Potentially infinite possibilities

[Alexis Jacobi]

Yes, I've been influenced by my environment, but I think such questions are naturally asked as humankind continually seeks to go further.

I’d quibble a bit with this description: no culture in the world (that I am aware of) has ever established “seeking to go forward” as an imperative ideal.

But Europe definitely did. See the first few chapters of Waldo Frank.

Other cultures sought to remain where they found themselves. Or to expand within established limitations of possibility.

Our Reality is (to employ an explanatory model) defined through The Age of Exploration.

And frankly not everyone (for example) has any desire at all to go to mars. It is not only a metaphor, it is an extension of that established model: plodding ever-onward!

[Lacewing]

I would say, but every cultural position operates from a defined metaphysics. So, you and I must be operating from a description of what the world is, where and why it is, how it came to be and for what, if any, purpose.

I think that's way too much to assume. As you suggested before, one can be influenced to one degree of another. That's very different from claiming that we all agree and operate from a set of common answers. Perspectives/ideas can vary vastly DESPITE a culture. We're not all neatly put into boxes.

Every previous culture on the planet had answers to those questions. We (i.e. we of Christendom) used to have such a picture, but now it has all been collapsed into a scientific description offering us no explanatory outline. Ours, the one defining our present, is definitely unique.

Yes, which demonstrates how those pictures can change/collapse. It must be because there were enough of those within the culture who were stretching in another direction... until, perhaps, a tipping point was reached.

If I understand your position, I think I could fairly describe it as post-Christian in the sense of a particular US church interpretation of Christianity that became ultra-restrictive for you and from which it was necessary to escape. (If I remember well descriptions you have given).

That was my experience, but that is not how I view my 'position'. I have various perspectives, related to whatever we might be talking about. My experience of Christianity had more than one chapter. My experience of my culture included other things that were going on in the world at the same time -- as a child of the late 60's and 70's. This experience provided contrast: I was able to compare free-thinkers to sheep-thinkers... those who explore, and those who follow. I could feel what was in alignment with me. I was moving toward something -- rather than away from something. It didn't matter what my culture was telling me. See?

But the interesting question to ask — for you & me & all of us — is what is our description of ‘the world’? I mean: the cosmos. Existence. Being. Is your model the scientific-anthropological model? (Amoeba to Man by way of blind, purposeless evolution in a universe of exploding energy/matter that just happened to occur, somehow?

I can attempt to put it into a description, but will you do so, as well? I've stepped forward and done this too many times only to have someone offer nothing in return.

Or, is there some overarching or undergirding metaphysics? Some Consciousness that set things in motion? Why? To what end?

I'll answer if you will. I can tell you that my response would be short and simple.

Obviously, what interests me is how our beliefs intersect with culture.

I see that... and I can see the value of considering that. But our beliefs are not limited to/by our culture. I would say that we are products of our awareness most of all, which can be culture-independent.

The pattern and process of the development of European thought is so radical, and so destabilizing, to the entire framework of metaphysics that those on the cutting edge of that process have really lost the ground under their feet.

Naturally, radical shifts would be like that. Wouldn't you agree that being so radically rigid and blind in one's religious stance can also cause one to lose the ground beneath their feet? Anything extreme can do that, yes?

The time we are in now is unquestionably strange, momentous & bizarre.

I agree!

These are outcomes that require a detailed explanation and a “master metaphysician” to weave an explanatory story together.

Or..... we shift to a kind of acceptance that doesn't require a story

If we have no “explanatory story” how can we move forward?

How did you do it when you were a little kid? You didn't need stories. You didn't need a purpose. You were just exploring each landscape you came upon. Why do we think it needs to be so different when we're adults? We were more naturally in-tune then, than we are now... and probably more spiritual than man-made religion can ever hope to be.

If we don’t know where and why we are, how could we plot a course? Toward what?

You can see as far as you see in many directions, and you choose one based on all available input. When you come to a fork in the road, you reassess. It's not that hard. It doesn't require some overarching vision. It doesn't require a god and an ultimate plan.

If you woke up in an unfamiliar landscape by yourself, with no clue where you were or why, would you cease to exist? You might end up having the best time of your life. Freedom from stories! Aliveness in the NOW!

You seem to me to be a person who seeks an ‘operative philosophy’ and in some sense you have discovered or seek a means to move in Reality in new and different way. Sort of an existential idea-technology not unlike how magic is conceived by some: inexplicable intelligence in interaction with inexplicable ‘what is’.

Hmm... interesting description. Do you think that's bad?

[Lacewing]

AJ...

