Can people change?

[mental vagrant]

Heh, you assuming super space agent luke has had the oppertunity to breed. Producing offspring is incredibly glib and selfish in our age.

[Luke Space]

Ask yourself the question, why do humans breed?

If you can give yourself the answer to that question, without emotion or attachment to any aspect of existence, you are enlightened.

I answered it without emotion and without attachment (I think). However, a psychopath probably would answer it in the same manner yet he/she probably would not be enlightened.

By the way, what do you mean by "attachment"? I don't read much philosophy so I'm not too sure of what it means.

[Luke Space]

Heh, you assuming super space agent luke has had the opportunity to breed. Producing offspring is incredibly glib and selfish in our age.

:-)

[Matt Gregory]

You see, if I spend all day reading something I'd like to be able to retain a large amount of the information if not all of it. Just like Will Hunting did in that movie Good Will Hunting. Have you seen it? Basically, it's about a brilliant genius who lives life as if he doesn't have this special gift. In one scene he was able to recall information from a history book word for word and the page number. I know this is a fictional movie but I'm sure there are people like this in the world. Now if only there was a way to train one's memory to do this...

If this is what you really want to do, then you should just do it. It's not hard to memorize a book. Lots of books have been handed down through oral recitation like the Bible, the Odyssey, and the Iliad.

I really don't know, but what I think is that the reading helped, but it has side-effects. Namely, all this time spent studying is an investment, so we get attached to it and link our identity to it. "I'm a philosopher!", "I'm well-read!", "I study a lot and have become very intelligent!", blah blah blah. This is an easy trap to get stuck in. What changed is that I squirmed out of the trap, but once I got some genuine insight, I fell right into another trap. They're all over the place.

Wouldn't seeing results of your hard work (becoming more intelligent etc) make you happy and eager to continue? I don't see a problem with this.

Yeah, all my work finally paid off a little bit and made me happy. But happiness is total roadblock further progress towards truth. Truth needs to be pursued with the utmost integrity if you want to actually get there.

The ego is very cunning will deceive your rational mind ruthlessly.

Can't the ego work with the rational mind? By the way, what do you mean by ego? By some definition the ego doesn't seem like a bad thing. I mean, without an ego I probably wouldn't be motivated to change myself. I'd accept everything as it is.

The ego is the undeveloped part of oneself that believes in false ideas for the sake of preserving happiness and security.

When I was 25, I had a hard time concentrating. Actually, I could concentrate, but only on things I was interested in. Like video games. I could concentrate on video games for days. Reading, not so much. It would put me right to sleep.

Hah, I still play on my ps3. Got 3 new games which I still haven't played, though. If you don't mind me asking: how old are you?

I'm almost 40.

Life changes people. But I'm interested in knowing what causes that change. I have a feeling you stopped playing video games. Am I right? Did you loss interest and move on to better things? What caused this change to occur? Tell me about it.

Yeah, I basically grew out of it. I guess it stemmed from thinking about my life and what I want to do with it. I decided that I want to be remembered as someone whose existence benefited the human race, and I concluded that games aren't going to get me there.

I just forced myself to read day after day. I would read each paragraph ten times and then when I finished the book I would start over at page 1 and read it again. I wouldn't read a lot, just a few pages at a time, but it would add up and it helped me think a lot. The goal is not to read, but to think.

Good advice. I too am going to read something - especially new difficult-to-understand information - as many times as it takes for me to understand it. As far as I'm concerned, there's really no such thing as not being able to understand something. Everything that has been understood, can be understood.

Just make sure you read good books! Spend your time wisely.

I hope you're not tired of my questions. I like reading your responses.

No, not at all. I get busy with life, though, and I sometimes (meaning usually) don't feel like thinking about philosophy :/

[Blair]

what do you mean by "attachment"?

In a broad sense; the illusion that anything at all is not intrinsically a part of yourself.

You attach "to" it (and it reciprocally attaches to you) , under the egos' mental construction that it is somehow not you. This is why sex manifested itself in this chemically dense aspect of the universe. But that's all it is, the workings of an unconscious universe leading you as a sentient, to believe you must find your mate and breed to become whole.

Science has recently proven that all "things" are interconnected, no matter how disparate they may seem. Philosophy knew this a long time before. The song remains the same.

