What is 'Enlightenment'?

[TruthAgenda]

It is the abandonment of reason. There is the 'Matrix' being used (or perhaps came into existence naturally) to confine our minds. It forms the separation between sheep, and shepherd. The politicians, celebrities, etc, are beyond reason (though not entirely), or 'unreasonable'.

Now, what is 'Reason'? 'Reason', is thinking with words. That's all it is. You were given symbols (words) by your language, of abstract concepts, like 'good' and 'evil', like 'god', like 'identity', and even 'separateness'. Then, you use those symbols to create a reason; a philosophy; a doctrine; or a purpose. Keep in mind, these abstract concepts, which you take to be truth, or real, were created by someone other than you, whom you don't know. By this process, you turn your emotions, and your identity into words - you turn your entire reality into words. We are social animals, and for that reason, words carry profound power - more power, in some cases, than one's own perception. Words become our world. We stop truly perceiving. And this is why childhood memories are always the most indelible; because we were still recording our experiences with our eyes and other senses. An adult with an inner-monologue is converting his perceptions into words, and in this way his perceptions are also influenced by his language.

Thinking with words, reduces one's cognition profoundly, for they only see and think with mere snapshots of the reality they're perceiving. A symbol (word) is only a reference to a real or abstract thing, and therefore all of its' 'life' is lost to the symbol. For instance, if I were to tell you that the sky is 'blue', supposing you'd never seen it, do you think I could ever, with all the words available to me, convey the actual reality of it? So, he who needs not 'reason', who perceives reality without a layer of translation, sees more. Sees all the little things his 'reason' couldn't tell him, for no words or questions he could think of would predict what he perceived.

(If this post is suddenly deleted, rest assured it is because there are people who do not want this information propagated.)

[Walker]

[Harbal]

(If this post is suddenly deleted, rest assured it is because there are people who do not want this information propagated.)

I suspect you would be delighted were your post to be deleted. It would, no doubt, give you an unaccustomed feeling of being taken seriously.

[Iwannaplato]

It is the abandonment of reason. There is the 'Matrix' being used (or perhaps came into existence naturally) to confine our minds. It forms the separation between sheep, and shepherd. The politicians, celebrities, etc, are beyond reason (though not entirely), or 'unreasonable'.

Now, what is 'Reason'? 'Reason', is thinking with words. That's all it is. You were given symbols (words) by your language, of abstract concepts, like 'good' and 'evil', like 'god', like 'identity', and even 'separateness'. Then, you use those symbols to create a reason; a philosophy; a doctrine; or a purpose. Keep in mind, these abstract concepts, which you take to be truth, or real, were created by someone other than you, whom you don't know. By this process, you turn your emotions, and your identity into words - you turn your entire reality into words. We are social animals, and for that reason, words carry profound power - more power, in some cases, than one's own perception. Words become our world. We stop truly perceiving. And this is why childhood memories are always the most indelible; because we were still recording our experiences with our eyes and other senses. An adult with an inner-monologue is converting his perceptions into words, and in this way his perceptions are also influenced by his language.

Thinking with words, reduces one's cognition profoundly, for they only see and think with mere snapshots of the reality they're perceiving. A symbol (word) is only a reference to a real or abstract thing, and therefore all of its' 'life' is lost to the symbol. For instance, if I were to tell you that the sky is 'blue', supposing you'd never seen it, do you think I could ever, with all the words available to me, convey the actual reality of it? So, he who needs not 'reason', who perceives reality without a layer of translation, sees more. Sees all the little things his 'reason' couldn't tell him, for no words or questions he could think of would predict what he perceived.

(If this post is suddenly deleted, rest assured it is because there are people who do not want this information propagated.)

The post deletes itself. You use premises and deduction to reason your you support for the idea what reason is bad. (not saying the argument is solid. But it sure is an argument and an attempt at reasoning.)

[TruthAgenda]

(If this post is suddenly deleted, rest assured it is because there are people who do not want this information propagated.)

I suspect you would be delighted were your post to be deleted. It would, no doubt, give you an unaccustomed feeling of being taken seriously.

Oh, no : ). I'm delighted it wasn't, for it has been deleted at other times on other forums.

[Impenitent]

Ludwig was here...

-Imp

[Harbal]

Oh, no : ). I'm delighted it wasn't, for it has been deleted at other times on other forums.

