The Things We Don't See

This topic contains 28 replies, has 17 voices, and was last updated by  Hannah Schenck 2 months, 1 week ago.

  • Author
  • #15954

    Woah. This all is so fitting within my newest theory.

    The things we don’t see… Such as whom the real Otis Fletcher is, why someone would want to pretend to be someone appearing so kind to gain our trust, or whom is pulling the strings to provide the manipulation!

    Otis, or whomever you really are, I have the slightest tugging at my heart strings that you are (a part of the) “always watching”.

     Brad Ruwe 

    What if we’ve been wrong on the “shadow” theme. It’s not that duplicates of us are being made, or our “shadow selves” that perfectly complement us. What if it truly is our shadow, a part of us, the part of us that blocks the light creating the shadow. Just as these images don’t show the whole story, they hide things, just as we do ourselves. We hide elements of ourselves from others, we put out an edited version of who we are to the world around us.

    Noah put out the super confident, “man in charge” version of himself, when really he seems to just be following his daddy. Otis (possibly) put out this image of him being a kindly old man who doesn’t understand technology, when really he could be a force to be reckoned with.

    We all hide parts of us in the shadows. What if this is what these images are trying to convey to us about ourselves? Who we are VS who we display to the world.


    So, regarding Otis – I have a couple of theories about who the “King” is because I do NOT thing it’s Horace. I think the King is someone that we know and don’t expect, I think Otis said as much.

    Horace is a 10.

    One of my theories is that the King will turn out to be Otis – Otis is behind this, or maybe “John,” but that he is the one at the top that we’re being asked to help.

     Meghan Mayhem 

    @nothenrygale This is something I’d brought up in the past I’m regards to the shadow accounts. With the exception of @thebuz, every one of our shadow accounts popped up to call us our for something. Posting the audio, dropping the note, posting overly verbose theories, etc. They all seemed to be trying to shame us for something about ourselves. At least that’s how it appeared to me.

     Buz Wallick 


    I’m no scholar, but did Socrates actually exist or was he the ultimate creation from within Plato’s cave?

    There is a lot of evidence that Socrates was a real person. However Plato did do a bunch of writings AS his teacher Socrates. Specifically with the writings of Socrates trial titled “The Apology of Socrates” in which Plato wrote about Socrates trial from the POV of Socrates himself. Plato even wrote himself in as a character. Sound familiar?

    So with that being said and tying into the whole picture cropping business…

    Could Plato represent the Creators (DLB&CS) and Socrates represent Anoch? A real entity but also a creation of Plato in some cases.

    Both were of course condemned to death for “Corruption of The Greece Youth”.

    I need to do some more reading here, but I definitely think there is more to this Plato/Socrates business than meets the eye. Bigger Picture if you will.


    @thebuz funnily enough, Socrates was sentenced to die for corrupting the youth particularly by introducing “strange gods.”


    @coryphella excellent, we agree (which exists me in and of it’s own!) Otis (whomever he really is) could be the “king we do not realize exists”. Horace, the system, OSDM, iConfidant, Noah, Sarah… everyone we thought was in control at some point, has turned out to show their flip flopping and fighting for “power”. That’s fitting right in with the 10’s and 2’s always switching, etc.

    @thebuz – I would recommend looking into Socrates and Plato for everyone involved in this. I did not know anything really, other than he was the philosophical greek dude that “admitted he knew nothing, therefore was the smartest man”. There literally are people who believe Socrates was a creation. But, on the note of Socrates, it is maybe noteworthy to mention he supposedly would go into cities/governments of the time seeking the philosophers. He would get them to tell him all about how they knew this, how they “knew” that, only to lead the discussion in a way that literally made them later state things to completely contradict what they had stated earlier.

    This entire history thing of Socrates/Plato could tie right into everything we are learning perfectly. If Socrates was created by Plato (there are entire discussions you can find online on the debate as to whether or not the story we know of Socrates was just Plato’s creation) – – it could definitely tie into my theory that people are using this whole experience thing against us. It provides the perfect grounds for “evil guy/gal xyz” to come in (much like Otis) as a kind caring individual, only to disappear out of our sights. Actually, a lot of characters seem to have disintegrated back into the darkness of which they came…

     Buz Wallick 


    I would recommend looking into Socrates and Plato for everyone involved in this. I did not know anything really, other than he was the philosophical greek dude that “admitted he knew nothing, therefore was the smartest man”.