The lil butterfly is just settin' things up so she can whine-quit the conversation becuz another...

bad man won't let her do what she wants.

...don't say you weren't warned/reminded.

Look out... Henry is issuing more of his delusional warnings and reminders in service to his misogynist ego. He doesn't have anything else to contribute, so instead of avoiding the topic and simply minding his own business, he repeats his lame-ass comments over and over. It's a plague on forum discussion just like Age. Maybe the two of you should talk to each other and leave people alone who have no interest in your dumb distortions.

[henry quirk]

I got a fiver on the table: whine-quit in five pages or less.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I would say, but every cultural position operates from a defined metaphysics. So, you and I must be operating from a description of what the world is, where and why it is, how it came to be and for what, if any, purpose.

I think that's way too much to assume. As you suggested before, one can be influenced to one degree of another.

Perhaps if you understood the examples I was thinking of my assertion would make sense. I am thinking of ancient India which is especially interesting because of the range of varying religious schools over long historical periods. Though the schools of thought and practice were varying, the underlying metaphysics offered a sort of bedrock. So when I suggest that “every cultural position operates from a defined metaphysics” I refer to the average viewpoint that an average person received as their “metaphysical picture” of the World (i.e. the manifest world, manifest reality: existence). In this sense “every cultural position operates from a defined metaphysics”.

The sense I have about your position is that it is a localized one. By that I mean localized historically in a specific phase of American history. The liberty that you have to “think freely” about nearly anything, is not a common feature in previous points in history. But it is definitely a feature of a late point in European history and in the ethos of a nation established under radically new principles.

I am attempting, for the sake of conversation, to consider the main assertion of your thread

[Age]

AJ...

The lil butterfly is just settin' things up so she can whine-quit the conversation becuz another...

...don't say you weren't warned/reminded.

Look out... Henry is issuing more of his delusional warnings and reminders in service to his misogynist ego. He doesn't have anything else to contribute, so instead of avoiding the topic and simply minding his own business, he repeats his lame-ass comments over and over. It's a plague on forum discussion just like Age. Maybe the two of you should talk to each other and leave people alone who have no interest in your dumb distortions.

Once again 'this one' will not engage at all when it is questioned and challenged over its beliefs, (for obvious reasons), but it will instead 'talk about' others.

[Lacewing]

I got a fiver on the table: whine-quit in five pages or less.

Oooohhhh, you gave me five pages!! The reality is that most interactions on the forum don't last for five pages.

No problem putting you on Ignore with Age.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Lacewing: Some considerations about reality...

Most of us are likely capable of noticing how many different 'realities' human beings can live in. If we contemplate the implications of that, what might we consider or conclude?

For me...

Perhaps there are potentially infinite possibilities that can be seen, imagined, and experienced -- collectively and individually -- each reality appearing as real or valid to each individual/collective who experiences it.

What I am making efforts to point out, I hope for productive results, is that the proposition you are making is one that could only be made in our present time. And that you and me and everyone on this forum now “share a world” of beliefs and understanding about the world we are in. I asked about your view (if evolutionist or something different) not to probe into the reaches of your personal beliefs but to make a point for all of us: we all operate from such a view. There is no alternative.

Discerning that that view is requires a “master metaphysician” to help us to see that we do operate in a metaphysics, and that it does determine a great deal else.

[Lacewing]

I would say, but every cultural position operates from a defined metaphysics. So, you and I must be operating from a description of what the world is, where and why it is, how it came to be and for what, if any, purpose.

I think that's way too much to assume. As you suggested before, one can be influenced to one degree of another.

Perhaps if you understood the examples I was thinking of my assertion would make sense. I am thinking of ancient India which is especially interesting because of the range of varying religious schools over long historical periods. Though the schools of thought and practice were varying, the underlying metaphysics offered a sort of bedrock. So when I suggest that “every cultural position operates from a defined metaphysics” I refer to the average viewpoint that an average person received as their “metaphysical picture” of the World (i.e. the manifest world, manifest reality: existence). In this sense “every cultural position operates from a defined metaphysics”.

The sense I have about your position is that it is a localized one. By that I mean localized historically in a specific phase of American history. The liberty that you have to “think freely” about nearly anything, is not a common feature in previous points in history. But it is definitely a feature of a late point in European history and in the ethos of a nation established under radically new principles.