I think it will be safe here.

[TruthAgenda]

The post deletes itself. You use premises and deduction to reason your you support for the idea what reason is bad. (not saying the argument is solid. But it sure is an argument and an attempt at reasoning.)

Not exactly. It just so happens that reason can be used to invalidate reason in itself. That is the "end of reason". Though, I wouldn't utilize only reason against itself - I'm speaking from the experience of having 'defeated' 'reason'. Of course, I expected those who cherish philosophy, and therefore reason, to have a hard time with my position.

[Iwannaplato]

Not exactly. It just so happens that reason can be used to invalidate reason in itself. That is the "end of reason". Though, I wouldn't utilize only reason against itself - I'm speaking from the experience of having 'defeated' 'reason'. Of course, I expected those who cherish philosophy, and therefore reason, to have a hard time with my position.

So, you decided to go ad hom. Which is also a form of reasoning, but a poor one.

The main problem with this response is that inside the larger argument against reason, there are smaller arguments with conclusions about reality and perception. So, you are not just using reason to undermine reason, but also drawing subconclusions about other things.

There seems to be an odd spate of identifying anyone who posts here as a philosopher and using it as pejorative term. I'm not a philosopher. I'm interested in philosophy.

[Age]

It is the abandonment of reason. There is the 'Matrix' being used (or perhaps came into existence naturally) to confine our minds. It forms the separation between sheep, and shepherd. The politicians, celebrities, etc, are beyond reason (though not entirely), or 'unreasonable'.

Now, what is 'Reason'? 'Reason', is thinking with words.

Is there a way to 'think' without words, or language?

If yes, then how, exactly?

That's all it is. You were given symbols (words) by your language, of abstract concepts, like 'good' and 'evil', like 'god', like 'identity', and even 'separateness'. Then, you use those symbols to create a reason; a philosophy; a doctrine; or a purpose.

But I used those provided symbols, words, and/or language to work out what the Universe actually is and how the Universe actually works.

I do NOT use those symbols to create 'a reason'; 'a philosophy'; 'a doctrine', nor 'a purpose', neither.

Keep in mind, these abstract concepts, which you take to be truth, or real, were created by someone other than you, whom you don't know.

When you say, 'keep in mind', is this a, literal, example of 'confining your minds' or 'minds being confined'?

By this process, you turn your emotions, and your identity into words - you turn your entire reality into words.

Or could it also be the case that you make your OWN 'reality' from, through, and by the words that you actually use? Or, maybe more correctly, your make your OWN 'reality' by the 'meaning' that you put 'behind' the words that you actually use?

We are social animals, and for that reason, words carry profound power - more power, in some cases, than one's own perception.

I am not sure that just because human beings are a 'social animal', then 'that', by itself, means words carry 'profound power'.

I would just say that because very specific 'meaning/s' are given to words, then words, themselves, can carry very 'profound power'.

In fact, the words that you say to "yourselves" do have FAR MORE POWER, over 'you', than first thought, and realized.

Words become our world. We stop truly perceiving. And this is why childhood memories are always the most indelible; because we were still recording our experiences with our eyes and other senses. An adult with an inner-monologue is converting his perceptions into words, and in this way his perceptions are also influenced by his language.

Absolutely EVERY thing is relative to the observer, and the way one looks at, and see things, is all depended upon what that body has previously experienced. Past experiences of the body, hitherto, are always forming the 'individual observer', within.

And, absolutely EVERY thing is relative to 'the observer'.

Thinking with words, reduces one's cognition profoundly, for they only see and think with mere snapshots of the reality they're perceiving.

How does one 'think', without words?

Also, how much, and how little, one ACTUALLY SEES/OBSERVES is depended upon the words that they are 'thinking' with or of.

A symbol (word) is only a reference to a real or abstract thing, and therefore all of its' 'life' is lost to the symbol.

But, not necessarily so. And, only if one 'thinks' this way.

For instance, if I were to tell you that the sky is 'blue', supposing you'd never seen it, do you think I could ever, with all the words available to me, convey the actual reality of it?

Yes, if, and when, you found the Right words.

How do you think you conveyed, to us, the 'reality', (or, more correctly, your BELIEF), that one can NOT convey the actual reality of 'it', that is; 'the sky is blue'?

