Colin Wilson

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Talking Ass » Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:31 am

Once Again The Talking Ass Clarifies His Mind-Boggling Doctrines to The Mentally Limited (And Limiting) and Wows The Crowds All Over Again! How Wonderful Is The Ass Who Talks?

'Oppose' is merely a dramatic term, essentially for fun. Still, I 'oppose' the sort of mental forumulations you are attracted to, which seem to 'absorb' you. And there is no 'poison' here: no ill will, no anger. I write because on some level it 'delights' me. What I am opposing is certain idea constructs that we establish in our perceptual mechanism, sort of like a software program (though that is a reductive analogy). It is very attractive and very possessive.

movingalways wrote:The soul wanders like a whore, finding many moving lovers called Tangible and Concrete. Where, I ask you, as I asked myself, is her husband that moves not away from her when she asks for his Truth?
Note the 'biblical' phrasing, the tone. Should I answer with a similar phrasing, as if we are on the road to Nazareth? That aside, I only draw into question the mood and the image that drives this perception. Who determines that 'the soul' is a 'whore'? The ideas that permit such a characterization can be looked at, examined. I do understand the use of analogy and metaphor, but I am not so sure these are the ones I wish to be using, myself. And I am not necessarily opposed to it, nor to the idea (as it must follow from your story) of a 'father' who receives back his whoring child. But since you are bringing up this whole chain of reference (biblical stories) I must point out that there are many different levels of interpretation possible. We are not speaking a completely unrelated tongue insofar as I am inclined to believe-perceive that there exist 'ethical commands' provided (as you might say) by Spirit. These commands, expressed in the Prophetic literature (since you have brought this up I will speak this language), speak of 'whoring' in a very different way than you do. To 'whore' in the Biblical sense is to lose sight of the essential, which is a definite 'concrete' and 'tangible' and to be captured by the false, the merely personal, or the selfish (etc.) Do you suppose that you have some special right to dominate the meaning here? That your personal interpretation somehow trumps all others? Because you often 'speak' from within this particular 'language', that is, the Bible.

So, what I 'oppose' is your spurious interpretation, your taking these things to some outerspace level, your abstractions. I suggest that you, or rather 'someone who thinks like this', would do well to examine the predicates operating in him. And this is pretty much the role that I assume in these conversations. A sort of 'reality-check'.

So, just for the sake of clarity, though I do most certainly understand, as has always been the case here on GF, that ideas can be tremendously threatening, especially if one is opposing absolutist thinking and the addiction of reductionist thinking. Try to see it like this: it is as if I am 'arguing' with an Evangelical Christian. Those ideas are so well-establsihed, so fundamental to the personality, that any 'opposition' to them represents 'poison', or an attack, etc. You(-plural) know well what I am talking about. But what you(-plural) cannot see, will not see, is the manner in which you engage in similar thinking patterns.

I know that what I am suggesting must be vehemently opposed because what stands to be 'lost' is vast indeed (appears so anyway). The enormous construct-contraption that one has spent so much time piecing together! Now, when one moves into the later years of one's life, just imagine what the cost of disassembly is? I do not recommend that you undersake that task. It can lead to damage to the personality. I suggest, in your case, light modification. I suggest a little humor too.

But I am writing for a younger audience. For those who still have some choices (within the 'web of causality' that drives them and all of us) to organize perception in accord with another or with other potential models.

Out of curiosity, would you subscribe, generally, to Dennis's view, the one expressed just above? Are you 'birds of a feather' in that sense?

(I see Dennis's view, as I have said, as Grandly Reductive. So attactive though that he will never---from the look of it---be able to wiggle out of its grip. The ultimate question to ask is How will this serve him? What will it look like when he gets a little older? While I can't say with precise terms, I have observed the other younger men who write here and seen how this style of thinking ossifies. Not 'liberation', not 'healing' bust something more akin to hardening and shrinking. I am opposed to that 'ossification'. I am interested in far greater fluidity within our thinking even at the cost of the sacrifice of apparent gains from Absolutism).
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Dennis Mahar » Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:06 am

These distinctions you draw like
ossification
grand reduction

are your way to keep yourself aloof.
shit to hide behind.
get it?
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Diebert van Rhijn » Wed Oct 19, 2011 6:31 am

Fine post there, Mahar. (brief summary).

