Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:34 pm
I don't go near them because they are complete dross. Want me to explain why?
Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment
http://theabsolute.net/phpBB/
If you can do so without appealing to some emotion, sure, otherwise forget it.I don't go near them because they are complete dross. Want me to explain why?
Truth is more important.Sue Hindmarsh wrote:The discussion of Woman is all about the undermining of the ego - and nothing is more important than that.
.
Dan called for brevity and succinctness.Leyla Shen wrote:Wow, funny as hell. A whole page of one-liners. That's gotta be a first.
Dan called for brevity and succinctness.
Your judgment lacks clarity and refinement. You paint everyone with the same brush to justify resorting back to past conditioning. There is a spectrum of intelligence surrounded by ignorance. Ignorant people are totally controlled by their conditioning, as they have rarely penetrated into the depths of their own consciousness. Their conversations revolve around shallow topics, and they feel threatened whenever a discussion questions the validity of their conditioned animal values.I look at the world and see a bunch of stupid people, but I also don't see a bunch of fools. I see that everyone thinks rationally...they just do it imperfectly and don't care to do it perfectly. So what? That's no reason to condemn them as some "wise people" do, and try to change them. Before attempt to perfect others, make sure that you are perfect yourself.
That doesn't bother me as long as I have understood the basic idea.Your judgment lacks clarity and refinement.
You must not talk to many people in real life. It's easy to think of them as stupid when you go up onto the top of the mountain. You see all of their duels and daily dealings as almost entirely unconscious.You paint everyone with the same brush to justify resorting back to past conditioning. There is a spectrum of intelligence surrounded by ignorance. Ignorant people are totally controlled by their conditioning, as they have rarely penetrated into the depths of their own consciousness. Their conversations revolve around shallow topics, and they feel threatened whenever a discussion questions the validity of their conditioned animal values.
I suspect the only reason why "wise people" are disgusted with others is that they feel left out. At least that's how it comes off most of the time.Intelligent and rational people are not controlled by their conditioning to the same degree as the masses. They are not perfect, but they do possess some degree of self-awareness which varies. Subconscious activity still occurs, but they have the awareness to analyze it, and not allow it to affect their daily actions. Most people have very little self-awareness.
Haha, I'd say the same thing to you.So there is a huge spectrum of intelligence and ignorance, so you should not come to these crude judgments of yours.
Everyone's minds work the same way. We all think mathematically. Things have to make sense for everyone.It doesn’t make any sense to simply state everyone thinks rationally. It is not true, only a minority of individuals are able to think rationally to some degree.
You may want to rethink my stance. I've only said perfection is impossible. I've also said it's only a belief of mine...not something I believe is without a doubt absolutely true. Also, I don't do it mindlessly. Reread and try to keep up.Ironically, you criticize Kelly Jones for mindlessly promoting perfection, but you are on the opposite side of the dualistic tree, as you mindlessly promote imperfection.
Did I ever say to quit?I agree that one needs to stop striving to find the destination of enlightenment, but this doesn’t mean one should cease being attentive to their daily subconscious activity, and how it affects their daily action.
I agree entirely.You just can’t give up by cracking open a beer, getting a girlfriend, joining the army, pumping out a couple kids, and inviting the boys over to watch the super bowl, even though that is what our animal conditioning tells us to do at a subconscious level.
I agree with that entirely, as well.If you are a slave to subconscious thoughts then you are not enlightened.
Exactly. But this constant attention to detail is NOT any kind of attainment. This is why I say calling yourself enlightened is bogus so long as you aren't permanently enlightened.If you are strong enough to negate the validity of subconscious thoughts, and resist action then you are on your way, as you possess some degree of self-awareness.
I truly believe everyone tries their best to be good and live a noble life. Some people just have no follow through. That's why most of the time you'll find the most subconscious kind of people to be the most fucked up psychologically.However, this path is not popular to most people as most people value the activity in their subconscious mind because it is their fun, their meaning, and their future.
Not exactly.Without the subconsious mind being the master, the individual has no future, and this is the goal of the seeker of truth. So the path of truth is counterintutive to most people as they are working towards a future, while the sage is working to end his.
