• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Can you see "Witchy" eyes?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ninae said:
Then I realised there are a lot of people who are a combination of both and most evil peole aren't totally evil.
Click to expand...

This is the key.

This is why I was careful to say that good and evil are categories of actions, not categories of actors. In other words, I believe in good deeds and evil deeds, but I don't believe in good people and evil people. A person can cultivate the capacity to err on the side of one or the other in the majority of their actions, sure. But there's nothing keeping a person who's done nothing but good all their life from doing something evil, and vice versa.
 
Right - we're all free to switch side as we like. I'm making a more serious thread related more to this now, which sees the subject from an interesting perspective.
 
MyDoorsAreOpen said:
Inflicting needless suffering on another sentient being is my working definition of evil. It's to be avoided because it burns bridges, erects barriers, and blinds the inflictor to the interconnectedness of all beings. I'm not going to derail this thread either; this is the bottom line for me on this subject, and at this point in my life I really have no truck with anyone who sees it as useful to call this basic premise into question. I'm sorry if that sounds curt or anti-intellectual, but becoming a father and training in a helping profession that demands all I've got to give has really solidified my position on this and made this matter anything but academic to me.
Click to expand...

sounds like you are appealing to emotion rather than reason though, which is fine. Still animals in nature cause unnecessary pain on other animals for indirect reasons, like territory, to show who is dominate, to wipe out competitors. It's kind of in the nature of life to do this. A lion is hardly evil for wiping out the cubs of a nearby mother to protect his own future.

as for Ninae, i see the similarities yes. What do they mean to me? i don't know, nothing really. I think i have great intuitions and have a knack for the paranormal but you're better off sorting out the reptilian race from the humans than figuring out things by people's eyes in pictures. I get that you can feel the spirit of these people but so can i. what if we come up with two different answers? Most of those predators you found are seductive looking to me, which isn't interesting because of human biology.
 
I have no way of saying for sure what is behind it, but the similarities are interesting to me and should have to mean SOMETHING.

As for being "seductive", for sure, although I think that predatory look is more attractive to females than males (who's looking for a a pure, innocent, virgin (biologially). Then again I guess they can also like a look that say they're guaranteed sex, as opposed to most women. I once read something written by a "Witch" (self-proclaimed) that said the most effective way to seduce a man was to combine the angelic/devilish look. Sounds reasonable enough, based on what is known of male nature, but how you're supposed to accomplish that I don't really understand.

I would think an innocent person in a bad mood would have more success than the other way around. But I think she was talking about something deeper than that - actually combining those two opposite poles in one person so that both could appear equally genuine. Anyway, I think this is getting a bit too far into "forbidden knowledge" or what shouldn't really be talked about.
 
One thing that nobody is taking into consideration, including you, Ninae, is that these pictures are heavily photo-shopped. All of them. So you making some pretty wild assumptions about something that is almost completely altered from what it actually looks like in reality. Even the eye color is photo-shopped in these pictures. Trust. You are doing an awful lot of analysis on a machine-produced effect. Just saying.

We see what we expect to see. I've seen this happen with my best friend, who has always been very spiritual, and 'sees' things that others do not. She is a beautiful human being, inside and out, but she is not impervious to assigning causation to correlation herself. For example, I bought my current home about eight years ago. My best friend has often said how she loves the 'vibes' in my home, but also how she sees that something in my home has changed my personality. I remind her over and over that I moved into management the same year I bought my home. I've continued to climb the management ladder since then and, yes, it has changed my outlook on life entirely, and not altogether constructively. In fact, I've decided to begin moving out of management because I dislike it so much. My best friend agrees with me when I tell her this, but then forgets (she is very forgetful), and brings it up again. I've noticed other situations very similar to this one, where she attributes something psychically because she is inadvertently assigning false equivalencies to things. I love my best friend deeply, and I believe she has the most profoundly beautiful soul I've encountered on this earth, but I've learned to look closely at variables when she tells me things like this. And I believe that she is also right in that she sometimes sees things I am not aware of.

I do not mean to patronize or belittle you in any way, and I hope you don't take offense when I suggest that perhaps you are expecting to see something now and so you see it. It would be different if you were seeing something in person (but, also dangerous, as another poster said), but really, I don't believe you are even seeing this person's true eyes when you are looking at these very clearly 'shopped pictures.
 
