difficult for anyone to empathise if they have not themselves experienced any of this.

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 7:49 pm yesterday i did go to the dentist again...

Thank you for the update -- i am certain that we were all waiting with bated breath to find out what was happening with your toothache.

While I do not share your phobia of going to the dentist, I do not like the pain that sometimes accompanies dental-related issues and activities. I always require extra doses of anaesthetic -- often twice as much as normal -- because the usual amount has little effect on me. It also often wears off too soon, and I find myself, like you, experiencing blinding pain, with involuntary tears running down my face. At that point, my dentist always stops and gives me more anaesthetic. The last time I had a major dental procedure, the dentist had to freeze my jaw-bone by drilling a small hole in the bone in which to insert the needle, because simply freezing the tissues was not sufficient to quell the pain, no matter how many doses he gave me.

Incidentally, referring to your previous comment about the ability of dentists (and females in general) to instill calm in their patients, and your preference for female dentists due to your belief that they are better at such things, my dentist happens to be male, and yet I find him to be extremely empathetic, always showing considerable concern for me, and thus making me feel quite calm. He always tries to ensure my greatest possible comfort, and he is clearly distressed when he inadvertently causes me pain and discomfort, quickly taking steps to minimise it. In fact, in general, I have found male dentists, doctors and nurses to be extremely capable of comfort and compassion, as much as and sometimes more so than some of the female practitioners that I have encountered. Perhaps feeling comfortable with a health-care practitioner is not a one-way street, that is, perhaps the personality and inclinations of the patient play as much a role as the personality and inclinations of the practitioner in how comfortable and calm a person feels in their care.

thank you, lisa. i laughed for several minutes after reading your opening sarcasm. you have a wicked and appreciated sense of humour.

the thing is, concerning the gender relationship between doctor and patient, of paramount importance is that the patient has confidence in the person to whom they will be subjected. take me, for example, i know she is competent, will do the best she can, and that it cannot be easy having a patient with a phobia. i am scared as hell to go to her surgery, would rather crawl across burning embers than return to her on friday, but i am not a coward, have never been a coward. i go for check-ups far more regularly than people who profess they are unafraid. she doesn't realise exactly who i am, that in her chair and at her mercy is one of the most interesting, perceptive and creative people in norway today, and possibly in the entire northern hemisphere, and that pleases me. just imagine how nervous she would be if she realised the truth, and i need her to stay calm.

it would be awful to not be able to walk around and observe everything anonymously like other people. of course there are a number of people in my circle who recognise that there is one amongst them who is special, but even they cannot grasp the magnitude of what is going on, how impressed their grandchildren will be when learning that their forebearers were acquainted with a person who comes along only once every 500 years. don't forget, van gogh's genius was not recognised until after his death, he sold only one picture in his lifetime. it will be easy for people to read this and brush it off as boasting, but i am intelligent enough to know that there is no one else like me around, and i know how impossible it is to brag, to give self-praise, without opening one's self to ridicule from those who are unable to understand or reach such heights. doesn't bother me at all, because they will be forgotten while i get written into history.

I came upon a dentist,
he was slaughtering a tooth
I accused him there
With his tortured truth
He said “Listen to me, Geoff,
your eyes are blind
and your ears are deaf”

Well I found a silver needle
I put it into my teeth
It did some good
to the underneath
But the knights were bold
and the filling made of gold,
How comes the Knights were also such total shits?

I saw a forum growing up
where Lisa fell down
Was I supposed to praise my Lord?
the one with Wig and Gown
My dentures go round and round
And you, you are my only original tooth.

Do not leave me, Snow
do not leave me Snow
I’ve been pushed down
by a decent fool, and have to go.
Blood upon my body
and depravity in my soul
let’s fill the cavity, it is your Surgery

unlike you, mike, who ignored the portrait of yourself that i made, i thank you for this thoughtfully adjusted poem composed in my honour.
meanwhile . . .

to ignore is "to refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally". ooh what a long way away from the tired man who again lost a race with Sammy Sloth and Tommy Tortoise the other day. This leaves me stuck in last place in this Televised competition between the 3 of us

thanks for the drawing of myself, Geoffrey

Solongleonard

solongleonard wrote: ↑Wed May 20, 2020 4:04 pm thanks for the drawing of myself, Geoffrey

thank you so much, but relax, dear friend. you should know me by now, know that i am an easy going sort of chap, not the type to ever consider brooding over such petty things. it is of little importance. you obviously didn't like the picture, and that is your prerogative - so fair enough. it was a poor likeness. the matter is already forgotten. we will speak no more of it.