[Luke Space]

If this is what you really want to do, then you should just do it. It's not hard to memorize a book. Lots of books have been handed down through oral recitation like the Bible, the Odyssey, and the Iliad.

Good to know.

Yeah, all my work finally paid off a little bit and made me happy. But happiness is total roadblock further progress towards truth. Truth needs to be pursued with the utmost integrity if you want to actually get there.

How do I know that I'm not already there? I mean, I'm not delusional anymore and all my thoughts seem to be correct and honest. What else is there?

The ego is the undeveloped part of oneself that believes in false ideas for the sake of preserving happiness and security.

I have an ego, as most of us seem to have, but I don't think I experience false ideas/thoughts (head's up: that may just be my ego speaking!). I am wrong at times but that's only when I haven't understood something properly.

Is it possible to not have an ego? Would that even be a good idea?

I'm almost 40.

That's cool. You're still pretty young.

In a broad sense; the illusion that anything at all is not intrinsically a part of yourself.

You attach "to" it (and it reciprocally attaches to you) , under the egos' mental construction that it is somehow not you. This is why sex manifested itself in this chemically dense aspect of the universe. But that's all it is, the workings of an unconscious universe leading you as a sentient, to believe you must find your mate and breed to become whole.

Science has recently proven that all "things" are interconnected, no matter how disparate they may seem. Philosophy knew this a long time before. The song remains the same.

I understand most of what you wrote and agree with it. But I still don't understand what this "attachment" is. For example, going to a bar and thinking that a girl there is actually a part of me, or that everything is a part of me, would probably be a bad idea and get me into trouble. There needs to be a clear distinction between everything else and I, and there is.

Personally, I don't believe I need to marry or have offspring to become whole. But this is coming from someone who has never married or had children. I am whole, whatever that means, but I still want to improve upon myself and become a better whole, if that makes sense.

[Luke Space]

Q: What is an absolute truth?
A: Something true in all worlds.
Q: Is me sitting at my computer typing this message an absolute truth, why or why not?
A: It could be, but I can't verify it, which makes it questionable.

So far so good? How would you answer the above questions?

NOTE: I'll be away from Internet access for a full week. Take care, everyone!

[Blair]

Being ignorant of the way things are
is the easiest path of all
when you start drooling over Reality
you have to ask her out to the Ball

[Pam Seeback]

what do you mean by "attachment"?

In a broad sense; the illusion that anything at all is not intrinsically a part of yourself.

You attach "to" it (and it reciprocally attaches to you) , under the egos' mental construction that it is somehow not you. This is why sex manifested itself in this chemically dense aspect of the universe. But that's all it is, the workings of an unconscious universe leading you as a sentient, to believe you must find your mate and breed to become whole.

Science has recently proven that all "things" are interconnected, no matter how disparate they may seem. Philosophy knew this a long time before. The song remains the same.

I agree that it is ignorant to believe you must find your mate and breed to become whole. Does not this line of thinking logically take an individual to the inevitable end of sentient human consciousness? No breeding, no brain; no brain, no human thinking. If you agree with my logic, do you envision a reality of individual wholeness of nonsentient [spirit] consciousness?

[cousinbasil]

I agree that it is ignorant to believe you must find your mate and breed to become whole. Does not this line of thinking logically take an individual to the inevitable end of sentient human consciousness? No breeding, no brain; no brain, no human thinking. If you agree with my logic, do you envision a reality of individual wholeness of non sentient [spirit] consciousness?

Not that you were speaking to me, Pam, but I have often envisioned such a thing: a consciousness apart from bodily awareness. I personally have had out-of-body-experiences that were chemically triggered so I know the two are not the same thing, that is consciousness and the physical vessel to which it is tied. I admit that at those times I deliberately and fully willfully kept in mind that there was this vessel and that my intention was not to abandon it. Because the allure to do just that was tremendous - I had the fear of someone having to discover my dead body. I was so ready to go but did nor want to expose anyone to such a thing. I came upon the startling realization that this is likely an ability every conscious being has - the choice to opt out. It has to do with the control of one's breath. It lies deeply buried in one's psyche, for it is attached to the innermost of threads. It would require unrelenting and no-holds-barred soul searching, but the mechanism is there to be found.