Talking Ass wrote:I see Dennis's view as Grandly Reductive. So attractive though that he will never---from the look of it---be able to wiggle out of its grip. The ultimate question to ask is How will this serve him...how this style of thinking ossifies. I am opposed to that 'ossification'.

One always moves within the pulls of seduction. Perhaps some event horizons will not allow any return? But the penultimate question now becomes: is it always worth the price? Is there really something that can seem to worth everything? But why not think: blessed is the man who found it, however poor the spirit might appear?

I am interested in far greater fluidity within our thinking even at the cost of the sacrifice of apparent gains from Absolutism.

Thoughts are like crystallized fluids. Therefor one cannot wish truly for any greater fluidity in thinking. What you're interested in perhaps is a greater homogeneity of thought, feeling and action?
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
 
Posts: 5040
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Location: A∴A∴

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Talking Ass » Wed Oct 19, 2011 8:14 am

No, that homogeneity is, IMO, what 'you' strive for. As to the rest of what you wrote, it is merely typical. When pressed, you get almost metaphysical. Your prose becomes abstract, disconnected, 'tricky' is the impression it sometimes gives me.

I think you are disingenuous. I also think you have avoided many substantial points. Perhaps you were pressed for time?

Ideas have consequences and they also contain 'possessive spirits'.
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Kunga » Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:36 am

Alex......get naked.
You're wearing too much spandex.
User avatar
Kunga
 
Posts: 2305
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Dennis Mahar » Wed Oct 19, 2011 10:51 am

Thanks for acknowledgement Diebert.
I must say I 'listen' to you.
Several times I've been there in the way being there has to be to make a difference, as I read your expression.
In those moments your expression has blown my mind and had me walking on air for days.
Thanks for that.
Neitschke had as inspiration a book by Afrikan Spir called Thoughts and Reality.
Are you familiar with Spir?
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

OH GOD I CAN'T BELIEVE IT...

Postby Talking Ass » Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:46 pm

PS: A reclarification.

'Absolute thinking', which often or always seems to be born from reductive thinking operations, seems to be related to monotheistic thinking, a sort of 'fascism of the mind'. The doctrines of the QRS, to no small extent, derive from these 'traditions'. To 'ossify' in thought is to limit one's own thinking to a singular, captivating monopole, and to see exclusively through that lens. That is what I refer to as reductive thinking. (I am developing such an interesting lexicon here in relation to the Genius Forum).

Though all thinking is indeed 'crystallization' of thought, and is necessary, what is not necessary are too rigid thought channels, and thought derived from absolutism is drawn into question. 'Greater fluidity of thinking' is therefore expanded ways of thinking, of holding 'meaning'. For example, David's reliance on his mystification of the Infinite is an example of a transference (or sublimation?) from Christian monotheism; it originates in that (IMO). Movingalways uses it similarly, so does Trevor and many others. As with 'monotheism' in theology it tends to limit perception and to create a univalent conversation. Holding this Absolute in the mind tends to limit thinking and to force perception into narrow channels.

(I too many times found myself walking on air after reading one of Diebert's posts, but really more like 'swooning'. It is no surprize that he has slowly transformed into The Ambassador of GF.)

Dennis, as to Afrikan Spir, I found this page and thought it interesting.

    "Thus he [man] rises above empirical nature and sees the law of his true being as the law not of nature but of the norm, as the laws of morality and logic. Thus morality rises above natural science and, since the moral law is the norm, morality becomes religion."

Another major influence on Neitschke was this book (which I have in first edition). Check it out, y'all).

PPS: Diebert wrote "But why not think: blessed is the man who found it, however poor the spirit might appear?"

An Ass responds: Naturally, I share your pious sentiments, brother! It is truly generous. And this is why we are sort of forced to accept saccharine New Age tripe, all the derivatives of evangelism, Paulo Coelho, the 'psuedo-Buddhists', etc. You gotta be nice to these people, they are, after all, doing their best...
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Dennis Mahar » Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:23 am

It's not thought derived from absolutism.
It starts from the interrogation of phenomenal, perceivable existence.
A gathering of evidence in that matter.
Please understand this.
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Diebert van Rhijn » Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:43 am

Talking Ass wrote:When pressed, you get almost metaphysical. Your prose becomes abstract, disconnected, 'tricky' is the impression it sometimes gives me.

