Welcome back. For anyone familiar with the basics of philosophy they'll be beginning to notice that much of what the CCRU exposits and explains is very alike to Plato's Allegory of the Cave. An allegory which has been spoken about to death and can be applied in some form to almost anything. However, for those who are not familiar with this allegory, I will quickly explain it here as it is given by Plato, and then later in relation to what the CCIU are doing, because there are some key alterations. Now, one is to imagine a cave in which people have been imprisoned since childhood. It's important to note, based on the original text of the cave, that they were imprisoned from childhood and not from birth. I think this is a key distinction which I will come to later. These prisoners are chained in such a way that their gaze is fixed,
forcing them to look at a wall in front of them and not anywhere else in the cave, not at each other and not at themselves. Behind the prisoners is a fire, and between the fire and the prisoners is a raised walkway with a low wall, behind which people walk carrying objects or puppets of men and other living things, in the words of Plato. The prisoners cannot see what is happening behind them and can only see the shadows projected onto the wall in front of them. The sounds of the cave coming from the puppet masters echo around the cave. And the prisoners believe these sounds come from the shadows themselves. And the prisoners, of course, believe that the shadows themselves are the reality. That is all there's ever been and that is what's happening and that is the way things are and that is the real. Socrates suggests that the shadows are the reality for the prisoners, like I've said,
because they have never seen anything else. Plato indicates that the fire within the cave is the political doctrine of the current era and the shadows teach that dominant doctrine now you can sort of take what Plato indicates to be the political doctrine as many other things so you could take it as the media you could take it as education you could take it as institutions you could take it as the thing which takes place of reality in people's minds or the thing they believe to be reality now Plato then supposes that a prisoner is freed. That prisoner looks around and sees the fire, and if told that he was seeing the real, he wouldn't believe it due to his complacency regarding what he has always known, namely the shadows. The real then would hurt his eyes, and he would return to looking at the shadows out of comfort. Plato then supposes that someone should drag him out of the cave forcefully,
and slowly, as his eyes adjust to the light of the sun, he would begin to see things and people themselves he would begin to see the real he would begin to become accustomed to it we can take this sort of as a metaphor of when conspiracy theorists believe when they're trying to force truth on people or when you're trying to make people see reason some people simply do not and never will they have to be sort of forcefully shown plato then supposes the prisoner would return to the cave and tell the other prisoners that what is outside the cave is the superior world yet the returning prisoner's eyes would be blind due to being accustomed to sunlight and as such the other prisoners would infer that the journey to outside the cave has harmed the freed prisoner in some manner and therefore the prisoners would attempt to kill anyone who tried to drag them out of the
cave. Now as I said the allegory can be applied to almost anything which has some form of real fake representation real duality. I've often seen it applied to the viewing of television in which the shadows cast onto the wall of the cave are whatever is on the TV screen, and the fire is the dominant doctrine of the media. The poignant fact about this application of the allegory, however, is that the viewer willingly chains themselves to the wall with regards to TV once they've become accustomed to it. They believe the wall is good for them. Arguably the same is true for Plato's allegory. However, back to the CCRU. When viewed in a Kantian manner, or in the manner of the CCRU, the allegory of Plato's cave becomes relatively clear. What is projected onto the wall of the cave is representation or phenomena, and what is outside of the cave is the real or the noumena. However, there are subtle differences when understood via a CCRU slash Kantian lens.