If you could convey 'this' 'reality', with the Right words, then you CAN also convey the 'reality' of other 'things', with the Right words, as well.

So, he who needs not 'reason', who perceives reality without a layer of translation, sees more.

Which is EXACTLY what I have been saying for a while here now.

It is the younger of the human being species who can SEE the MOST, that is; SEE the MOST of what IS ACTUALLY True and Right, in Life. And, this is because their 'observations' are NOT DISTORTED by ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS like 'your', adult, observations ARE.

Sees all the little things his 'reason' couldn't tell him, for no words or questions he could think of would predict what he perceived.

This sounds like some kind of BELIEF of yours here, which you are 'trying to' convey to us.

(If this post is suddenly deleted, rest assured it is because there are people who do not want this information propagated.)

If your post is suddenly, or slowly, or even ever, deleted, then i will be very much surprised.

[Age]

The post deletes itself. You use premises and deduction to reason your you support for the idea what reason is bad. (not saying the argument is solid. But it sure is an argument and an attempt at reasoning.)

Not exactly. It just so happens that reason can be used to invalidate reason in itself. That is the "end of reason". Though, I wouldn't utilize only reason against itself - I'm speaking from the experience of having 'defeated' 'reason'. Of course, I expected those who cherish philosophy, and therefore reason, to have a hard time with my position.

WHEN, and IF, you find the Right words to back up and support YOUR POSITION, IRREFUTABLY, then NO one could really have a so-called 'hard time' with YOUR 'position'. But, as it was just pointed out, to you, using 'reason' to 'try to" "justify" YOUR 'position' that 'reason' 'confines your mind', (or 'you'), and stops 'you' from seeing and knowing the Big, True, and Real Picture, or 'entire reality', is NEVER going to work.

What you are doing here is actually REFUTING, DEFEATING and/or deleting your OWN 'reasoned position', through, (distorted), 'reasoning', itself.

[Dontaskme]

Oh, no : ). I'm delighted it wasn't, for it has been deleted at other times on other forums.

Posts do not seem to be deleted on this forum. But you can delete them yourself if you change your mind, otherwise they tend to stick around, so it seems what happens in the PNF stays in the PNF

(If this post is suddenly deleted, rest assured it is because there are people who do not want this information propagated.)

I agree.

You are not ready to accept this statement because the very thing which we are using to communicate is in jeopardy.

Also, the Matrix films touched upon the fact that reality is Nondual. The films purpose was to introduce the concept of nonduality to the masses, the Matrix films were the first to do this..I think.

[Dontaskme]

The answer to the OP is realised in the following video....

The Art of Seeing nothing appear as everything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFraTgV2gWo

[Veritas Aequitas]

It is the abandonment of reason.
..........

The difference between humans and an animal is the rational mind, i.e. the ability to reason.

While the Latin term itself originates in scholasticism, it reflects the Aristotelian view of man as a creature distinguished by a rational principle.
In the Nicomachean Ethics I.13, Aristotle states that the human being has a rational principle (Greek: λόγον ἔχον), on top of the nutritive life shared with plants, and the instinctual life shared with other animals, i. e., the ability to carry out rationally formulated projects.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_animal#:~

However, the function of reason has many levels of competences, i.e. there is

1. Proto-reason
2. Primal, crude Pure Reason
3. Progressive logical thinking
4. Reasoning with wisdom

A person who has abandoned reason in general will be the mercy of his animal instincts.
Worst is when a person rely on crude reason exposed to the basic instincts, e.g. theists clinging to an illusory God.
Worst still when a person rely on slightly higher reason but is dominated by the basic instincts, e.g. the malignant psychopath who is basically very intelligent.

Enlightenment is one who has the competence to optimize his well being with intelligence, reasoning with wisdom, in complementarity with his inherent and necessary instincts & emotions.

This is like Aristotle's anger management;

• Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry
  with the right person and
  to the right degree and
  at the right time and
  for the right purpose, and
  in the right way
  - that is not within everybody's power and is not easy.
  Aristotle

An enlightened person is one who can apply the above principle optimally to all his human functions which is controllable by any human.
In this case, the person must have the corresponding neural states to exercise the above.

[Iwannaplato]

Thinking with words, reduces one's cognition profoundly,

Well, let's take another tack. Then we should be like other primates who don't think in words?