It might seem pressing to you. Do you feel pressed, impressed, cornered, "heavy" or discouraged when some appeal for a more abstract, unattached, disinterested stance is being made? Because under much of my writing, at least what's being waved in your general direction, lies indeed a trick: to see if a mind can be drawn into crystal clarity for a little while and so temporarily stop wading around in mist and fluids, you old alchemist! Not that it can last or the crystal 'boll' is any truth but it reminds as the best. It facilitates like nothing else.

PPS: Diebert wrote "But why not think: blessed is the man who found it, however poor the spirit might appear?"

And this is why we are sort of forced to accept saccharine New Age tripe, all the derivatives of evangelism, Paulo Coelho, the 'psuedo-Buddhists', etc. You gotta be nice to these people, they are, after all, doing their best

The problem with "these people" is perhaps more that they're not doing their best. It's often not serious enough, only rarely would they sound as if they found anything but they're still looking, practicing, chatting and there's always the next phase, 'the great universal awakening' etc. There's a lot of spirit still there, not the strong load-bearing spirit or any free spirit but to remain with the ever popular Nietzsche: a spirit of gravity, small spirits or even sometimes just simply "the folly of too much spirit".
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
 
Posts: 5040
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Location: A∴A∴

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Talking Ass » Thu Oct 20, 2011 3:08 am

Breaking His Rule, The Talking Ass® Attempts Conversation With Dennis Mahar-har-har
(Not a laughing matter...)

I'm often tricked by you to engage with you, Dennis, but you never seem to do very 'good thinking' and always approach conversation (to the extent that you engage in it) from a reductionist and absolutist-derived position and 'group of predicates'. Your 'reasoning' is a sort of 'hammering' with your simple mechanism: a pseudo- or neo-Buddhism. Then you repeat some derivative of that thinking and say 'please understand this' as if I do not fully understand it. I also understand the attraction for arriving at a description of phenomena and a phenomenal model, what is called around here Absolute Reality. I am aware that, applying a reductive analysis that 'you' arrive at a model and make propositions based on that model. I see this, and have seen it all along. You 'use' your 'model' as the basis for an evangelical tool. 'You' (though I admit you are not a unity of persons and there are slight variations) have mapped your world according to an arbitrary selection that dismissed and leaves out a great deal: a great deal that I wish to see included.

PS: Diebert, I put a good deal of energy into a number of posts written to you, in response to you. You get 'metaphysical' and avoid responding. This is disappointing to me. And that is why I 'decry' the tactic as 'metaphysics', etc.
Last edited by Talking Ass on Thu Oct 20, 2011 3:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Diebert van Rhijn » Thu Oct 20, 2011 3:12 am

Dennis Mahar wrote:Nietzsche had as inspiration a book by Afrikan Spir called Thoughts and Reality. Are you familiar with Spir?

Not really. Thanks! It sounds like he might have shaped at least some of N's thoughts although one could also see differences like Nietzsche going with becoming over being and the more naturalistic, intuitive mode of knowing he therefore had to propose, which brings him closer to the work of Spinoza in my view. People also often mention the intriguing Max Stirner as major influence although Nietzsche keeps silent about him.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
 
Posts: 5040
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Location: A∴A∴

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby movingalways » Thu Oct 20, 2011 7:50 am

Talking Ass: Do you suppose that you have some special right to dominate the meaning here? That your personal interpretation somehow trumps all others? Because you often 'speak' from within this particular 'language', that is, the Bible.


I claim no special right to any meaning, I gave you a thought, that is all, you analyzed it, and voila, TA is revealed to himself. I analyzed your analysis of my analysis, and voila, Pam is revealed to herself.

