Page 9 of 28

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 3:25 am
by SpheresOfBalance
Arising_uk wrote:
Bill Wiltrack wrote:...

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.
Break it down, show the contradiction, as you see it!

Obviously, as usual, it's your history with Bill that causes you to leap so far. It could be that the author of Bills quote simply screwed up his use of the English language. When was it that this guy died?

Contrary your your flawed 'belief,' ARISING UK, everyones meaning is not necessarily contained within your responses. Or should I say UNDERSTANDING? As if it's paramount, flawless, necessarily definitive! You're just one in 8 billion, that's all! Just like the rest of us! Suck it up!

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 3:26 am
by SpheresOfBalance
Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
It doesn't surprise me that he would appear idiotic to you or anyone else that may have not had a deep understanding. [/size]
.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
CelineK wrote:
Arising_uk wrote: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.
Yet you're incapable of saying why. Then what does that say about you?

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:14 pm
by Arising_uk
CelineK wrote: 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.
Not sure I said there was a contradiction in his metaphysics?

I accept that I could be making a mistake in assuming that to tell of an experience is the same as explaining it as I think that if no-one has ever been able to explain something I wonder what the point in telling of it?

Still, you sound like you have experience of this person's work so I'd be interested in what his metaphysic is as. for my part, I think metaphysics a dead end in philosophy if it is meant to have a special insight into the world.

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:22 pm
by Arising_uk
SpheresOfBalance wrote:Contrary your your flawed 'belief,' ARISING UK, everyones meaning is not necessarily contained within your responses. Or should I say UNDERSTANDING? As if it's paramount, flawless, necessarily definitive! You're just one in 8 billion, that's all! Just like the rest of us! Suck it up!
I'm fine with being one of many, no eyed-deer why you think otherwise?

Once more, one may have a meaning they wish to impart and if they wish to impart it then they will, in the main, be using language to do so and as such despite that one thinks they are using the words that represent the meaning they wish to impart the nature of language means this is not necessarily so therefore if one wished to impart a meaning one should pay attention to the response ones words get as this will tell you if your meaning has got across. You appear to think that it is the others fault that they don't understand what you mean but then you think language has a fixed meaning that can be found in dictionaries but with respect to language meaning does not lie in dictionaries just definitions. Hence the catch-phrase, 'The meaning of one's words lies in the response they get', if one truly wishes to communicate something.

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:23 pm
by Arising_uk
SpheresOfBalance wrote:Obviously, as usual, it's your history with Bill that causes you to leap so far. ...
Maybe.
It could be that the author of Bills quote simply screwed up his use of the English language. When was it that this guy died?
Doubt it, more likely I've not understood his difference between telling and explaining.

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 2:12 pm
by Hobbes' Choice
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
It doesn't surprise me that he would appear idiotic to you or anyone else that may have not had a deep understanding. [/size]
.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
CelineK wrote:
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.
Yet you're incapable of saying why. Then what does that say about you?
It says that I'm way ahead of you, and that you are a twat.

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:20 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
Arising_uk wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:Contrary your your flawed 'belief,' ARISING UK, everyones meaning is not necessarily contained within your responses. Or should I say UNDERSTANDING? As if it's paramount, flawless, necessarily definitive! You're just one in 8 billion, that's all! Just like the rest of us! Suck it up!
I'm fine with being one of many, no eyed-deer why you think otherwise?

Once more, one may have a meaning they wish to impart and if they wish to impart it then they will, in the main, be using language to do so and as such despite that one thinks they are using the words that represent the meaning they wish to impart the nature of language means this is not necessarily so therefore if one wished to impart a meaning one should pay attention to the response ones words get as this will tell you if your meaning has got across. You appear to think that it is the others fault that they don't understand what you mean but then you think language has a fixed meaning that can be found in dictionaries but with respect to language meaning does not lie in dictionaries just definitions. Hence the catch-phrase, 'The meaning of one's words lies in the response they get', if one truly wishes to communicate something.
Arising, you know that I've respected you in a lot of ways, I may not say it very often, but on many occasions I've supported you fully. The reason I've picked at that particular baby, (phrase), of yours, is because in and of itself it comes off both arrogant, and obviously false. In FACT, ones response does not necessarily have anything to do with another's MEANING!! If you had formulated that particular phrases 'meaning,' using the word, 'words' instead of the word, 'meaning,' then you would have been much closer to being correct. But even still, your phrase would, in and of itself, convey your assumption that your understanding of the meaning of words is necessarily superior to others, and this a direct contradiction to your other belief that dictionaries do not contain meaning, that meaning is born of peoples minds, such that it leaves no room for anyone to formulate any sentence that another may understand. Whether you care to acknowledge it or not, in FACT, a dictionary that 'everyone' refers to, is the "ONLY" way one can insure that their words are capable of conveying the meaning that is inside their heads. So it is the job of anyone that wishes to convey the proper meaning that is contained in their minds, to adjust the words they use to meet those in a dictionary or else they fail to formulate sentences that another can find common reference so as to fully understand. WE CANNOT CRAWL UNTO EACH OTHERS MINDS TO FIND TRUE MEANING. Unfortunately we must rely on REFERENCE books as a source of COMMON meaning so as to understand one another. IT CAN BE NO OTHER WAY! If you don't understand my point then you had better rethink your belief system. Because on this topic, my logic is flawless! No, I'm an idiot!! I'M NOT BETTER THAN ANYONE!! WE ARE ALL BORN OF EQUAL POTENTIAL. Unless we are born physically flawed, or are subsequently mentally corrupted!

