Author Topic: The subject of reason + complementary postulates  (Read 101 times)

Cory

  • Administrator
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 83
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: The subject of reason + complementary postulates
« on: July 16, 2018, 11:25:29 pm »
On p.22 of The TROM book, I see two sentences which confuse me: http://take.ms/elErA

The first one is: """All the subject of reason limit the possible and define the reasonable"""

This is not a well-formed English sentence. What do you suppose the author was trying to express here?

Next we read: """The most reasonable postulate is a complementary postulate"""

The reason this confuses me is that I wonder why a postulate needs to be complementary to anything: it stands on its own.

Your right a postulate is a postulate in a state exterior to your body. A state where your uneffected by anything can be a strait postulate without consequence. Scientology calls it serenity of beingness. However people dont operate like this. If the average person makes a "postulate" it is formulated based on your life experience, which is a series of effects in your life. They thinj it through first. That thouhht bombards with all possible bad situations and is crafted based on them. Thus most "postulates" are in fact just counter postulates to something else. A reaction. Thus we have the four kinds of effect postulates. A cause postulate is pure and uninterrupted by past effects. Its done without reservation or inhibitions because its done in the present moment now, not from the mind or the past.