This is not what I'd call any kind of enlightenment. I wouldn't call someone who is at this level, a "wise person". This is all I'm saying.So the search ends, but a daily awareness remains, a careful attention is needed to be weary of all the subconscious activity that lingers below the conscious mind.
Scott responded:Without the subconsious mind being the master, the individual has no future, and this is the goal of the seeker of truth. So the path of truth is counterintutive to most people as they are working towards a future, while the sage is working to end his.
Care to elaborate? I propose that unconscious people are working towards a future that is based on fantasy and illusion. They derive their energy through ambition and the promise of material gain. They are constantly hoping, fantasizing and working towards something shallow down the road, and once they achieve it, they move on to another shallow goal. And this activity is what keeps them going, their happiness is always in the future.Not exactly.
Oh, I intend to reply. I'm not currently silent, I'm just currently overwhelmed with life's annoying little practicalities - like finding a place to live.Trevor Salyzyn wrote:Dan, I think you should give Scott another chance. As in, let him hear one more of your explanations, and based on how he reacts to it, decide whether to continue a discussion with him. If it looks like he's willing to engage you in an even exchange, then steam forward.
No one will see you as any worse if you leave Scott alone if he attacks you immediately and unthinkingly on your first serious attempt to engage him, but personally I think your current silence is sending the wrong messages.
Just a suggestion.
Sure. 1) It's not true that an individual has no future without the subconscious mind being the master. 2) It's not true that being without a future is the goal of the seeker of truth. 3) It's not true that the path of truth is counterintuitive to most people. 4) It's not true that the sage is working to end his future.You: Without the subconsious mind being the master, the individual has no future, and this is the goal of the seeker of truth. So the path of truth is counterintutive to most people as they are working towards a future, while the sage is working to end his.
Me: Not exactly.
You: Care to elaborate?
I propose that unconscious people are working towards a future that is based on fantasy and illusion. They derive their energy through ambition and the promise of material gain. They are constantly hoping, fantasizing and working towards something shallow down the road, and once they achieve it, they move on to another shallow goal. And this activity is what keeps them going, their happiness is always in the future.
I love how you said "more spiritual attainments". Exactly!For instance: many people I know fantasize about striking it rich, or making money in some sort of easy way, even though they have been ripped off numerous times. This is the sort of unconscious activity I'm talking about. Constantly seeking more finanical security, more wealth, more spiritual attainments, and all the rest of it.
I agree with you but this really just comes down to how I don't like defining things like this in religious terminology. I'd just call that person, "someone who has thought about it".So the sage is without this sort of ambition, without a future. He doesn’t value subconscious fantasies that tell him happiness is just down the road after he achieves something. Whether it is a material attainment or spiritual one.
One doesn't have to do anything.This is why I agree with you when you suggest that the search has to end, and the ideal of perfection isn’t all that useful, however one still must be able to recognize flaws in thinking and behavior and adjust them or end them one by one if it is at all possible.
I hear this so often it becomes tiresome after a while. Of course there's a path: it's called the path of the renunciation of delusion. It's the only path there is.[...]It became clear that everything I had done towards the philosophical path had been moronic, and that there wasn't any actual path.
The path necessarily begins with egotistical motives. Given that this is necessary and unavoidable, it means nothing to be critical of the fact. If one remains on the path then the ego is undermined naturally. If this does not happen, one is not on the path at all - or making no actual headway.That the entire path I had been on was simply the ego trying to bring meaning to life.
Sure, but this is actually a remedial insight. And as it's being expressed here, a very incomplete one. There is no objective meaning to life, no meaning inherent in reality. However, there is meaning to life inasmuch as meaning is an artifact of consciousness and we therefore bring meaning to life. For some reason we tend to not accept subjective meaning as legitimate or real. It's usually because of a lingering attachment to objectivity as reality. A common delusion.That there isn't any actual meaning to life...it's just the way things are.
Philosophy is not about striving for meaning outside of one's self. It's about striving for the truth of things, which includes the nature of meaning.It isn't some kind of game or movie, or a story...those things all have meaning attributed to them. There's always a plot. Not so with reality. So the main character, myself, had no further purpose in striving for anything imaginary. I simply am.
