One song.Nick_A wrote: ↑Mon Jul 03, 2017 5:24 am
Maybe Jimmy Buffett has the right idea in his song Margaritaville. I’ll retire to Margaritaville, find some island girls, play island music, drink island rum while eating shrimp. If the people ask was there a woman to blame I’ll say yes. It was Greta’s secularizing that did it. How much can one take?
This is just classic secular condemnation of what is not understood. Believe it or not there are still some people in the world concerned with the essential philosophical/religious question concerning who we are and why we are here. A secular dominated society believes we are here as a giant collective to serve the Great Beast. Of course these people don't fit in so they just play a part. They give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's.Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:34 am When you take the trouble to actually read what Nick is saying, it doesn't seem to mean a damn thing. Nick obviously doesn't like the way things are, probably because he can't fit in, and he's glimpsed a shadow of something he's convinced is far preferable. The trouble seems to be that, because he can't see what's causing the shadow, his description of it necessarily has to be very vague. Even if it turns out that the shadow Nick is chasing is made by the Sun, rather than the fire in Plato's cave, it is still only a shadow and contains no more "truth" than any other shadow. Or, to put it another way, Nick doesn't know what he's talking about.
It wasn't a condemnation of any kind, it was merely my analysis of the situation.
I do believe it but I also believe there are more worthwhile questions than those two.Believe it or not there are still some people in the world concerned with the essential philosophical/religious question concerning who we are and why we are here.
Secularity is essential for a fair society, it doesn't guarantee fairness but you can't really have fairness without it.A secular dominated society believes we are here as a giant collective to serve the Great Beast.
In my experience most people don't condemn "God concepts" unless they're being preached at by someone like you.Of course these people don't fit in so they just play a part. They give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's.
Secularists are always condemning God concepts while forgetting these concepts are really just God being made in the image of Man which is classic secularism.
I am well aware of the absurdity of the human condition but I can't see any evidence of it being diminished by religion and spirituality. Face it, Nick, you've just got some kind of Don Quixote complex.We cannot verify a conscious Source for creation. However we can by sufficient conscious efforts to "know thyself," verify the absurdity of the human condition as it exists in us. This is considered insulting and worthy of secular intolerance.
A student of psychology you are not. If I was uninterested in spirituality, I would not test self-proclaimed spiritualists to see if they are for real. I would ignore them.Nick_A wrote: ↑Mon Jul 03, 2017 5:24 amYou aren’t attracted to knowledge which devolves into opinions you argue about. The world agrees with you and prefers to battle over opinions. However, there are some who are attracted to the knowledge representing the source of opinions and why this devolution and all the problems associated with it takes place. Authentic philosophy and religion stimulates the mind and heart into conscious contemplation of the source while the world remains totally absorbed in arguing opinions.... I have more problems with those without expertise who causally denigrate the work of those who are smarter and more productive and more diligent than themselves. This anti-expert attitude is understandable, although very much about the ignorant and lowbrow.
It is theists who present what appear to be works of imagination as absolute fact.Nick_A wrote:Neither Jesus or Socrates were overly concerned with earthly facts. They are just partial truths. Jesus enabled the apostles to experience the psychological truth of what he taught. Socrates through the Socratic dialogue enabled those participating to reach intellectual truth. Arguing earthly facts and their interpretations was left to the Pharisees or the government.Sure, and as a science and sci fi fan, amateur musician, cartoonist and digital artist, and keen, if psychonaut I love to create and use my imagination. I just don't like works of imagination presented as fact.
Okay, noted. You are a theist who despises God's creation. I would say that scientists do far, far more to provide awakening than the blinkered and stultified ideas of ancient religions.Nick_A wrote:You’ve described animal meaning and purpose well often provided through idolatry of the Great Beast which determines what should be done. In contrast to meaning and purpose for the human animal which is provided by the world, conscious human meaning and purpose is actualized by consciously receiving awakening influences from above and giving to below. Animal purpose is on the ground. Human purpose unites levels of reality – above and below. It is the conscious potential for human being. The Beast struggles against it since it threatens its imagined self importance and dominance in the world or Plato’s cave.Objective human meaning is clear enough to me ATM. We are not only part of the Earth (and the Sun and galaxy) but agents of the Earth's current transformation and disseminators of the things it created on its surface so as to continue this remarkable story - from the molten geology through to today's Anthropocene period.
What is not meaningful about being part of all this? To be a human being living safely ensconced in a society, given all that we have learned (from experts!) about how we came about, is an incredibly privileged position existentially. In our societies we are safely partitioned from many of the dangers and torments that plague almost all other animals. How is it that we should be so lucky while trillions of others aren't?
There is meaning to be found everywhere in existence if one is fairly happy. However, when people are miserable, unable to accept the (admittedly often hard-to-accept) chaos, injustice, foolishness and perils of their lives, then meaning is harder to find. At that point we might look to either the profane or the metaphysical for meaning.