I am not suggesting the "out-of-body" experience I and others have had is the same as non sentient awareness, although at the time I was aware I had no "senses" or incoming stimuli from the outside world, vis a vis light entering into my retina; nonetheless I clearly saw things.

[alice144]

.... f it.

[Pam Seeback]

Not that you were speaking to me, Pam, but I have often envisioned such a thing: a consciousness apart from bodily awareness. I personally have had out-of-body-experiences that were chemically triggered so I know the two are not the same thing, that is consciousness and the physical vessel to which it is tied. I admit that at those times I deliberately and fully willfully kept in mind that there was this vessel and that my intention was not to abandon it. Because the allure to do just that was tremendous - I had the fear of someone having to discover my dead body. I was so ready to go but did nor want to expose anyone to such a thing. I came upon the startling realization that this is likely an ability every conscious being has - the choice to opt out. It has to do with the control of one's breath. It lies deeply buried in one's psyche, for it is attached to the innermost of threads. It would require unrelenting and no-holds-barred soul searching, but the mechanism is there to be found.

I am not suggesting the "out-of-body" experience I and others have had is the same as non sentient awareness, although at the time I was aware I had no "senses" or incoming stimuli from the outside world, vis a vis light entering into my retina; nonetheless I clearly saw things.

I also had an out-of-body experience when I was four years old, non-chemically induced :-), and although I do believe such experiences contribute to the development of spiritual consciousness, the bottom line is that, as you say, out-of-body consciousness is not no-body consciousness, just as "near death" experiences are not death experiences.

What I observe of most logical thinkers that take logic as far as the wisdom of the wholeness of the individual mind is that they do not take the next logical step which is to acknowledge that since the thinking mind is sex/DNA dependent, that if sex is relinquished so that individual wholeness is to be realized, the logical outcome is that the thinking mind itself would become extinct. Very few individuals want to take wisdom to this extreme for obvious reasons.

Thanks for sharing your experience. Consciousness - what a ride!

[Pam Seeback]

A lot of this thread seems like silly metaphysical stuff that has no basis in reality.

"Seems" does not cut it if you are going to be a contributor on a board based on logic and reason. Can you give me your reasons why this "metaphysical stuff" is silly and has no basis in reality?

It's less about finding true love and reproducing. Although since so many people have gone this route, it would appear that there is some wisdom to it.

Certain psychological studies have proven that love has health benefits. I was recently reading an article on Personality Cafe about, among other things, love can make you smarter through allowing for the synaptic pruning of unwanted neurons through the release of the neuromodulators. Learning about another persons experience, is, to my mind, just as important and eye-opening as, say, studying mathematics, or reading about philosophy.

((I'll post that link after I'm not so new and this forum will allow me to do so. Just so you guys don't think I'm pulling stuff out of my ass.))

So it's less about finding a soul mate, but more about finding friendship, and maybe some flawed, human kind of love, if you are maybe very lucky. The aim is more towards companionship, I think.

Alice, companionship still requires the prerequisite of sex and all the baggage that goes with sex so that companions can be produced. Companionship after wisdom is still, for most, a necessity. Such companionship could be said to be a loving connection of like-mindedness.

Quote: Pam
If you agree with my logic, do you envision a reality of individual wholeness of nonsentient [spirit] consciousness?

Quote Alice144: Haha, like that pilot episode of Star Trek TOS. Nice.

I don't believe that such a think is ever possible,

Were you not non sentient before you became sentient? Were you not formless before you took form? Were you not invisible before you became visible?

I am a Star Trek fan; which series was "TOS?"

[cousinbasil]

I am a Star Trek fan; which series was "TOS?"

TOS = The Original Series

[Pam Seeback]

Talk about logical. :-)

[Dennis Mahar]

Were you not non sentient before you became sentient? Were you not formless before you took form? Were you not invisible before you became visible?

This is the PRIME duality human being struggles against, all other dualities pale in comparison to this one.

Something and Nothing.
2 bookends of Nothing with Something between.

Nothing.......Something (one's life).......Nothing.

The perilous situation.
The dread of Nothing.
The Conditions.

How many come to terms with Nothing.
How many in their dread of Nothing cling desparately to 'anything' as long as it's 'something'.

