~~~ Prostitutes for God ~~~

[Bill Wiltrack]

.








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


........................................................................................................................................... The Way







Look...if you see a beautiful painting you may be inspired to paint.

You may just decide to enjoy the beauty of the painting itself.



If one of my masterpieces inspires you to action - all the good!


If you just decide to enjoy my philosophical perspective - well, that's fine too.



Through an amazing epiphany I discovered a religion. My religion.

For me, THAT is AMAZING! And that is enough!

I spend my day in a personal effort to grow closer to this religion.

This has changed my life and this inherent good GUIDES my life.


THAT is enough for me.

I can't change anybody. I can't change the world.


I can only change me.





Thank you for responding to this thread and applying yourself to this concept. Enjoy!






.

[Arising_uk]

Nice words pity they are belied by your postings here and across the weeb.

Glad you can identify your problem, i.e. its a 'religion' for you not a philosophy and I think its your proselytizing and wish to be in the priesthood that's the issue.

Why not return it to politics and outline how you'd like things to work and use others critiques to refine and adapt your views until they appear credible or show that they aren't and as such give them up for something else.

Your claim of it as your religion leads me to think you are an ex-theist looking for something to fill the void that a loss of faith in such a 'God' brings and if so then I commiserate but cannot empathise as I've never been raised with such a belief.

See what I mean about the me, me, me aspect of your thoughts? Nothing wrong with that but it grates when you use others misery to salve yourself with moral ointment and attempt to dress it up as philosophy.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.








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






I want to thank both of you for participating and developing this thread.






.

[Arising_uk]

Save your pointless platitudes.

Got any actual thoughts about why you re-contextualised a pantheistic goddess belief into one concerning your theistic 'god'?

Or about the contradiction in your thoughts concerning the meaning of the word 'God'?

Or about the false inference you made from your 'God's' view to Mans view?

Or your ignoring that your 'God' appears to support an unequal hierarchy amongst its creation?

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




I really appreciate your articulate questions and again, I appreciate your support.


I think you are missing the focus of my original post in making this thread and I believe the essence of my follow-up posts here have escaped you.


May I respectfully request that you re-read this thread in it's entirety.


I don't mean to come off as condescending but I feel attempting to move forward within this context as useless.


Good luck to you and again, I appreciate your participation within this interesting philosophical tenant.





.

[reasonvemotion]

I was raised a Buddhist and as such I understand what I can or cannot change and have the serenity not to bother others when it slips, unless they be my long-suffering friends that is.

Arising,

I found this interesting. I know a little about Tibetan Buddhism, are you referring to Zen or Tibetan? When reading this my mind went back to the days of that terrible debate you had with Spheres. I know from a Tibetan view point this would never have taken place. My question is, do you still practice this philosophy or you were raised with it and have abandoned its teachings.

I am asking this from an entirely neutral stand point.

[Arising_uk]

I really appreciate your articulate questions and again, I appreciate your support.

I'd really appreciate it is you'd answer some of them for once.

I think you are missing the focus of my original post in making this thread and I believe the essence of my follow-up posts here have escaped you.

What I did miss was that the title was the title of the boobtube clip and not yours so I retract my first question. Although it does confirm to me my dislike of such TV programs.

That still leaves my two questions about your two assertions. Will you be giving a reply any time soon?

May I respectfully request that you re-read this thread in it's entirety.

Done so and see nothing new that I have not responded to.

I don't mean to come off as condescending but I feel attempting to move forward within this context as useless.

I think I have responded in context to your two assertions. I await a reply.

Good luck to you and again, I appreciate your participation within this interesting philosophical tenant.

So says you but so far I think you've not said anything.

[Arising_uk]

Arising,

I found this interesting. I know a little about Tibetan Buddhism, are you referring to Zen or Tibetan? When reading this my mind went back to the days of that terrible debate you had with Spheres. I know from a Tibetan view point this would never have taken place. My question is, do you still practice this philosophy or you were raised with it and have abandoned its teachings.

I am asking this from an entirely neutral stand point.

reasonvemotion,
Neither, my mother is Burmese and I refer to her cultural understanding and transmission of the Burmese Buddhist Way. My position is the latter of your questions although I think I retain some of those teachings when the necessity arises and overall the raising has had an influence upon my philosophical training and thinking, just not in the way of retaining much of it as a useful or probably true metaphysic nor moral or political nor epistemological philosophy.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.








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






A short time ago I had the honor of having the most responded to thread in the history of this entire forum, independent of the original poster.

Within that initially simple thread by far the most prolific poster here had their credibility destroyed. Please don't make have to say that your credibility was revealed.

Unfortunately the moniker of a cartoon chicken now suits you. Philosophical discourse does not.


I urge you to change the moniker that you hide behind. And change your attitude.

In brotherhood.