today is a national holiday, ascension day, a time to offer prayers to our sweet saviour in heaven. let us rejoice and give thanks to the lamb of god, who with his precious blood took away the sins of the world. for we worship and bless his holy name. in nomine patris, et filii, et spiritus sancti. amen

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Thu May 21, 2020 5:29 am ...today is a national holiday, ascension day, a time to offer prayers to our sweet saviour in heaven. let us rejoice and give thanks to the lamb of god, who with his precious blood took away the sins of the world. for we worship and bless his holy name. in nomine patris, et filii, et spiritus sancti. amen

Either Geoffrey has found religion and thus joined the ranks of the "sheep" for whom he has previously expressed considerable disdain, or he is just mocking religious people by mimicking what they might say. I'd wager the latter, but who knows?

hello lisa
no intelligent person can categorically claim that a superior being exists. it is highly doubtful that it does, though quite impossible to be sure. all holy scriptures are utter nonsense, of course - although some of them are not entirely without intellectual value, prose and stories. faith gives comfort to people, gives them hope. sadly, those behind religion are mostly unscrupulous, misogynistic men concerned with money, control, indoctrination, power, psychological manipulation, etc. - the cause of much fighting and death. in all likelihood we are alone and unobserved, but if an all-powerful male creator does exist, he is not the kind father figure to whom one needs to bow down. for what merciful person would permit earthquakes, innocent brain-damaged children, tsunamis, spina bifida. why would some "be born to sweet delight while others unto endless night"? leonard wrote to me, and i think i still have the letter, that if god exists, "he/she/it has a very dark and cruel side". considering the upbringing i had, and the way i lost almost everyone close to me, i think that sums it up quite concisely.

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Mon May 25, 2020 1:47 am ...i think that sums it up quite concisely....

Ah, so you have not joined the sheep, and were just full of... mischief.

Of course, I happen to agree with everything you wrote. (That doesn't happen often.).

Leonard looks very cheerful in your sketch -- nice to see!

LisaLCFan wrote:
>Ah, so you have not joined the sheep, and were just full of... mischief.
>
>Of course, I happen to agree with everything you wrote. (That doesn't happen often.).
>
>Leonard looks very cheerful in your sketch -- nice to see!

it must be wonderful to have faith, to throw intelligence, common sense, logic and the laws of physics to the wind. to be a member of a flock of sheeple who believe in the paranormal, who surrender their individuality and ability to think in order to serve a system where ignorance is welcome. how wonderfully blissful it must feel to be brainwashed into believing that eternal life is waiting on the other side of death. i am almost tempted to get a lobotomy and join those fucking idiots

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Mon May 25, 2020 9:18 pm ...it must be wonderful to have faith, to throw intelligence, common sense, logic and the laws of physics to the wind.... i am almost tempted to get a lobotomy and join those fucking idiots

You really think it would be wonderful? I don't -- I love my brain, and to me, intelligence is bliss!

Incidentally, there are, actually, some very intelligent people in the world who also happen to have faith and who believe in god, etc.. It is thus an inaccurate generalisation to assume and assert that all believers are stupid. I used to be totally mystified by such individuals (intelligent believers), because it was unfathomable to me how someone with an otherwise keen brain could believe such things with the same certainty that they believed in logic and physics and the things explained by them. However, I eventually came to understand how it may be possible to explain how an intelligent person can believe in spirituality, faith, etc., through the writings of Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein.

The idea is that there are conceptual frameworks consisting of various tools and materials, through which we can explain and understand the things that exist, and also, there is more than one of those frameworks. So, we have to determine which framework to use in order to learn about and understand whatever it is that we are trying learn and understand. Different frameworks and the tools therein can only explain those things that fit into them -- that is, only those aspects of reality that are knowable and understandable through that framework and its tools/materials -- but it does not enable us to know and understand things/aspects of reality that require a different conceptual framework with different tools and materials that would enable us to know and understand it.

So, when it comes to understanding things like physics and the physical world, there is a certain framework that consists of various tools and materials and understandings -- logic and reason and mathematics -- that we can apply to those things, and by which we can learn about them and understand them. But, the tools and materials and understandings that we find in that particular framework will not work in different realms, such as in a spiritual realm. If a person perceives, or wants to perceive, something that exists in a spiritual realm, in order to know and understand it, they must use a conceptual framework and tools and materials that are applicable to that aspect of reality, and a framework that includes logic and reason is simply not the right one to use.