One has no control over conditions.
There's a possibility of free and happy that's not dependant on conditions.
That possibility opens up in the recognition of emptiness.

People think enlightenment means 'to come up with something'.
Enlightenment means 'to come up with nothing'.

To 'come up with nothing' appears to human being's dread of nothing as 'the booby prize', so human being makes shit up anyway to deal with it.

Genius isn't an IQ situation.
It's a mode of reasoning that comes up with nothing.

Luke Space,
You have 2 concerns.
1. Your IQ.
2. How can you get laid.

This is how to deal with it.
Go to Mensa and see if you can hook up there.
If that doesn't work, go to a trailer park and see if you can hook up there.
If you're good looking and have some money one should work.
Either option will produce misery.
When you want to fix misery come back here.

[Pam Seeback]

Quote: Pam
Were you not non sentient before you became sentient? Were you not formless before you took form? Were you not invisible before you became visible?

Dennis:

This is the PRIME duality human being struggles against, all other dualities pale in comparison to this one.

Something and Nothing.
2 bookends of Nothing with Something between.

Nothing.......Something (one's life).......Nothing.

The perilous situation.
The dread of Nothing.
The Conditions.

Man is the only being who consciously struggles to reconcile these two worlds of himself, causing him to push through the struggle to find a resting point of conscience.

Luke, there is no such "thing" as "enlightenment", but the belief that there is is the very fuel that brings one to this understanding. Such is the pattern of duality awareness and of the "hard wired" desire to "see beyond it" [to transcend its false sense of "twoness"].

[Pam Seeback]

Genius isn't an IQ situation.
It's a mode of reasoning that comes up with nothing.

Dennis, I'd love to explore this thought, if you are willing, but I will start a new thread so as to not derail the original intent of this one.

[alice144]

movingalways, don't you know that its rude to reply to deleted posts?

"Seems" does not cut it if you are going to be a contributor on a board based on logic and reason. Can you give me your reasons why this "metaphysical stuff" is silly and has no basis in reality?

Logic and reason are overrated. Most people don't operate by it anyhow.

How do you know that your philsophical musings are correct? How do you know that they are incorrect? The farther they stray from direct, concrete experience, the more difficult it is to make any definite claims. I'm quite leery of metaphysics for this reason. I think that, yes, it is a sign of an intelligent person who is curious of the world around him, and who is curious about more than his direct sensory experience. But I think that once you stray beyond what is immediate proveable, you are dealing with intuition and guesswork. I believe that people can correctly identify patterns without understanding the underlying phenomena and still be able to make good choices within that system of knowledge which they have created. However, this is messy, and I prefer to keep things as little messy as possible.

Yes, you are correct, I can't prove that metaphysics has truly nothing to do with anything but then by the same token, you can't prove that it has any basis in reality.

I have an issue with your claiming to abide by the rules of logic, when in fact you only do so when it is convenient (i.e. someone disagrees with you). I don't see any evidence of logical progression in your own posts; instead it's more a collection of impressions.

Were you not non sentient before you became sentient? Were you not formless before you took form? Were you not invisible before you became visible?

Again, that's not a meaningful statement. Who cares what I was before I was born. The only important thing is how to work within what I know and what I can reasonably imagine from what I know.

I think it's useful to get away from the mundane demands of living, and I'm happy that you are able to do so. I also am very much in favor of people looking inward, and focusing on spiritual goals. However, most people don't operate by this reality. At the risk of being offensive -- I don't think that your way of living is very much in line with the rest of the world. I believe, that, in order for ideas to be good and useful ones, they have to be helpful for other people. I am personally very interested in a philosophy which is more generally applicable.

Alice, companionship still requires the prerequisite of sex and all the baggage that goes with sex so that companions can be produced. Companionship after wisdom is still, for most, a necessity. Such companionship could be said to be a loving connection of like-mindedness.

Okay, we have had very different experiences. Personally I've had some fantastic platonic relationships.

[Pam Seeback]

Alice, I appreciate your reply, but our thinking is too different to form any kind of meaningful dialogue. You lost me in the first statement, telling me I was rude to reply to a deleted post. Perhaps you deleted your post just before I posted my reply, but I assure you, when I pressed the "submit" button, I was unaware of its deletion.