As for the bible, it is but one of many wisdom books that are full of thoughts for "wisdom chewing." I like the taste of its meat, it is that simple.
Man knows nothing, salvation!
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Dennis Mahar » Thu Oct 20, 2011 8:14 am

Your 'reasoning' is a sort of 'hammering' with your simple mechanism: a pseudo- or neo-Buddhism. Then you repeat some derivative of that thinking and say 'please understand this' as if I do not fully understand it.


how do things exist?
a human being depends on plants for converting co2 to oxygen.
a web of interconnectivity?
is that a good start?
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Dennis Mahar » Thu Oct 20, 2011 9:13 am

Diebert,
I haven't been able to get a copy of Spir's book.
I don't think there's an english translation.

This from wikipedia attracted my mind:

Epistemology

Spir sought to establish philosophy as the science of first principles, he held that the task of philosophy was to investigate immediate knowledge, show the delusion of empiricism, and present the true nature of things by strict statements of facts and logically controlled inference. This method led Spir to proclaim the principle of identity (or law of identity, A ≡ A) as the fundamental law of knowledge, which is opposed to the changing appearance of the empirical reality.[22]
[edit] Ontology

For Spir the principle of identity is not only the fundamental law of knowledge, it is also an ontological principle, expression of the unconditioned essence of reality (Realität=Identität mit sich), which is opposed to the empirical reality (Wirklichkeit), which in turn is evolution (Geschehen).[23] The principle of identity displays the essence of reality: only that which is identical to itself is real, the empirical world is ever-changing, therefore it is not real. Thus the empirical world has an illusory character, because phenomena are ever-changing, and empirical reality is unknowable.
[edit] Religion and Morality

Religion, morality and philosophy, have for Spir the same theoretical foundation: the principle of identity, which is the characteristic of the supreme being, of the absolute, of God. God is not the creator deity of the universe and mankind, but man's true nature and the norm of all things, in general. The moral and religious conscience live in the consciousness of the contrast between this norm (Realität) and empirical reality (Wirklichkeit). "There is a radical dualism between the empirical nature of man and his moral nature" [24] and the awareness of this dualism is the sole true foundation of moral judgment.[25]
[edit] Social Justice

Socially, Spir was not favourable to inherited wealth's accumulation in private hands and demanded just distribution of material goods, but disapproved of collectivism.[26] He set the example, redistributing his personal inherited land properties to his former serfs.[27]
Dennis Mahar
 
Posts: 4084
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Talking Ass » Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:38 pm

Pam wrote:I claim no special right to any meaning, I gave you a thought, that is all, you analyzed it, and voila, TA is revealed to himself. I analyzed your analysis of my analysis, and voila, Pam is revealed to herself.
This is sort of accurate, but not really. First, you totally avoided almost everything I wrote---which is a common tactic around here among the Absolutists and Reductionists (and to that I will add Religionists): when confronted with a challenge, best indeed to avoid it completely, turn tail and run! Or, like Diebert, throw up some convoluted, wordy formula (with lots of italicized words, say for example 'penultimate'...) which signify very little and simply bring conversation to an abrupt halt. Then, wait a little while and start posting again exactly the same stuff as before, in the same tone and language. Bravo! Isn't it more accurate to say that you simply have no desire or interest to examine ideas? Isn't it more accurate to say that you'd much prefer to preach?

Yet, it is not exactly accurate to say that it is me and you 'speaking', it is more accurate to say that it is our ideas that are speaking. These ideas, which extend back through our language to Experience and Being, are what is actually 'speaking'. (This use of a singular where a plural is necessary...is intentional).
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Blair » Thu Oct 20, 2011 1:06 pm

Why don't you take a look at the absurdity of your own creed you ridiculous little Jew bitch.
User avatar
Blair
 
Posts: 1527
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:47 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Talking Ass » Thu Oct 20, 2011 1:52 pm

Can you define what that 'creed' is, my Gentile brother? ;-)
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Blair » Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:42 pm

Well that would be telling, wouldn't it..

Suffice to say the jews will be getting their marching orders out of the United States soon enough.
User avatar
Blair
 
Posts: 1527
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:47 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Talking Ass » Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:57 pm

It would be what this forum is about: engagement, exchange of ideas...
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Blair » Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:59 pm

No, it's more to do with a nation of American males becoming aware of how a few jews lied in medical text books about the necessity of circumcision, and how their country is a throbbingly charged magnet for the wrath of avenging Muslims against the unbelieving Zion filth.

To put it mildly.