Honestly, is that even supposed to mean something? For one thing, what has the philosophical path got to do with jumping through hoops or other people in any way? Other people's ideas can be stimulating, but at bottom it's all about our minds and our consciousness and thinking. Philosophy is an explicitly personal enterprise.I found that continuing on with this philosophical path would just be jumping through flaming hoops set up by other egotistical morons, who are just like myself.
People will naturally challenge your wisdom if you speak dross.If they challenge my wisdom, that is something absolutely laughable to me...because I've attained everything now.
The core of what? And if you are not perfectly logical what makes you think you have attained everything?I am not perfect logically, down to the core.
So what? It's not actually an argument for anything. What percentage of the human population have you known? What do you know of the nature of consciousness or reality that shows you that this perfection is in principle impossible? Just one time I'd like to see such an argument because all this bald faced assertion stuff is tedious at best.I have never known of anyone who was.
That's not an argument, it's a sentiment, and obviously one designed for the purpose of self-convincing.Perfection isn't an attainment. It's a dream.
I agree, that statement is just stupid. If certain delusions can be overcome it is a perfectly valid hypothesis that all delusions can be overcome. To argue otherwise you'd have to make a case for those that by definition cannot. Put up or shut up, as they say.It's like eating one candy bar and then imagining the world could be made out of chocolate. Just stupid.
Really? How many have you met, or did you just make that up?I've grown contempt for people who try to pull it off as if they're perfect
See, more bald faced bombast - you should go into politics where contempt for logical protocols are the norm. Do you ever put any substance into the claims you make? Flawed in what sense?when they're probably more flawed than anyone else.
Are you saying you want or need to be led? What on earth has the supposed flaws of other people got to do with your own personal path and attainments? You're speaking like a child whose papa let him down at some point.It's very misleading.
Yes it is, a very big one. What are you going to do about it? Nothing, I suppose... And it's more than just the contempt that is the flaw.But that contempt is a flaw of mine.
It's funny. That is exactly how you come across.Instead, I should feel sorry for them, because they were treated so bad in their lives that all they have left to hold onto are their delusion of grandeur.
This shows you know nothing at all, and certainly nothing about psychology. And you have the temerity to speak of the delusions of grandeur of others. People who are "perfectly fine" don't engage in philosophy at all. They most assuredly don't go looking for insight from others. And besides, deluded people are anything but perfectly fine.The reason I feel contempt is that they fool people who are just fine into becoming just like them. It's entirely unnecessary.
Ok, so stupidity is perfectly fine to you. That's your prerogative, but what has that got to do with philosophical goals?I look at the world and see a bunch of stupid people, but I also don't see a bunch of fools.
This isn't even remotely close to the truth, but it's a sentiment that would likely win you votes in an election. People reason expediently and conveniently. Their reason is driven by motives far other than the valuing of reason or truth or sanity. It means nothing that people think rationality at times. Do you know the difference bewteen utilising reason and being a rational person?I see that everyone thinks rationally...they just do it imperfectly and don't care to do it perfectly.
I'm sorry, but this is indicative, again, of your complete lack of comprehension of how purpose and meaning and value manifest in the world. It also contains bucket loads of hypocrisy, but you don't see that, do you? When peaceful people try to change warlike people because of their differing values and purpose are they doing something wrong?So what? That's no reason to condemn them as some "wise people" do, and try to change them.
That isn't necessary (besides, you don't even believe in it). It is enough to understand reality. Purpose and value flows naturally from that and such things might involve attempting to wake people up. It's not the wise people who actually change others, it's the others who change themselves. No-one can actually change who you are if you don't let it happen. This is truer with regard to philosophical thinking than anything else.Before attempt to perfect others, make sure that you are perfect yourself.
Shouldn't you figure that out for yourself?Shahrazad wrote:Well then, tell us on what points he is right.
Scott wrote those and I bolded some of them in support. I'll reply anyway, because in many ways I feel similar misgivings to Scott.Jimbo posted a bunch of stuff. Here's my response to each point:
I hear this so often it becomes tiresome after a while. Of course there's a path: it's called the path of the renunciation of delusion. It's the only path there is.[...]It became clear that everything I had done towards the philosophical path had been moronic, and that there wasn't any actual path.
I’m relatively free of common delusions, but not free of ego delusions. I still remain convinced that as temporary beings our aim should be, and our true path always is, is to seek sustainable happiness/contentment. We will always seek the positive over the negative, just as you guys are doing in promoting your truths.