[Luke Space]

To me enlightenment is the whole purpose of studying philosophy and engaging oneself in philosophical thought. I see it as the end result or a destination. But I'd also like to think there is much progress to be made once someone actually becomes enlightened. One journey is over and another begins.

What did Plato mean by there being another realm (or something) of unchanging forms which constitute ultimate reality? I'd like an explanation of what this means. Thanks!

Luke Space,
You have 2 concerns.
1. Your IQ.
2. How can you get laid.

This is how to deal with it.
Go to Mensa and see if you can hook up there.
If that doesn't work, go to a trailer park and see if you can hook up there.
If you're good looking and have some money one should work.
Either option will produce misery.
When you want to fix misery come back here.

Heh. How serious are you?

Anyway, I don't think I'm ever going to get laid again. That part of my life is over. It's actually pretty impressive that a person in my situation can wash and dress himself. Some people like this can't. I guess I'm pretty lucky in some ways!

Luke, there is no such "thing" as "enlightenment", but the belief that there is is the very fuel that brings one to this understanding. Such is the pattern of duality awareness and of the "hard wired" desire to "see beyond it" [to transcend its false sense of "twoness"].

You mean there's no such thing as consciousness without delusion?

Someone once told me that seeing color is a delusion and I didn't understand what they meant by it. Any ideas? For me, color does exist and I can't possibly see how it can be a delusion. People that are color blind may not know that color exists but that's because they can't see it and don't understand it.

[mental vagrant]

To me enlightenment is the whole purpose of studying philosophy and engaging oneself in philosophical thought. I see it as the end result or a destination. But I'd also like to think there is much progress to be made once someone actually becomes enlightened. One journey is over and another begins.

What did Plato mean by there being another realm (or something) of unchanging forms which constitute ultimate reality? I'd like an explanation of what this means. Thanks!

Luke Space,
You have 2 concerns.
1. Your IQ.
2. How can you get laid.

This is how to deal with it.
Go to Mensa and see if you can hook up there.
If that doesn't work, go to a trailer park and see if you can hook up there.
If you're good looking and have some money one should work.
Either option will produce misery.
When you want to fix misery come back here.

Heh. How serious are you?

Anyway, I don't think I'm ever going to get laid again. That part of my life is over. It's actually pretty impressive that a person in my situation can wash and dress himself. Some people like this can't. I guess I'm pretty lucky in some ways!

Luke, there is no such "thing" as "enlightenment", but the belief that there is is the very fuel that brings one to this understanding. Such is the pattern of duality awareness and of the "hard wired" desire to "see beyond it" [to transcend its false sense of "twoness"].

You mean there's no such thing as consciousness without delusion?

Someone once told me that seeing color is a delusion and I didn't understand what they meant by it. Any ideas? For me, color does exist and I can't possibly see how it can be a delusion. People that are color blind may not know that color exists but that's because they can't see it and don't understand it.

Say why.

[Dennis Mahar]

Luke,

Anyway, I don't think I'm ever going to get laid again. That part of my life is over. It's actually pretty impressive that a person in my situation can wash and dress himself. Some people like this can't. I guess I'm pretty lucky in some ways!

That's refreshingly honest Luke,
thankyou.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

To me enlightenment is the whole purpose of studying philosophy and engaging oneself in philosophical thought.

At some time you might have to choose between enlightenment and philosophy.

What did Plato mean by there being another realm (or something) of unchanging forms which constitute ultimate reality?

I see a wall and it's white. I see a white mattress. Although the wall and the mattress are their own separate things, the shared "whiteness" is a Form. Also, the wallness is shared by all walls, and the mattressness is shared by all mattresses.

[alice144]

Alice, I appreciate your reply, but our thinking is too different to form any kind of meaningful dialogue. You lost me in the first statement, telling me I was rude to reply to a deleted post. Perhaps you deleted your post just before I posted my reply, but I assure you, when I pressed the "submit" button, I was unaware of its deletion.

Okay, glad to hear. I've had other things happen on other internet forums before. Actually I feel bad now, rereading that post, because I think my resentment colored my reply. In short, I was unnecessarily uncivil, for which I apologize.