Actually we have numerous choices.Nick_A wrote:You only give yourself two choices and argue these choices. However, there is a third choice. One can open to the direction from which these choices appeared and reconcile duality on that basis.Note that whatever it is you focus on, positively or negatively, the more you become like it. Is that what you want?
Given that being funny on philosophy forums invites criticism and most people claim to be good in bed, your claims are at best untested, and preferably will remain so.Nick_A wrote:If this were true I couldn’t be good in bed or even have a sense of humor. The human condition is a big problem. It seems quite clear that technology is advancing while human understanding remains the same. If this continues, our species is doomed. Real philosophy and the essence of religion seeks to promote human understanding through providing what is necessary to acquire it. Has philosophy sunk so low that its main concern now is to argue politics? It is depressing to read of what takes place in the world but does no good to become depressed or paranoic over it. It is better to find those in the real world who share these concerns and unite in this common cause in support of human understanding.I'm old enough to tell passion from malcontent. You come across as anxious, depressed and deeply paranoid. Everything is a problem. Everything is a big deal.
This is the classic description of secular intolerance. It is considered analysis of the situation in progressive secularism. It begins with the premise that it is right and true so intolerant of anything getting in the way of its techniques.It wasn't a condemnation of any kind, it was merely my analysis of the situation.
This is true for regular mundane concerns like where are my car keys? What are your three most important philosophic questions?I do believe it but I also believe there are more worthwhile questions than those two.
What is fair society and how does secularism further it? Are you saying that humanity left to its own devices has the potential for fairness? And you say you understand the human condition?Secularity is essential for a fair society, it doesn't guarantee fairness but you can't really have fairness without it.
Secularism condemns the expression “One nation under God” which America is founded upon and seeks to eliminate it. What could be a more vivid expression of this preaching as an expression of secular intolerance?In my experience most people don't condemn "God concepts" unless they're being preached at by someone like you.
Secularized religion and New Age fantasy are just part of cave life which is an expression of what we are so doesn't change. Progressives want to replace oil and gas with windmills. Who in their right mind wouldn’t want to fight windmills?I am well aware of the absurdity of the human condition but I can't see any evidence of it being diminished by religion and spirituality. Face it, Nick, you've just got some kind of Don Quixote complex.
Your ego is interested but you have not been willing to sacrifice it so as to experience something more real. St. John advised to test the spirits. Do you know what that means?A student of psychology you are not. If I was uninterested in spirituality, I would not test self-proclaimed spiritualists to see if they are for real. I would ignore them.
I am not impressed by the claims of those incapable of doubting the veracity of their perceptions, as though our senses and emotions delivered noumena to us rather than phenomena. When people make these newbie errors it's hard to take them seriously.
I am especially not impressed when the above people start positing their naive views as superior to those who have done the work. Basically you are playing a status game.
Secularist who worship the Great Beast as the high point of universal evolution are far more gullible and guided by self justifying imagination than any theist could be.It is theists who present what appear to be works of imagination as absolute fact.
Secular philosophy is trying to dispute the Socratic axiom: “I know Nothing.” Have they succeeded or have they proven it?Jesus and Socrates may not have cared much for facts (and Jesus, as presented in the Bible, most likely did not exist, his legend seemingly being based on those of Osiris and Horus) but they actually did care very much about facts - the "facts" that they themselves imparted. Again this is a game, this time philosophers cleverly trying to undermine their memetic competition.
Why would I despise the body of God. You just like to throw meaningless accusations around. You are one of those who would shoot first and ask questions later. You have no conception how silly all your accusations make you appear.Okay, noted. You are a theist who despises God's creation. I would say that scientists do far, far more to provide awakening than the blinkered and stultified ideas of ancient religions.
Basically you are miserable because the world is undergoing a period of significant change, and change is difficult. Yes, life can be painful at times, but if we focus on the negatives then we fail to appreciate the good, like ungrateful children who think that having a roof over their heads and being kept safe and healthy is nothing.
You should write a book called “My favorite Complaints.´Readers will marvel at your ability to create so many. Recognizing the human condition for what it is isn’t complaining – it is philosophy. I can speak of the joys of a cute blonde, merlot, and shrimp by a fireplace but what does it have to do with philosophy?Your issue is that you fixate on negative things. Constantly. I cannot remember a post of yours that lacked some complaint, and most usually, numerous complaints. You are a complainer and unusually negative thinker.
Yes, the great question. Conscious evolution or dust to dust. A tough choice within Plato's cave.Oh yes, I forgot. I am being a materialist, controlled by your Great Beast. Only your GB bothers with black holes rather than the higher immaterial structures of heaven than enlightened beings like yourself will enjoy in dimensions not subject to time rather than base and degraded physical reality [sic].
Matthew 13: 26 What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?
You think you have got out of the Cave but you are still watching the shadow play.Yes, the great question. Conscious evolution or dust to dust. A tough choice within Plato's cave.