Firstly, one is locked from birth to the chains, as opposed to childhood in Plato's initial allegory. We don't develop our Kantian form of synthesis in our childhood, we are imminently, instantly, always locked into it. So we are born and we synthesize the same way throughout our entire lives therefore there is no act of locking one to the chains the change which lock us into perceiving only representation or shadows aren't externalities which attach us to something but are inherent parts of our very being we are one with the chains the chains are of us the form the chains take in plato's allegory which is this idea of an internal external split where someone is chained into the internal but can break the chains and exit to the external allowing for a subject is in the
kantian manner incorrect because the chains which lock us into the inside are part of the subject himself so secondly the understanding of the outside of the cave isn't something which can only be understood via journey to the outside one of the great tyrannies then made clear by the ccriu is the fact that we understand there is a real without having to ever venture there it's sort of the great cosmic tease of transcendental philosophy, so as opposed to Plato's initial and original allegory of the cave, in the Kantian manner, one can, if they look hard enough and read the correct text, such as the Critique of Pure Reason, they can understand that there is an outside of the cave, but theoretically, it's impossible to get there. What does Plato's allegory of the cave become once
applied to such a framework? Once again, all we're looking at is this lock-in. But let's imagine multiple miniature caves within the Kantian Transcendental Cave. There's one for politics, one for media, one for taboos, familial values, societal etiquette, etc. At all turns, we are apprehended by shadows which we believe to be real. We are apprehended by something which aims to control our reality by pretending to be that reality. But once again, these sort of miniature shadows are within the Kantian framework. So there are readings of Plato's Cave with the Kantian, but read in the CCRU sense, in the purely Kantian sense, the actual allegory of the cave itself is already making multiple metaphysical errors in the idea of internality and externality, because at no point does Plato make any distinction
with regards to what the alteration in the perception or mode of synthesis of man. So when he leaves the cave, he's still using his senses and sense data to sense things. You can tweak around with the allegory and say that metaphorically, This is sort of what Plato's on about, but I don't personally think so. And so the entire allegory of the cave is a metaphysical error. What we need to escape is the actual way we synthesize shadows. One of the interesting facts that Plato overlooks is the fact that the light which projects onto the shadows and the light which illuminates the outside, both of which are just light, are exactly the same. So it's funny to me that Plato overlooked the fact that, well, actually man's perceiving exactly the same thing, which is representation. He's perceiving what is allowed to him by his senses. Now a lot of what
the CCRU is doing is playing around and actually creating a meta-reality philosophy within their work. The CCRU does directly confront this meta-reality control system with their notion of the architectonic order of the eschaton. On page 80 of CCRU writings, serious magic is too Now, magic here is understood as the control mechanism for reality, which isn't far off the generally accepted definition of magic given by Dion Fortune, which is, the art of causing changes to take place in consciousness in accordance with will.
Unfortunately for us, Fortune does leave this open-ended. She says will in general, as opposed to one's will or your will. A change can take place within will generally, which means to say that the will of another can cause change within your will. The magic that the CCR you are alluding to is the reality-altering magic projected onto the walls of multiple caves as a way to cause changes within your will. To such a meta extent that your notions of will and reality themselves are changed. That is to say that what's happening within the cave, what's happening within representation, what's happening within the inside is a form of magical control which alters what you actually believe reality to be. Now, in a piece called Spheres and Degrees of the AoE,
AoE stands for the architectonic order of the eschaton, as I previously mentioned, It's stated in CCIU writings on page 83 that the AoE understands that power presupposes invisibility. Succession is not temporal but transcendental, metatemporal or metatronic, with higher levels appearing earlier in the sense of the a priori. Superior levels control inferior ones, acting upon them as the puppet master. This is the section wherein the CCRU begin to alter Kantian critique into something which controls, something which constrains, and something which locks in. The notions of superiority and inferiority presuppose a notion of control, or a duality of master and slave. The superior form of transcendental temporality is that which controls and forms the successive modes of temporality
which man exists within. The reason this section is entitled Spheres and Degrees is largely due to this formulation of superior and inferior modes of temporality. Architectonic order of the eschaton, doctrine and ritual, is consistent with Burrah's OGU, or One God Universe, in that it's a meta-framework of self-referential justification and vindication of its own truth, supported by societal, political and familial traditions, attitudes, habits, normalcy, and conceptions of reality, which adhere to a strict norm. A reality itself which also adheres to a hierarchical form of transcendental layering, which is beholden to a metaphysics of time allowing for entry and control of alternative
modes of time, linear, non-linear, teleoplexic, etc. Now teleoplexy is something I'll get into much later. The AOE then is the order which controls the entire structure of temporal superiority and inferiority. It's of note that evidence relating to connection between the AOE and AI research or UFO phenomenon is not available to first degree initiates. That's to say that those who are accessing and assessing Kantian critique via the usual means will not find their connection to AI or UFOs. This is sort of a very cryptic CCRU hint as to ways in which one can read Cantean Critique which are entirely original and may lead one towards the exit, but I'll leave the personal journey bits to you guys. Despite the heavy and often complex occultist and mythological frameworks
utilised to attend to this metaphor, the CCRU are in some form creating a religion, they are creating a myth. They are creating an occult structure from which to address the cage of time. There is an understanding that if we address this cage of time, this lock-in from the usual means, that is our senses, we're simply running in circles and chasing our own tail. We need an entirely new structure to address it if we are to attempt to exit it. See you in the next lecture.