So, what I'm saying to you is to "give people the benefit of doubt" because that can ONLY serve both you and them, when it comes to the sharing of meaning contained in each of our minds. NO ONE EITHER DESERVES OR SHOULD INSIST ON CARTE BLANCHE IN TERMS OF MEANING CONVEYANCE, BEING SHARED AMONGST EVER DIFFERING PEOPLES, SUCH THAT THEY STOMP ON ANOTHER'S WORD USAGE AS IF THEY ARE SUPERIOR. As it's just an illusion or their delusion, the former born of ignorance, the latter, a self stroking mechanism. Take your pick!

And I do thank you for being very even keeled in your last response to me. In my 'opinion' it showed much maturity! Whether you value it or not is immaterial, as I would feel the same way, either way! So unload if you wish, or maintain such grand decorum, it's your choice of course.

And despite your belief in them, or the date being in dispute, I wish you and yours happy holidays! May it find you and yours, healthy, happy and wise!

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:23 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
Arising_uk wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:Obviously, as usual, it's your history with Bill that causes you to leap so far. ...
Maybe.
It could be that the author of Bills quote simply screwed up his use of the English language. When was it that this guy died?
Doubt it, more likely I've not understood his difference between telling and explaining.
Actually that's what I was thinking, I just used the most far fetched possibility to corral anything more likely. My way of showing the extent that one may not understand, at least to my way of thinking.

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:36 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
Hobbes' Choice wrote:It says that I'm way ahead of you, and that you are a twat.
I'm waiting for you, with respect to my words to you, to finally support your half baked assertions. But I'll descend to your level on this one, SO AS TO MAKE A POINT:

NEENER, NEENER, NEENER, YOU'RE A TWAT TOOOOOOO! I'M WAY AHEAD OF YOU! YOUR TURN! ;)

Support your assertions, and stop being a yes man to those obviously smarter than you! I have more hope for you than that!

Happy Christmas, atheist! And not being a traditional religious person of the teachings of the bible, I yet mean that in earnest. As I see something in Christmas that is so much more than simply the religious acknowledgment of a philosopher that died 2015 or so, years ago. First and foremost I see him as one of the earlier philosophers, to do more with morals/ethics than most. Just because you and I do battle, as much as it is, I still wish you and yours well!

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:38 pm
by Hobbes' Choice
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:It says that I'm way ahead of you, and that you are a twat.
I'm waiting for you, with respect to my words to you, to finally support your half baked assertions. But I'll descend to your level on this one, SO AS TO MAKE A POINT:

NEENER, NEENER, NEENER, YOU'RE A TWAT TOOOOOOO! I'M WAY AHEAD OF YOU! YOUR TURN! ;)

Support your assertions, and stop being a yes man to those obviously smarter than you! I have more hope for you than that!

Happy Christmas, atheist! And not being a traditional religious person of the teachings of the bible, I yet mean that in earnest. As I see something in Christmas that is so much more than simply the religious acknowledgment of a philosopher that died 2015 or so, years ago. First and foremost I see him as one of the earlier philosophers, to do more with morals/ethics than most. Just because you and I do battle, as much as it is, I still wish you and yours well!
I think you are confusing Xmas with Easter. Jesus is supposed to have been born 2015 or so years ago. Presumably he'd have died somewhat less that 2000 years ago; perhaps 1990 years ago. But you never did have much of a penchant for thinking clearly.

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:57 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:It says that I'm way ahead of you, and that you are a twat.
I'm waiting for you, with respect to my words to you, to finally support your half baked assertions. But I'll descend to your level on this one, SO AS TO MAKE A POINT:

NEENER, NEENER, NEENER, YOU'RE A TWAT TOOOOOOO! I'M WAY AHEAD OF YOU! YOUR TURN! ;)

Support your assertions, and stop being a yes man to those obviously smarter than you! I have more hope for you than that!