I suppose, by analogy, one can think about the conceptual framework and tools and materials that one uses to bake a cake, versus the ones used to build a house, or the ones used to fix a car. In each of these examples, what a person wishes to understand and accomplish are very different, and require very different kinds of tools and materials and understandings in order to be successful. One will not be able to figure out how to build a house, nor be able to build a house, from what they find in a bakery -- the tools and materials used for baking are simply not the right ones to use for carpentry. Nor will a person have any luck trying to figure out how to bake a cake, nor be able to bake one, by going to an auto mechanic's shop and trying to use the tools and materials found there. Each of these people must find the right framework -- the right tools and materials and understandings, etc. -- in order to be able to accomplish their respective tasks, otherwise, they will have to say "I simply cannot do/make/understand a cake with all these wrenches and bottles of motor oil...". Furthermore, one would not say that the framework, tools, materials, understandings... that are required to bake a cake are wrong or useless or meaningless or stupid, just because a carpenter cannot use them to build a house. Neither would one force a baker to use the tools of a mechanic to bake a cake, insisting that they are the only tools that can be used, for everything! Obviously, there are totally different tools, materials, etc., that people use for different things.

So, back to Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein, trying to get to know or understand a spiritual dimension, faith, religion., etc., by using the framework and tools and materials of logic, reason, mathematics, etc., will not work, because they're the wrong tools -- those tools are designed for the physical world, and thus the framework is wrong for the task and for understanding the spiritual objects in question. Therefore, one has to find and use a different framework and different tools, ones that will allow a person to learn about, know, understand, and explain things that cannot be known or understood or explained using the framework, tools, and materials, that one uses for the physical world.

Capiche?

Harvey Wittgenstein is a disgrace. Some of the actors he assaulted may never have got the roles at all, but for him breaking the sexual distancing rules. I hate him with a passion fruit and a fake banana.

Me 1 movement

A few points that I'd like to make.

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Mon May 25, 2020 1:47 am those behind religion are mostly unscrupulous, misogynistic men concerned with money, control, indoctrination, power, psychological manipulation, etc.

This group is a subset of all those who make it their mission to attain raw power and the wealth that comes with it, they can be found in the upper echelons of probably every government, political party, mega-corporation, and union as well as in religions. Many or most who are in positions much lower than the megalomaniacs in their organizations are unaware of what is above and do worthwhile work themselves, ie, the nuns at the Catholic church. Even if many people at the upper levels of an organization are benign, they will inevitably be forced aside by the few with insatiable lusts for power.

Geoffrey wrote: ↑Mon May 25, 2020 1:47 am no intelligent person can categorically claim that a superior being exists. it is highly doubtful that it does, though quite impossible to be sure.

I studied in the natural sciences when I was younger, and although my career took a different path, I have kept up with general developments, especially regarding astronomy, and retain the awe at what science reveals. I think Geoffrey's words were carefully chosen. For example, when he says, "no intelligent person can categorically claim that a superior being exists," Geoffrey must be correct. But if he had instead said, "no intelligent person can claim that a superior being might exist," I would question the veracity of that statement. We have a situation where there are two possible explanations: there is a "superior being" or there is not. And despite all of mankind's scientific knowledge and advances, nether explanation can be proved. And maybe never can be. I was not brought up in a religious household, and so never acquired any attachment to any formal religion. But from an intellectual standpoint, I also know that (thus far at least) science has not been able to explain many things, for example how DNA, originated. To me, at least, it is not sufficient to just say, "oh, way back there was a warm soupy mix of chemicals that decided to form polynucleotide chains and coil in a double helix."

The whole idea of there being a "superior being" automatically brings images of a white-haired man in robes to one's mind. This usually ends any arguments, but I think it does a disservice to what many like myself have come to believe, that there is something beyond what we know, and in fact are capable of knowing, and that something probably affects us, our world, and our universe. If this seems unbelievable to you, consider dimensions. All human brains can understand the three basic dimensions, and a few (I would guess less than 1%) can truly understand how time is the fourth dimension. And yet there are a handful of human brains working on plausible theories where the universe contains as many as ten dimensions. Trying to comprehend more than three dimensions is very troubling to most people, because we don't normally encounter concepts that the brain cannot grasp. That is the same way I feel about the "something beyond what we know," while I can neither describe nor understand it, I can accept the possibility--even probability--this it exists.

Years ago I read an interesting picture book that I obtained through the Scientific American Book Club called "Powers of Ten." Each page was a photograph or picture, and the first page was a view of the observable universe from many parsecs out in space. Page two depicted the same scene as page one, but with everything magnified by ten (in other words, page two was blow-up of the center 10% of page one). This progression of size by powers of ten continued until, at the middle of the book, the picture was an overhead view of a park. This then went on for remainder of the book until the limit of our knowledge about "small" was reached. (I see "Powers of Ten" can be obtained on Amazon for $3.88, it could be the best $3.88--or 39 krone--you ever spent.) What made this book fascinating was realizing how many pages at the beginning and how many at the end could not have existed fifty years ago due to the limits of scientific knowledge.

4