The Call for Debate Thread

[skipair]

S: No matter who they debate it's as if they aren't even trying, and easily win blindfolded and with one hand tied behind their back, yawning as they make the final blow.

A: [I don't see them 'winning' myself, I often see them flatly lose...]

I figured you might, but still amazes me you do. This is where I can't relate.

Yet in all that you wrote you mentioned nothing at all specific and concrete.

For one, I was trying to tell you that perhaps you talk too much to understand what is going on. I also told you that your perception of the "QRS" perspective focuses on what it seems to exclude (a perceived negative), instead of figuring out what it includes (a who knows). I tried to give the music, women and WWII example to show how negative perceptions can change to positive in the future in hopes of you giving the material a serious look instead of treating it as a toy to constantly critique. This was not specific and concrete enough? :)

I find this interesting. You emulate and admire something---but what exactly is it? What do they do that you want to do, or see yourself doing?

I don't think I'd learn much by emulating them, except perhaps their persistence in valuing reason, which I do admire.

What do they do that I want to do or see myself doing? This is hard to say. But it seems apparent to me that they have had a realization, or perhaps several, about logic, reasoning, and reality that I haven't yet experienced. The clues that lead me to this conclusion are somewhat subconscious, but it is probably some combination of their inability to be phased by critical attack, their consistency and congruence of ideas, their clarity of expression, their logical and psychological insight, and for some fun if I stretch a bit, maybe even something to do with their faces. In their profiles Kevin's face looks entirely empty, and his eyes seem to look further upon a different world. David's face looks like he's ventured into every crevace of heaven and hell before finally finding salvation.

Really, all I know is that the major realizations I've had in the past are my favorite experiences in life due to their profundity, and if there are more to be had, I want them. These realizations come in a flash after a long period of feeding their potential with exploratory reasoned thought. It's like filling a balloon until if finally explodes.

Even the suggestion that there are more realizations, without anyone already claiming their attainment, is enough to make me go crazy for it. What I might do once I get these realizations, I have no idea.

[Kelly Jones]

Yes, Carl, I do receive a welfare benefit: a disability pension. I applied mid-2004, and started receiving the pension in April 2005. And, yes, I am a computer. Thoughts are solid and real to me, the sixth of the physical senses.

Since we're talking about genius and sanity, and the whole process of finding a way of thinking about Reality, I'll share my experiences on applying for the pension. Having sufficient money to dedicate one's energy to becoming sane, is paramount.

If anyone is considering applying for a disability pension, reading this, then you might do better with some advice about it.

It is not easy. My first approach was all wrong. I tried to convince the treating psychiatrist that my reasoning about Ultimate Reality was sound, and the keystone philosophers of human civilisation - on which the profession of psychiatry was based - had it wrong. This was supposed to prove that my genius disabled me for living in society. Of course, the psychiatrist was offended, and wrote me off as arrogant.

My second approach worked. I explained to the new psychiatrist that adjusting to society caused me too much suffering, and I'd probably kill myself if I had to continue fitting-in. It was true enough. At the time, I was hypersensitive, and felt suffocated by living in the human zoo full of brute creatures.

I would advise anyone applying for a disability pension, to fund their cause for Enlightenment, to be pretty careful how you go.

For example, my explorations and experiments into perception were agitated by a desperate desire to dump the whole farce of being a normal human. It was a moderately dangerous thing to do. Reasoning about the mind, and having ego-ridden satoris, while wanting to drop normal consciousness, is highly likely to bring on mild psychosis. I used to have hallucinations.

I would pass on David's advice at the time: be patient and keep things simple.

[Clancy]

For example, my explorations and experiments into perception were agitated by a desperate desire to dump the whole farce of being a normal human. It was a moderately dangerous thing to do. Reasoning about the mind, and having ego-ridden satoris, while wanting to drop normal consciousness, is highly likely to bring on mild psychosis. I used to have hallucinations.

I would pass on David's advice at the time: be patient and keep things simple.

Is anyone a normal human?


I think you are being too hard on yourself...and probably everyone else around you for failing to understand you.

[Kelly Jones]

For example, my explorations and experiments into perception were agitated by a desperate desire to dump the whole farce of being a normal human. It was a moderately dangerous thing to do. Reasoning about the mind, and having ego-ridden satoris, while wanting to drop normal consciousness, is highly likely to bring on mild psychosis. I used to have hallucinations.

I would pass on David's advice at the time: be patient and keep things simple.

Is anyone a normal human?

Normal refers to the norm. What most do makes the norm. In regards spiritual matters, most people are unaware of what is ultimately real.

But there's a difference between being aware of the true nature of things, and having the courage to give it everything. Necessarily, the coward will need to give himself a bit of a shove, as he doesn't like what he finds in enlightenment.

I think you are being too hard on yourself...and probably everyone else around you for failing to understand you.

Perhaps.

By the way, are you Clancy from the walking club?

[Clancy]

Normal refers to the norm. What most do makes the norm. In regards spiritual matters, most people are unaware of what is ultimately real.

But there's a difference between being aware of the true nature of things, and having the courage to give it everything. Necessarily, the coward will need to give himself a bit of a shove, as he doesn't like what he finds in enlightenment.

Unaware of what is ultimately real...yes I would agree with that, but I would also say that most people have no desire to identify what is "ultimately real" they would prefer to make it up for themselves and reside in their own reality...and that is essentially what spirituality is.

Maybe for some they think that to break out of that cocoon would take courage. But for me it simply meant looking at the stars from an outside toilet.

Clancy from the walking club? No I know not of what you speak....

[Kelly Jones]

Hi Clancy,

I thought you might be Clancy from the walking club in town, as he is also a nurse (I think).

most people have no desire to identify what is "ultimately real" they would prefer to make it up for themselves and reside in their own reality...and that is essentially what spirituality is. Maybe for some they think that to break out of that cocoon would take courage. But for me it simply meant looking at the stars from an outside toilet.

The key word here is "cocoon". Being able to tell the difference between a cocoon and liberation is what spirituality is really about. Anything else is really just the cocoon-attitude.

We shouldn't really be justifying cocoon-attitudes, saying that they are also spirituality, since they're not.

Instead, we need to point out where a person is clutching onto a perch of safety and ignoring the Infinite that surrounds us. The truth of the Infinite doesn't harm us, but it can be painful when our love of truth and reason is weak.