^ dont listen to ninae this is her latest stimulant induced obsession, just because she writes pages upon pages on certain topics doesn't make them grounded in reality
 
It was a bad choice of wording. Too controversial/inflammatory, etc. But I still believe there is something in what I was trying to convey, if not exactly the way I put it.

Maybe "Being in touch with energies of darkness or negativity" would have been a better choice than the fairytale-like term "Witchy" - which was asking for it. Oh, and I still have my head screwed on most of the time, even if going through benzo WD induced psychosis 5-10 times this year has taken a lot out of me, but only temporary.

Observe and judge for yourselves - no personal agenda for me in this. Just a point of interest.
 
Ninae said:
Maybe "Being in touch with energies of darkness or negativity" would have been a better choice than the fairytale-like term "Witchy"
Click to expand...

To be completely honest Ninae, this sounds even more mystical and fairytale-like to me.

I think it's extremely difficult if not impossible to judge character or intention based on what a persons eyes look like unless it is extremely obvious. Charlie Manson, for example, has a very dangerous and psychotic glare in his eye. Madonna, on the other hand, was a schtick thought up by a record company. Of course she's going to convey what her character is supposed to convey during a photo shoot, it's her job. Joan Collins just looks normal to me.

It's also important to note that what looks "evil, dark or negative" to one culture might convey something entirely different to another. It's not only about reading into something based on a personal sensitivity to these things, but is also very dependent on how you're conditioned by society and culture to read into them. In all honesty, it seems a bit superficial to focus too much on what someones physical characteristics say about a person without ever knowing them.
 
There are many different beliefs about these things. Many people don't believe psychic skills even exist, while others have seen proof they do.

About that, there is one psychic or extra-sensory skill termed "clairsentience" which refers to being unusually sensitive and perceptive to feelings and energies (like someone who can "see" things would be called clairvoyant and someone who can "hear" would be called clairaudient). This is the only extra-sensory skill I have worked on and developed to some degree and have come quite far with.

Anyway, I don't really see much point in discussing this with someone who has no experience with it or belief in it, when there are enough who have.
 
Bardeaux said:
Joan Collins just looks normal to me.
Click to expand...

LOL. She might be physically impressive but if you could see her aura you would probably die from visual pain. Luckily I'm blessed with the abscence of clairvoyance, which would be too much for me, so I can only "feel" these things though that is uncomfortable enough.

When I was a child I found her horrendously revolting to look at (beauty/ugliness is also a kind of energy, not just form) and children are more sensitive to these things.
 
Ninae said:
There are many different beliefs about these things. Many people don't believe psychic skills even exist, while others have seen proof they do.

About that, there is one psychic or extra-sensory skill termed "clairsentience" which refers to being unusually sensitive and perceptive to feelings and energies (like someone who can "see" things would be called clairvoyant and someone who can "hear" would be called clairaudient). This is the only extra-sensory skill I have worked on and developed to some degree and have come quite far with.

Anyway, I don't really see much point in discussing this with someone who has no experience with it or belief in it, when there are enough who have.
Click to expand...

No offense but if you actually believe you can see ethereal energies in a person's eyes then your mind is not calibrated to reality the same way most people are. A psychologist would probably be reaching for their prescription pad. Personally, I think if you really believe you have senses bordering on clairvoyance then you should look for some authentic, corroborative proof and then capitalize off it. Of course, don't let people know you have that skill because that would just ruin the franchise.
 
thujone said:
No offense but if you actually believe you can see ethereal energies in a person's eyes then your mind is not calibrated to reality the same way most people are.
Click to expand...

I think you got it there. Many people's minds are "Not calibrated to reality in the same way most people are" - and many much more so than me, who's only at the tentative stages.
 
the thing is, even if what you believe is true, this will never be confirmed either way. you will never be able to do anything with this "knowledge" and by focusing your attention on it, you will only be wasting your life.

as long as you're living functionally and are able to take care of yourself, then what you think does not matter. if it starts to negatively impact on the quality of your life, then these things may not be such a great idea, don't you think?

imo, get off the drugs. all of them. they do no good if they lead to such delusions and fantasies. there's plenty to experience in life without.
 
I'll just leave this here, Eagles - Witchy Woman:



;)

Its a problem with flash photography. Faces are whitened, constriction of pupils, a person reacting to a huge amount of light. Magazine photography isn't shot to be natural, its photoshopped and has a general unreal quality that the brain has trouble dealing with. See hyperreal, reality as simulation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top