Why would you say that? Do you believe that when a person first hears piano music, they can play a piano? My advantage here is in having personally experienced the absurdity of the human condition in relation to human conscious potential and the willingness to admit it. I didn't invent these things. I refer to the greats of the past who dwarf my understanding in the real meaning of the word but help me to learn. Secularism can mock them and call them a cast of characters. They call the denial of reality greater than man on earth intellectual progress and are intolerant of those who know awareness of this reality is essential for human conscious development as well as society having the potential to discover its objective purpose of furthering individuality rather than sacrificing it in service to the transient whims of the Great Beast. Those like Greta can curse me out all they like, it doesn't matter. My concern is for the young who suffer this attitude in institutions of child abuse called schools. I support those who defend the psyche of the young and keep the great ideas alive in society which promote conscious evolution for those drawn to it much like a moth is drawn to the flame.
Plato went to great lengths to describe the difference between knowledge and opinion.Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:46 pm Nick, if anybody has got out of the Cave they cannot know that they are free of the shadow play. Possibly, and for all we can know, nobody has got out of the Cave. The Great Beast, aka the culture of any specified society, is one of many shadows . There is no absolute knowledge.To affirm some knowledge as absolute is idolatry.
Yes I know. The ugly crazy lady started early. But again regardless of the educated secular growls, sometimes we need these Hemorrhoid types, these true pains in the ass, to shake things up and raise the essential human questions that are being destroyed in the young.It will now be I think 23 years that you made your entry into the phenomenal world to create the greatest pain in the ass for rectors and school directors
I assure you that it is a live issue with educationists to present a balanced view to children. Children are taught the skill of critical thinking and this skill includes the variety of ideas and religious affiliations, the manner of the presentation as suited to the age and ability of the child.-----regardless of the educated secular growls, sometimes we need these Hemorrhoid types, these true pains in the ass, to shake things up and raise the essential human questions that are being destroyed in the young.--
The kiss of spiritual death. The Great Beast smiles its approval. Secularism has established in its own eyes that only the state representing the Great Beast can provide this “balanced view” designed to destroy what is essentially human in the young.I assure you that it is a live issue with educationists to present a balanced view to children. Children are taught the skill of critical thinking and this skill includes the variety of ideas and religious affiliations, the manner of the presentation as suited to the age and ability of the child.
They are barely discussed because dominant secularism in its narrow minded arrogance believes it already knows and follows the purpose of education.The concern of this study is the loss of the meaning or purpose of education and the instrumental view of education as its corollary. Today, education is largely conceived of as a means to gain social and economic privilege. The overemphasis on school children's test scores and the accountability of teachers and schools is evidence that education has lost its proper meaning. In such a climate, we observe general unhappiness among teachers, school children, and their parents. Society as a whole seems to have given up on education, not only school education but also the very idea of educated human beings. There is an urgent need to reconsider what education is and what its purpose is. However, these questions,once being the primary concerns of philosophers of education,are barely discussed today………………………….
Plato and Simone Weil have rightly understood that conscious attention connecting above and below and opening a person to appreciate objective values normal for the soul is the goal of human education. This is poison to secularism and inspires its intolerance to all that questions its imagined superiority. Jesus, Socrates, Plato, Buddha, Simone Weil, and others are referring to what is necessary to awaken to reality which should be the goal of education. Progressive education prefers the kiss of spiritual death furthered through indoctrination and secular intolerance giving the impression of superiority but in reality is just self serving narrow-mindedness.……………………Thus, education is apprenticeship in reading and the learning of the method of contemplation. I conceive of Weil's thesis as a comprehensive response to the question in Plato's Meno: "Can Virtue be Taught?" Replacing the term "virtue" with "attention," Weil responds that it can be taught and it should be the sole purpose of education. Like Plato, Weil considers education to be the conversion of the soul to the Good, while attention is the orientation of the soul to the Good (or God). As we turn to see the contradictions between the transcendent Good and the reality in this world, we need to contemplate the without losing the love of the Good in life's bitterness and confusion. By learning to contemplate, reading better, and changing perspectives, one could learn to love better. Weil claims that this should be the sole purpose of education. This grand vision of education may re-kindle the meaning of education and suggests a compelling alternative to the now dominating instrumental view of education. It might then save the downcast situation of education observed in teachers, school- children, their parents, college professors, and our society as a whole…………
Don Quixote mistook the windmill as the enemy. He was fighting an illusion. There are those fighting reality by considering windmills to be the solution. Either way their fight is with imagination. What kind of education would allow a young person to awaken to reality sufficiently to experience that it is useless to fight imaginary dangers while supporting spiritual death?By the way, Nick, your remark about Don Quixote and tilting at windmills misses Harbal's point altogether. The psychology of Don Quixote has nothing to do with sustainable energy sources. In fact, the story of Don Quixote excites interest because so many people recognise this tendency in ourselves. One should look at the reality of a problem before one gives time and psychic energy to it.