Pack your bags Alex, the star of David is on the move, again.
User avatar
Blair
 
Posts: 1527
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:47 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Kevin Solway » Thu Oct 20, 2011 7:24 pm

Blair has been banned for over-the-top stupidity.
User avatar
Kevin Solway
 
Posts: 2578
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Kunga » Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:08 am

I don't see the difference between misogyny and racism. They're both over the top . One nice thing about this forum is I don't feel personally attacked when misogyny is slurred my way.


Alex, I am not an educated intellectual. I love reading and have excellent comprehension, but I have not been gifted with writing prose profusely . Seems like my mind instantly grasps concepts and transforms them into easily assimulated formulas....like poetry taking a complex subject...say "Love" for instance....and condenses eons of emotions into a few words.

I have never engaged in serious intellectual conversation growing up, as most people in my life had no interest in the subjects I delved into.
So it was all in my head...by myself.

I always felt like a misfit. Didn't know I had a Jewish heritage ( Sephardic) until I was 20 years old (my fathers family).

Anyways....I gravitate more towards the cryptic...yogis...crazy wisdom types. (Like Blair & Dennis :) )

It behooves me when people say in a thousand words , what could be say in one word.
Isn't part of being a Genius having the ability to make something less complex ?

Peace

_/\_
Last edited by Kunga on Fri Oct 21, 2011 1:23 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Kunga
 
Posts: 2305
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby movingalways » Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:27 am

Talking Ass wrote:
Pam wrote:I claim no special right to any meaning, I gave you a thought, that is all, you analyzed it, and voila, TA is revealed to himself. I analyzed your analysis of my analysis, and voila, Pam is revealed to herself.
This is sort of accurate, but not really. First, you totally avoided almost everything I wrote---which is a common tactic around here among the Absolutists and Reductionists (and to that I will add Religionists): when confronted with a challenge, best indeed to avoid it completely, turn tail and run! Or, like Diebert, throw up some convoluted, wordy formula (with lots of italicized words, say for example 'penultimate'...) which signify very little and simply bring conversation to an abrupt halt. Then, wait a little while and start posting again exactly the same stuff as before, in the same tone and language. Bravo! Isn't it more accurate to say that you simply have no desire or interest to examine ideas? Isn't it more accurate to say that you'd much prefer to preach?

Yet, it is not exactly accurate to say that it is me and you 'speaking', it is more accurate to say that it is our ideas that are speaking. These ideas, which extend back through our language to Experience and Being, are what is actually 'speaking'. (This use of a singular where a plural is necessary...is intentional).


Alex, you are free to feed and grow your tree of knowledge of good and evil, but if you bring it to me, its fruit will not be eaten. As I said in an earlier post to you, when the infinite calls, the infinite calls. Nothing I can do about it, nothing you can do about it, it calls, it is answered, and the pruning shears come out.
Last edited by movingalways on Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Man knows nothing, salvation!
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby movingalways » Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:29 am

Talking Ass wrote:It would be what this forum is about: engagement, exchange of ideas...


The way of the death of the ego or self is not void of the exchanging of ideas, for those who have ears to hear.
Man knows nothing, salvation!
User avatar
movingalways
 
Posts: 1754
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Colin Wilson

Postby Talking Ass » Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:03 am

An Ass Quotes Blake:


    "What is a wife and what is a harlot? What is a church and what is a theatre? are they two and not one? Can they exist separate? Are not religion and politics the same thing? Brotherhood is religion. O demonstrations of reason dividing families in cruelty and pride!"

    ---William Blake

___________________________________________________


As to Blair, I hope he gets reinstated. My personal view and desire ('taste' as Diebert often says) is for posts that are essays. But as Pye once pointed out, certain people have their techniques of communication and can't be judged against an established standard. Blair, hope to see you back here soon. Then we can come up with some reparative strategies for reestablishing your long-lost foreskin...