I am attempting, for the sake of conversation, to consider the main assertion of your thread

I understand your point of focus. I cannot speak to it at any length or significance, however, when it does not include my experience or perspective. Examples of groups of people doing one thing or another do not translate (for me) to 'every' or 'all' applications. Although I appreciate noticing patterns and influences, I am cautious about over-arching conclusions that exclude that which is not being acknowledged or realized from a particular perspective. There may be more of that significantly at work 'behind and across the scenes' of this Earth stage, so from my perspective, it cannot be left out. This is where we see how very different focuses/perspectives (such as yours and mine) are living and experiencing by different rules/effects. So how realistic is it for us to agree on how things are supposedly 'organized'?

What matters to you is not the same that matters to me. What is of significance to you is not the same as what is of significance to me. Yet, we are both living very functional lives while sharing the same apparent space and time. I find the potential implications of that fascinating. But how do we discuss that fascinating part if we're stuck on defining and agreeing on a particular framework?

How do people with very different 'frames of reference' communicate? I think we could do this much easier in person. In my experience, there is something about the energy of being in-person that communicates/shares despite words used, or lack of them. Have you experienced this too? Isn't it as significant for consideration as all the definitions we can come up with?

[Lacewing]

What I am making efforts to point out, I hope for productive results, is that the proposition you are making is one that could only be made in our present time.

At the risk of frustrating the hell out of you (which I've probably already done)...

How do you know that? What is it that you think applies only to this so-called 'present time'?

And that you and me and everyone on this forum now “share a world” of beliefs and understanding about the world we are in.

To varying degrees, perhaps... but certainly not even enough that we can agree on basic understandings and values and realities and truths. So, who's version is correct?

I asked about your view (if evolutionist or something different) not to probe into the reaches of your personal beliefs but to make a point for all of us: we all operate from such a view. There is no alternative.

I think what you are saying is based on your belief that we are products of a shared 'time in history' on this physical planet, and there is nothing more to it than that. Yes?

If so, what makes you so sure of that... especially in the face of countless ongoing examples and demonstrations which intersect our 'present time' through flashes of inexplicable awareness, memories, visions, connections, other-worldly interactions, etc. You are aware that these occur, yes? Are these excluded as insignificant to your physical model?

Do we really know what our lives are and what we are? Does it matter?

[Alexis Jacobi]

At the risk of frustrating the hell out of you (which I've probably already done)...

Not in the least.

How do you know that? What is it that you think applies only to this so-called 'present time'?

In my case? Based only on reading the literature of comparative religion. Understanding how people conceived of themselves and the world they find themselves in.

And because there are very definitely new modes of seeing and understanding the world and being which derive, very substantially, from Europe.

You and I and all others here are “products” of these new modes of seeing, imagining and being.

What is it that you think applies only to this so-called 'present time'?

The revolutions in thought which produced us. These are not universal traits of the historical intellectual world. They pertain to our intellectual history.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Do we really know what our lives are and what we are? Does it matter?

Well, yes, I certainly believe that it matters very much how we understand ‘world’ ‘cosmos’ ‘manifestation’ ‘being’. Absolutely.

But as you make clear: children exist, carry on moment to moment, in life and in their being without asking such questions.

If you (Lacewing) were to say: I have no need or desire to examine or understand life in these ways (intense probing) I could only say “That is a valid choice”.

[Lacewing]

If you (Lacewing) were to say: I have no need or desire to examine or understand life in these ways (intense probing) I could only say “That is a valid choice”.

I may not want to do it through your eyes -- but I find it endlessly fascinating to explore, examine, notice, and consider all kinds of connections and possibilities. And in doing that, I discover much that I/we DON'T explore, examine, notice, and consider, which is also interesting.

The more I know, the more I know I don't know. Aristotle
The more we learn, the more we realize how much there is to know, and how little we actually grasp. Socrates

[Alexis Jacobi]

I think what you are saying is based on your belief that we are products of a shared 'time in history' on this physical planet, and there is nothing more to it than that. Yes?

If so, what makes you so sure of that... especially in the face of countless ongoing examples and demonstrations which intersect our 'present time' through flashes of inexplicable awareness, memories, visions, connections, other-worldly interactions, etc. You are aware that these occur, yes? Are these excluded as insignificant to your physical model?

Perhaps if you refer to a few examples of “flashes of inexplicable awareness, memories, visions, connections, other-worldly interactions, etc.” I be better able to understand and possibly comment.

[Age]

I got a fiver on the table: whine-quit in five pages or less.

Oooohhhh, you gave me five pages!! The reality is that most interactions on the forum don't last for five pages.

No problem putting you on Ignore with Age.

Once more 'this one' is able to talk 'about' me, but not able to converse 'with' me.

"lacewing" has an absolute belief, which it is obviously very ashamed of, and which is why it does not like that I keep revealing what its fixed belief is, here.