Happy Christmas, atheist! And not being a traditional religious person of the teachings of the bible, I yet mean that in earnest. As I see something in Christmas that is so much more than simply the religious acknowledgment of a philosopher that died 2015 or so, years ago. First and foremost I see him as one of the earlier philosophers, to do more with morals/ethics than most. Just because you and I do battle, as much as it is, I still wish you and yours well!
I think you are confusing Xmas with Easter. Jesus is supposed to have been born 2015 or so years ago. Presumably he'd have died somewhat less that 2000 years ago; perhaps 1990 years ago. But you never did have much of a penchant for thinking clearly.
Incorrect. It used to be 2015 years BC and/or 2015 years AD. BC stood for "Before Christ" while AD stood for "AFTER DEATH." They've just taken that away so as to appease the atheists. To be more scientific and less religious. "After death," my friend, is after death, PERIOD!

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:09 pm
by Hobbes' Choice
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote: I'm waiting for you, with respect to my words to you, to finally support your half baked assertions. But I'll descend to your level on this one, SO AS TO MAKE A POINT:

NEENER, NEENER, NEENER, YOU'RE A TWAT TOOOOOOO! I'M WAY AHEAD OF YOU! YOUR TURN! ;)

Support your assertions, and stop being a yes man to those obviously smarter than you! I have more hope for you than that!

Happy Christmas, atheist! And not being a traditional religious person of the teachings of the bible, I yet mean that in earnest. As I see something in Christmas that is so much more than simply the religious acknowledgment of a philosopher that died 2015 or so, years ago. First and foremost I see him as one of the earlier philosophers, to do more with morals/ethics than most. Just because you and I do battle, as much as it is, I still wish you and yours well!
I think you are confusing Xmas with Easter. Jesus is supposed to have been born 2015 or so years ago. Presumably he'd have died somewhat less that 2000 years ago; perhaps 1990 years ago. But you never did have much of a penchant for thinking clearly.
Incorrect. It used to be 2015 years BC and/or 2015 years AD. BC stood for "Before Christ" while AD stood for "AFTER DEATH." They've just taken that away so as to appease the atheists. To be more scientific and less religious. "After death," my friend, is after death, PERIOD!
I think you are wrong.
AD is not "AFTER DEATH" rolf. It's Anno Domini.
The last time I looked Jesus was thought to have been born 3 BC, during the reign of Augustus.
And died circa 30-35 AD in the time of TIberius.

What crap is "to appease the atheists"? When has anyone ever appeased the atheists over anything. AND WHY?

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:21 pm
by SpheresOfBalance
SpheresOfBalance wrote: I'm waiting for you, with respect to my words to you, to finally support your half baked assertions. But I'll descend to your level on this one, SO AS TO MAKE A POINT:

NEENER, NEENER, NEENER, YOU'RE A TWAT TOOOOOOO! I'M WAY AHEAD OF YOU! YOUR TURN! ;)

Support your assertions, and stop being a yes man to those obviously smarter than you! I have more hope for you than that!

Happy Christmas, atheist! And not being a traditional religious person of the teachings of the bible, I yet mean that in earnest. As I see something in Christmas that is so much more than simply the religious acknowledgment of a philosopher that died 2015 or so, years ago. First and foremost I see him as one of the earlier philosophers, to do more with morals/ethics than most. Just because you and I do battle, as much as it is, I still wish you and yours well!
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
I think you are confusing Xmas with Easter. Jesus is supposed to have been born 2015 or so years ago. Presumably he'd have died somewhat less that 2000 years ago; perhaps 1990 years ago. But you never did have much of a penchant for thinking clearly.
Incorrect. It used to be 2015 years BC and/or 2015 years AD. BC stood for "Before Christ" while AD stood for "AFTER DEATH." They've just taken that away so as to appease the atheists. To be more scientific and less religious. "After death," my friend, is after death, PERIOD!
AD is not "AFTER DEATH" rolf. It's Anno Domini.
As to the meaning of AD, touché!
As I've told you, I'm not a bible thumper. I was told that many years ago as a child and never bothered to look it up, because I could really care less about biblical text, or Latin for that matter.


The last time I looked Jesus was thought to have been born 3 BC, during the reign of Augustus.
And died circa 30-35 AD in the time of TIberius.

What crap is "to appease the atheists"? When has anyone ever appeased the atheists over anything. AND WHY?
I'm sure you're well aware of how political correctness is taking hold of the US these days. I was under the understanding that AD is no longer used so as to be more politically correct, and the atheists are the only ones that might be offended, OK the Jews too, then there's the Muslims and... ;)

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:12 am
by raw_thought
I hate to be trivially semantic. But it is important. The thread should be called "the purpose of life" not "the meaning of life".
The meaning of "dog" is not "to serve humans". That is a culturally determined understanding. It is contingent. Meaning is definitional, not contingent.

Re: ~ The Meaning of Life ~

Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:53 am
by CelineK
Hey Bill, the book I am writing is precisely about the emotions-electromagnetism connection and hope do Walter Russell justice. But glad to see that you know him too.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
......................................................................[/color]Image

.