Still, and oddly enough, 'the Jewish question' has always been a subtext here. I am fairly certain this is because of the fact that Jewish culture and religion is so potent, but also it has to do with the nature of Idea: how Idea can get a hold of a person and a people, and how Grand Ideas shape this world. It is only 'natural' that as one ('we') move to the core of examination of Meaning---and all of us as spin-offs and throw-offs out of the Western meaning-system---that we would have to examine Jews and Jewish religious culture. Now, one strategy is to attempt to annihilate the whole people, but this tends to result in a rather unattractive present, and the disposal of corpses is always a problem. But if one actually became ARTICULATE about what, in fact, one opposes (about Jews and Judaism), one would then 'engage with the Grand Conversation'.

In my own case, oddly enough, the Ideas that have motivated me and still motivated me are those, strangely, of pre-European paganism, that is the Greek 'world'. It is just now significantly coming into focus. The idea-structures that we hold in our heads, that stem from the European intellectual traditions of the last 500 years or so, sit on top of a basic, experiential 'ur-religion' of Being and Experience, and this 'world' is not a singularity or a monopole but a plurality. This contrast and confict between the singular and the plural is part-and-parcel of our being.

I have also been thinking quite a bit about this style of 'Buddhism' spoken about around here. I think if it were a more strict 'Taosim'---and I suggest an image to grasp it: a man, sitting in a kind of awe and immobility (there is rarely movement or 'gesture' in these tableaus), surrounded by mountains, swirling clouds and winds, perhaps a raven being circled in the currents, who is just one small area in the image, a minor personage, just one part of a Whole that is magnificent, powerful, and can never really be grasped. At that point we would have a link to the Greek and pre-Greek notion of Life, currents of Life Force: an existence within an inconceivable chain of causation. I DO believe I grasp how it is that the 'conclusions' of Nietzsche, or what is suggested by his intense, dramatic intellectual rebellion against Judeo-Christianity, would conduce toward a desire and a need for a resolution in 'Zen'. I think this is the easy way out, though, and leads to unwholesome conclusions. But to explain this, to 'demonstrate' it, one has to move back along the routes of ideation (that bring one to this point). How else would one do it?

Well, you COULD actually do it with 'gesture' and dance, or with Art. When you (me and we) actually encounter someone who is ALIVE IN THIS WORLD, it always has a profound effect on us, and it does not come to us through the Verb, through discourse. How does it come to us? It comes to us through Gesture. I would also like to mention, at this point where a significant Log Jam has been loosened (at the cost of a banning which I hope will be rescinded), that I think we would all do well to entertain the idea that a notion of Deity should be conceived of as an Observer. Not an actor in our drama but as 'trascendental inspiration'. This idea relates to a notion of Epihpany, or Appearance, and we 'use' of employ this 'appearance' (revelation, vision) as a means to give meaning to our life: the concrete life we live here. A too-great concentration on 'trascendence' leads the mind and the soul (energy of man) into a realm of abstractions, and in that we disconnect from our Vital Self.

Kunga, I appreciate your self-description. On a certain level you are right about Racism and Misogyny, but there is never (in these 'anti-woman' conversations) a subtext of annihilation as there always seems to be with anti-Semitic(ally) inclined conversations. Also, QRS see themselves not as oppressors of women but as liberators of women, so their 'misogyny' is certainly modified by that vision. True, there are numerous men here who seem to hate women and have significant psychological issues around Woman, but that is par for the course in the human world.

There are many, many ways to express Meaning and Value. No one has a hedge on communication. But trying to communicate must be the goal, shouldn't it?

movingalways wrote:Alex, you are free to feed and grow your tree of knowledge of good and evil, but if you bring it to me, its fruit will not be eaten. As I said in an earlier post to you, when the infinite calls, the infinite calls. Nothing I can do about it, nothing you can do about it, it calls, it is answered, and the pruning shears come out.
Understood. Eat not of what I offer but know that you and I appear on a forum in which the Written Word doth prevail as the Means by which we communicate our thoughts, feelings and beliefs. He-Who-Is-Ass-Like only recommends a close(r) examination of the Core Ideas that motivate us...including that of an 'Infinite'. Is that not analogous to your sense of a kind of Pruning? To examine the 'fore-structures' [terrible pun avoided here] that mould us, shape us, impel us, dominate us?

PS: Pam, you want ears, I got ears... ;-)
fiat mihi
User avatar
Talking Ass
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:20 am

PreviousNext

Return to GENIUS FORUM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SeekerOfWisdom and 0 guests