    Many of us have been since the Cave theory was explored early on.

    I will say that we should start diving into the Socratic dialogues that chronicle the last days of Socrates. There might be something there.

    Apology of Socrates

    The Apology of Socrates (Greek: Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους, Apologia Sokratous, Latin: Apologia Socratis), by Plato, is the Socratic dialogue that presents the speech of legal self-defence, which Socrates presented at his trial for impiety and corruption, in 399 BC.[1]

    Specifically, the Apology of Socrates is a defence against the charges of “corrupting the young” and “not believing in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel” to Athens (24b).[2]

    Among the primary sources about the trial and death of the philosopher Socrates (469–399 BC), the Apology of Socrates is the dialogue that depicts the trial, and is one of four Socratic dialogues, along with Euthyphro, Phaedo, and Crito, through which Plato details the final days of the philosopher Socrates.


    Euthyphro (/ˈjuːθɪfroʊ/; Ancient Greek: Εὐθύφρων, Euthuphrōn), [ca. 399–395 BC], by Plato, is a dialogue whose events occur in the weeks before the trial of Socrates (399 BC), for which Socrates and Euthyphro attempt to establish a definitive meaning for the word piety (holiness).[1]


    Phædo or Phaedo (/ˈfiːdoʊ/; Greek: Φαίδων, Phaidōn, Greek pronunciation: [pʰaídɔːn]), also known to ancient readers as On The Soul,[1] is one of the best-known dialogues of Plato’s middle period, along with the Republic and the Symposium. The Phaedo, which depicts the death of Socrates, is also Plato’s fourth and last dialogue to detail the philosopher’s final days, following Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito.


    Crito (/ˈkraɪtoʊ/ KRY-toh or /ˈkriːtoʊ/ KREE-toh; Ancient Greek: Κρίτων [krítɔːn]) is a dialogue by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato. It depicts a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito regarding justice (δικαιοσύνη), injustice (ἀδικία), and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates thinks that injustice may not be answered with injustice, and refuses Crito’s offer to finance his escape from prison. The dialogue contains an ancient statement of the social contract theory of government.


    Looks like I have some summer reading now. Bring on the cliffnotes!

    Thank you @thebuz for the reading material start point. @wanda102 thank you for pointing out the cropping in the first place. Great catch!


    @thebuz Phaedo especially stands out to me as worth looking at. It’s the dialogue being delivered in “Death of Socrates,” and deals with the mortal, destructible nature of the human body and the Soul as it’s indestructible opposite. The soul is immortal. While a human can starve, sicken, and die; the soul carries on.

    Haven’t we said that in alchemical transmutation, one could theoretically transmute the immortal human soul of one being into another?

     Buz Wallick 

    @wanda102 Wow! Great catch. This ties into a ton of the stuff we’ve seen hints at. Essentially this what they were doing at Ascension by trying to find the right oracle to bring about their version of Anoch.

    That is of course until the rug got pulled out from under them.

     Buz Wallick 

    This also brings up some potential links to Plato’s Theory of Forms.

    Plato’s theory of Forms or theory of Ideas[1][2][3] argues that non-physical (but substantial) forms (or ideas) represent the most accurate reality.[4] When used in this sense, the word form or idea is often capitalized.[5] Plato speaks of these entities only through the characters (primarily Socrates) of his dialogues who sometimes suggest that these Forms are the only objects of study that can provide knowledge; thus even apart from the very controversial status of the theory, Plato’s own views are much in doubt.[6] However, the theory is considered a classical solution to the problem of universals.

    You could essentially replace “Plato” with “The Creators” here and we’re essentially describing The Tension Experience and The Lust Experience.


    The latest Facebook quote referencing “the bigger picture”seems like a direct confirmation about our theory of them cropping out dangerous elements from the paintings, no?

     Hannah Schenck 

    @chrysalis359 Yes, I think you are right

Viewing 14 posts - 16 through 29 (of 29 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

©2017 The LUST Experience | Brought to you by the makers of The TENSION Experience |  Privacy Policy.

Log in with your credentials


Forgot your details?

Create Account

Skip to toolbar