~ The Meaning of Life ~

[SpheresOfBalance]

Of course it 'sounds' reasonable, because Arising is not mentioning or dealing with his own erroneous 'weighting',
Yet every human being on the face of the earth applies their own 'erroneous weighting' to any problem/question. As any advanced question is based upon other preconceived notions/erroneous weightings. So one would have to dissect 'all' of mankind's preconceptions used to arrive at their conclusion before one can understand it's truth value. You and your savior may have thought it clever with it's inclusion, yet you both failed to see it pointing at the flaws in your own concepts as well.

which Professor Benatar discusses, and you wouldn't know what he's leaving out, because you haven't read the book either. So can we stop the blind cheer leading, and let Arising get on with it? (Yeah, I know you don't listen, but try anyways.)

Arising, the answers are there for you. I'll chip in when I feel I must (or maybe not. I've better things to do with this existence than get you to read anything). I have issues with your very first bit, but I'm more interested in you reading it all, first, so you've been exposed to his whole argument. (Which, incidentally, is not the whole argument for antinatalism. Just a well thought out one by a professor of ethics. The 'philanthropic' argument.)

Take your time. I'm moving this month, and busy with that. After which, I'm more interested in reading Thomas Metzinger for what he has to add.

AS, you're a Texas gal, yes? One of my favorites on this subject is a remarkable young woman, also from your state, by the name of Sarah Perry. Well worth your time reading her book if you're so inclined. (It's listed in the Book Club section.)

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=15466

Anyways, I'll end this post here, with a quote from myself in the Book Club:

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=15603

... I thought it best if I yammered less and read something on it [philosophy].

It's not bad advice to follow, and not just for me.

[Dalek Prime]

*burp*

[SpheresOfBalance]

*burp*

Yes alcohol does that to your brain.

[Dalek Prime]

I don't drink. It's all natural.

[waechter418]

How about this version:

All our deeds, emotions, thoughts, creeds – and whatever else we are trying to relate ourselves with – are expression of ConsciousNess which thus exercises its possibilities in order to realize itself.

(taken from the post: "another view of consciousness")

[Bill Wiltrack]

.



I appreciate you throwing your hat into this ring.

Welcome to the forum.


I really appreciated the stylings of P.D. Ouspensky when it comes to clarifying a perception of what consciousness is. I lived the philosophy detailed by Ouspensky. It's dynamic.


For me it was a life changer...actually provided me an experience that is the pinnacle of my life thus far.




Ouspensky states that there are four basic states of consciousness for many human beings;

• 1. Sleep
  
  
  2. Waking consciousness; waking sleep
  
  
  3.Self-consciousness
  
  
  4. Objective consciousness

I think this is similar to what you have stated above.






.

[CelineK]

.



What is the meaning of life?

Still struggling with the emptiness; this vastness of this thing I will title, for now, as my soul.

Looking for the meaning of this life of ours.

I know meaning, REAL meaning can be based upon words but overall meaning, REAL philosophy, goes far beyond words.


I looked for meaning, REAL meaning, in experience. Over the last few months even that inner search that I have committed my life to, even that has fallen short.


I'm still empty. Lost.


Are we dead?[/size]

.

hello, since I subscribe to Walter Russell's metaphysics endorsing that this Universe is Sexed because ruled by the self-existing Natural Laws of electromagnetism, the meaning of life is to replicate the Act Of Creation itself in everything we do. We must learn to match the Oneness's intent by overcoming the fear of being.

hope this helps a bit and wouldnt mind to explain further if you wish to.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





......................................................................







In May 1921 Russell experienced a transformational revelatory event that he later described in a chapter called "The Story of My Illumining" in the 1950 edition of his Home Study Course.

"During that period...I could perceive all motion," and was newly "aware of all things."

Russell used the terminology of Dr. Richard Maurice Bucke in his book Cosmic Consciousness to explain the phenomenon of "cosmic illumination."

Later he wrote, "It will be remembered that no one who has ever had [the experience of illumination] has been able to explain it. I deem it my duty to the world to tell of it."

What was revealed to Russell "in the Light" is the subject matter of The Divine Iliad, published in two volumes in 1949.




I too have had an illumining.



Have you?





Russell wrote in 1947: "For within the secret of Light is vast knowledge not yet revealed to man. Light is all there is.

"If science knew what LIGHT actually IS, instead of the waves and corpuscles of incandescent suns which science now thinks it is, a new civilization would arise from that fact alone."

Russell asserted that neither light nor heat flows from one point of space to another.





.

[Arising_uk]

...

Later he wrote, "It will be remembered that no one who has ever had [the experience of illumination] has been able to explain it. I deem it my duty to the world to tell of it." ...

Obviously an idiot then.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




..............................The name-calling thingy...don't think it looks good on you. Just sayin...



.

[Arising_uk]

.
..............................The name-calling thingy...don't think it looks good on you. Just sayin...
.

Why? Given his words philosophically and logically he's obviously an idiot.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




Once an individual has an illumination, or whatever one calls it, attempting to explain the experience is like trying to make a blind man see.


It doesn't surprise me that he would appear idiotic to you or anyone else that may have not had a deep understanding.




.

[Arising_uk]

.
It doesn't surprise me that he would appear idiotic to you or anyone else that may have not had a deep understanding. [/size]
.

You misunderstand, he's not an idiot for having the experience, he's an idiot for the contradiction in his words.

[CelineK]

.
It doesn't surprise me that he would appear idiotic to you or anyone else that may have not had a deep understanding. [/size]
.

You misunderstand, he's not an idiot for having the experience, he's an idiot for the contradiction in his words.

there is no contradiction is Russell's take on metaphysics. You perceived it this way because you dont seem to be aware of where he is coming from.

[Hobbes' Choice]

.
It doesn't surprise me that he would appear idiotic to you or anyone else that may have not had a deep understanding. [/size]
.

You misunderstand, he's not an idiot for having the experience, he's an idiot for the contradiction in his words.

there is no contradiction is Russell's take on metaphysics. You perceived it this way because you dont seem to be aware of where he is coming from.

I think arising is exactly aware of where he is coming from. He is a nutcase of the first order.