GENIUS FORUMS

Your post Jup is a perfect example. Worse actually, you're trying to explain myself for me. I see it only as niavety. but what do you want to achieve exactly? World peace? Progress of World Evolution? Laying your own egg? I'm not sure if I could say there was something, and if there was, I couldn't ...

But what you seem to be saying is that deeper understandings of the 'true nature' of reality, or the 'true relationship' to existence in the phenomenal world, is a special category of knowledge and in this sense is 'personal' and also incommunicable. Nope, you're wrong to speak about it as if I'm r...

is that any person is justified in cobbling together a 'philosophy' which is (by your own definition) really a spurious collection of personal preferences, No, I didn't say that or advocate anything like it at all, nor has my 'position' changed or been retreated from, what I said was that philosoph...

Where does this drive of "getting through" come from you think? There seems to be little use in contemplating the causal relations to such a drive. Philosophy starts with realizing that, the knowing one doesn't know. And with that opens a whole different realm as now a new way has been fo...

Philosophy is entirely personal. There is no such thing as a direct communication of "philosophical" understanding, all you can do is provide some pointers, some vague signs through language, and if the traveller doesn't see the direction you're suggesting, or can only see it from the view...

An insight which you have helped to elucidate is that philosophy is entirely personal. There is no such thing as a direct communication of "philosophical" understanding, all you can do is provide some pointers, some vague signs through language, and if the traveller doesn't see the directi...

In fact you have no idea at all about anything at all, and you can make no definitive statement of any sort on these questions. The reason? You have no idea at all 'where you are' nor 'why you are' in this place (this 'World'). So basically what you wanted to write was that you have the intelligenc...

If I understand you right, you are saying the following: There is not theory about 'the absolute'. 'The Absolute' is. But people have 'metaphysical dreams' which, I gather, they absolutize. In doing that they step into error and 'delusion'. But one can arrive at an understanding that these 'dreams'...

Also, to be illiterate or intellectually unprepared does not mean "Hasn't read the same books as Alex". And you claimed that I was the one who attempted to work for an absolute unassailable position? Stoopid. You are apparently incapable of adhering to even the most basic conventions of a ...

"We all require a metaphysical dream with which and within which to dream our way through this existence." Perfect, so where's the disagreement? Is this not an "absolute" statement? What I really propose is the theory of no theory in regard to the absolute, basically, the recogni...

You really need to read what you write again. "I suggest that this is all front, deception, and in many ways a convoluted lie. It could be a fun lie, and a lie that captures one for a long long time, but it is in essence a lie. It is not 'truthful'." No explanation whatsoever, no reasoning...

I'm not surprised that all you could do was drop a name.

a more 'authentic' conversation then becomes possible. You see? For example? If you're determined to side-step, then there's not much progress to be made on that previous topic, just an endless repetition. Though whenever I enter in to a conversation I do so with the purpose of benefiting in some w...

Does this mean that I cannot have absolute certainty of knowing about anything? You said it was outside our capacity. But what about very simple things? Such as that there is what we refer to as "thought"? Though it doesn't say much in an of itself, it is still knowledge and it is even mo...

To make grand pronouncements about 'absolute reality', to state that one has 'seen' it and understands it, can define what is delusion and what is wisdom, and much else, is a system that MUST have clear links to all the areas of life and must literally pronounce on those things. So, it is not at al...

yet I have to say that I very strongly question the choices made by the 'school' to which The Founders belong. What exactly IS that school? What exactly are its tenets? Who here elucidates it best? Seeker? Diebert? Pam? Leyla? Jupi? Leyla? (Gasp) To be truthful and factual, when one probes 'your' p...

Gustav Bjornstrand wrote:What are those conclusions, Seeker?

The prioritizing of seeking "absolute truth", the promotion of independent contemplation, such as meditation, that there is the possibility to have a clear and certain insight into the nature of reality, etc.

Can you answer those questions I asked?

If I say 'Absolute truth does not exist', you answer 'How can you know that?' Anyone who asserts that 'absolute truth' is not a possibility for our realization automatically voids their own assertion. The absolute-minded religionist can then make his claim unhindered. Is that what you're saying, or...

They are necessary - required - if they do not cause us to rule out and deny (block) other dimensions of the truthful. No one has done so, you just imagine that a "prioritizing" of 'absolute' truth means that one must necessarily be ignoring all other "dimensions of the truthful"...

I would also suggest that almost no one really understands what I attempt and so the reaction I get is, overall, contempt. Diebert for example, for all his smarts, does not grasp what I am up to nor does he understand its value, and too Diebert has been 'seduced' and operates out of a substantial '...

It's very rare to come to an understanding when starting from the top, to explain all the relative, ever-shifting traps of appearances That's true, and this is something I'm interested in: Which methods are most effective in 'sharing' understanding, or bringing another to it via communication? Ther...

Thank you Jup, your questions were actually much more clear this time. In light of the above, is an abstract reference to one or more things the same as them or comprised of them? Neither, an abstract reference is not the same as the thing nor is it comprised of them, it is just a reference. But to ...

I am is truth, we are is false. See? He's not going to see what you mean at all, there needs to be a medium of common experience through which you can communicate. Either way I don't think your explanation was clear enough, your statement I understand, but the experience just doesn't exist with Ale...

It was likely 'wise' to have avoided atempting to answer the question about education. I imagine that you would have stumbled into a mire and got caught. The question was very loaded. Also, you should take a closer look at this, and realize that this was probably your hopeful intention. Your intent...

Wait, how is it possible to confuse or twist definitions that are just references to appearances? The twisted definition is another reference to the same appearance. DON'T JUDGE BRO! It's mind blowing that you can't realize that this sort of quote is proving your ignorance and lack of ability to re...