I am finding that only part of the ego is undermined naturally. While habitualness is preventing me from making headway, so to is nihilism. Choosing one’s own meaning/purpose and value systems seems a little pathetic under the dark cloud of nihilism.Quote:
That the entire path I had been on was simply the ego trying to bring meaning to life.
The path necessarily begins with egotistical motives. Given that this is necessary and unavoidable, it means nothing to be critical of the fact. If one remains on the path then the ego is undermined naturally. If this does not happen, one is not on the path at all - or making no actual headway.
Well for me that is because objectivity is partially the true state of existence. There is a realness to objectivity that only a deluded person rejects. Forget about the form or inherency and all that other stuff, there is still the fact that we are caused by externalities to experience a somewhat non-chaotic unity with reality. I am a believer in limited objectivity. That other people and things only exist in an A=A fashion in our heads does not mean that objectivity does not exist. I trust intuitive logic and this logic tells me my brain could not create the causal chain that would lead to such a vast range of creations of human imagination and the vast range of life and patterns of existence. In a purely subjective world I would never be surprised by anything as they would all be my own creation in the first place.Quote:
That there isn't any actual meaning to life...it's just the way things are.
Sure, but this is actually a remedial insight. And as it's being expressed here, a very incomplete one. There is no objective meaning to life, no meaning inherent in reality. However, there is meaning to life inasmuch as meaning is an artifact of consciousness and we therefore bring meaning to life. For some reason we tend to not accept subjective meaning as legitimate or real. It's usually because of a lingering attachment to objectivity as reality. A common delusion.
So why are you guys promoting truth? (rhetorical)Quote:
It isn't some kind of game or movie, or a story...those things all have meaning attributed to them. There's always a plot. Not so with reality. So the main character, myself, had no further purpose in striving for anything imaginary. I simply am.Philosophy is not about striving for meaning outside of one's self.
Not really. A striving for truth, like every other human endeavour, is about striving for the highest ratio of positive emotions above negative ones over one’s lifetime. Not knowing something one feels they should know produces a negative emotion.It's about striving for the truth of things, which includes the nature of meaning.
Quote:
If they challenge my wisdom, that is something absolutely laughable to me...because I've attained everything now.
If someone feels they know everything, which may or may not include the viewpoint that attaining anything means nothing, then that is how they feel.People will naturally challenge your wisdom if you speak dross.
Wouldn’t you be taking an illusionary objective viewpoint to judge what Scott said as dross?
For me this would mean my emotional core, and to be honest I can’t say I'm the least bit logical in this regard.The core of what? And if you are not perfectly logical what makes you think you have attained everything?Quote:
I am not perfect logically, down to the core.
Perfection in any thing is impossible.So what? It's not actually an argument for anything. What percentage of the human population have you known? What do you know of the nature of consciousness or reality that shows you that this perfection is in principle impossible? Just one time I'd like to see such an argument because all this bald faced assertion stuff is tedious at best.Quote:
I have never known of anyone who was.
It seems to be natural outcome of those who think they know every important thing about reality. The positive feeling of grandeur is involved whenever one feels they are right. Generalise enough and it becomes easy to be always right.It's funny. That is exactly how you come across.Quote:
Instead, I should feel sorry for them, because they were treated so bad in their lives that all they have left to hold onto are their delusion of grandeur.
David does this when he uses words like "glorious" when referring to the infinite . It makes one want the green grass on the other side of the fence, however the closer one gets understanding how to get over the fence the less attractive the grass is as it turns brown and bland.This shows you know nothing at all, and certainly nothing about psychology. And you have the temerity to speak of the delusions of grandeur of others. People who are "perfectly fine" don't engage in philosophy at all. They most assuredly don't go looking for insight from others. And besides, deluded people are anything but perfectly fine.Quote:
The reason I feel contempt is that they fool people who are just fine into becoming just like them. It's entirely unnecessary.
Nah, I have no need to think any such thing especially. I think you're considering matters. If you decide at some point to respond that will be welcome.sschaula wrote:Actually, I'm not going to respond. It deserves a response, but really, I've stopped caring anymore about being right or making any sort of argument.
Consider me proven wrong, and a fool.