.

[reasonvemotion]

Thanks for sharing that Arising.

To accept and embrace Buddhism totally, requires sacrifice. I don't think people really grasp that. Your honesty was appreciated.

[Arising_uk]

My pleasure reasonvemotion,

I agree, I'm constantly irritated by Westerners who say they are Buddhists but do not learn to grow veg and take the robe and bowl. Although I agree the seeking of alms can be difficult in a culture that does not understand the philosophy. It irritates me nearly as much as those who say they meditate when all they really do is sit comfortably and navel-gaze. Ignoring that to even get to the position when one can truly begin to meditate involves, depending upon where you are, a good couple of years of a gruelling and disciplined physical routine. They think the Buddhas back was like that easily? Having said that I agree that any time-out and period of quiet is beneficial.

On this forum I think I've only talked to one, magnetman, who walked the talk with respect to Zen Buddhist training and whilst we didn't agree on much I respected his achievement of surviving a Japanese monastery.

I think the Burmese approach may be sightly more laid back than the Llamist or Zen traditions, not in the practices as what is there other than the robe, bowl, beads, a shit load of exercise, gardening, the 8 and the 4 and meditation(although I understand the practice can differ slightly here), but in the ability to join or leave a monastery and rejoin at will with no 'blame'. Could be wrong tho'.

For myself, I did not follow the philosophy because in my youth I was allowed to choose and my reasoning could not accept reincarnation nor what I saw as a too passive stance with respect to certain things in life and I just gave-up believing in much of it. Like I said tho', it certainly colours my actions and philosophy and accidents and dentists certainly became easier when I realised novacaine works as well as mind if you've not the mind to.
Gave me a love for eastern martial practices and exercises but lately age and edge-weapons has caused me to come over all medieval.

[reasonvemotion]

[Arising_uk]

Anything to avoid thinking and answering eh! Bill.

A short time ago I had the honor of having the most responded to thread in the history of this entire forum, independent of the original poster.p.

Philosophy by 'popularity'.

If you had any philosophical 'honour' you'd have responded to the very first reply in that thread that pointed out the error in your thoughts and pretty much answered your question. It at least could have caused you to rethink your thoughts but then learning to think philosophically is not what you seek when you come here. Its why I think you praised and admired the goaturder even tho' he is antithetical to what you appear to think, as in truth you wish to have your own little herd like he does.

Within that initially simple thread by far the most prolific poster here had their credibility destroyed. Please don't make have to say that your credibility was revealed.p.

Two things Bill, one, what makes you think credibility was a thought of mine? Two, my profligacy is mainly due to being here for a very long time now.

Unfortunately the moniker of a cartoon chicken now suits you. Philosophical discourse does not.

Your psycho-babble bent leads you to read too much of yourself into such things as avatars and niks.

I will say that it truly irritates me that you, who thinks wikying a philosopher is the same as reading them, think yourself capable of judging what is philosophical discourse. This is doubly so when I read other posts of yours where you decry past philosophers and the practice of using words to express ones thoughts but have not actually done the reading nor the effort involved to be in such a position to judge. Its this that annoys me about the interweeb as it allows such as you to write about what you can't be bothered to learn upon sites where some may have taken the time and effort to do so.

Take your mention of Socrates, I doubt you know that we have no written words by him and its Plato that you speak of. For myself I think Aristotle is a better founding father of modern Philosophy and as such Logic and Reason the grounds of Philosophy. As such I'll ask you once again, what is the link between your posted link in this thread and these 'thesis' that you propose?

Given that in your first proposition you make a contradiction which means the proposition is always false why do you think it has any meaning? Not doubting it might, just want to know what you think it is?

In your second proposition you make an inference that is not supportable by your premises, nor by the 'evidence' of theists 'Holy' Book. Do you still think it true upon these grounds and if so why?

I urge you to change the moniker that you hide behind. And change your attitude.

In brotherhood.

I urge you to do a little reading so that you know about which you speak and can understand why upon a philosophy forum your thoughts sound confused and in error. Barring that,

[Bill Wiltrack]

.


Life is short.

Philosophy is experiential.


Hope you feel better.



.

[Arising_uk]

Life is short.

And this demonstrates exactly what I mean about your thoughts and how the weeb allows such things to pass for thought. You think pat cliches are philosophy. You think such things have portent when in fact they are trite and fairly meaningless from a philosophical point of view. For a start 'life' is not a relative and is as 'long' and as 'short' as the mind that makes an experience from it.

It also makes me laugh as apparently you use a large chunk of your 'short' life to cruise the weeb for jollies.

Philosophy is experiential.

How would you know? Given you've never read those that have been called the philosophers. Prove me wrong and tell me what you mean by this.

Hope you feel better.

This is an "Have you stopped beating your wife" question and is more of your puerile attempt at head-fucking. But in answer, "I was not feeling worse thanks."
p.s.
I note you once again ignore questions about your 'thesis'. Its this that lets me know that philosophy is not for you as your ego is to fragile to consider your thoughts.