Philosophy Now Forum

Greta wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:07 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 9:43 amAwakening is a subject that seems to irate the hell out of Greta, but no matter, so be it, it is what it is.

No, awakening is a fairly natural thing to do as one matures. In time even you and Nick might start the process, but first you will each need to ditch your inordinate pride, so that may be some time yet, perhaps requiring a midlife crisis to bring you back to Earth.

Wrong again.

No one gets enlightened. No one does anything. No thing is doing itself.

This is the only enlightenment.

.

Greta wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:29 am This is just solipsism.

Solipsism is a concept known. That which is known cannot know anything, be anything or do anything. So no one to be a solipist...except the illusory belief in this conception.

I see you are still believing in your own disbeliefs...

.

Greta wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:29 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:21 am

Greta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:51 pm
HOWEVER, ONE THING I LOATHE IS THE DISHONEST PRESENTATION OF BELIEFS AND SPECULATIVE MATERIAL AS ABSOLUTE FACT.

It is an absolute fact that you exist right now. This PRESENTATION that is you - that you ARE - is irrefutable. That's all that can be known about you. Everything else is just pure material speculation, a fiction, a representaion, a reaction.

From belief to clarity.

This is just solipsism. Trouble is, all these other people are having their own little irrefutable truths. So then we all get together and look at each others' irrefutable truths and see how they compare. Then we notice that almost everyone shares certain irrefutable truths and then we call that shared understanding "science".

I personally value the truths of others who are not me, knowing that what they feel within is just as profound as what I feel. How do I know that's not just fantasy? I talk to people, read their ideas and over time a person gains experience and learns the difference between fantastical claims and credible ones.

Dontaskme wrote:

Greta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:51 pmI expect this will be ignored too.

It is an absolute fact that you exist right now. That's all that can be known about you. Everything else is just pure speculation, fiction.

just don't take any notice of the little man behind the curtain, ignore that one.

Again, you disregard the knowledge of others while, curiously maintaining faith in a book the best part of 2,000 years old.

Sure, in a way this moment within is absolutely everything. Yippee and huzzah. However, I note that I have had a veritable shitload of prior moments. With luck I will have many more of them in the future.

Now I have this moment but it's only as special insofar as I have the energy and inclination to have what I think of as a little "nature rhapsody", something I enjoy most days, usually on the dog walk or while gardening. Most times, though, I'm just trying to get things done with those "nows" (that are all there is), which is the case for most people with responsibilities.

None of this is "speculation" or "pure fiction". That's just what you choose to tell yourself about it. I can understand the wish for none of this to be real, for all the stupidity, humiliations and blundering one perpetrates in life to be just an illusion. It ain't, though.

I'm still rooting for the Mack truck.

Nonduality is the final truth. It's the end of knowledge.

Knowledge informs the illusory nature of life...the illusion of separation.

The identified entity, the claimed I will reject this understandably so.

The identified mind is not ready to hear the truth. It can't handle it, but those that do live out the rest of eternity shining.

And she's a beautiful shiner...no human man can touch her.

.

Dalek Prime wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 11:51 am
I'm still rooting for the Mack truck.

Big deal, a truck kills ..but do you honestly believe that's you there lying dead in that casket?

If you have no beliefs, then there is no need to believe that is you in that casket, so no one really dies do they?





.

Greta wrote:

I think humans are conditioned to "switch off" from the wonder of reality so we can get things done, to order our lives. So we "put aside childish things" and focus on surviving the human social terrain. This is what dopey-head is referring to as "spirit killing" - training people to be hard-nosed adults to survive in a hard-nosed adult world (that mostly theists built, it should be said - "spare the rod and spoil the child" seems to have caught on more than "love thy neighbour").

The Greta mind believes as the young begin their transition into adulthood they should switch off reality so they can be indoctrinated into becoming conditioned functioning atoms of society in service to its god the Great Beast.

Must the “switch off” be inevitable? This invites contemplation of what Plato introduced but should be excluded from modern philosophy according to the Greta mind in favor of debating the whims of secular experts and attacking Trump. These questions include: What is a Man? We know from D Ps reaction that the question of manliness is too insulting to consider. But suppose manliness doesn’t exclude reality for conditioning? Suppose manliness deals with the problems of the world while maintaining his awareness of reality and his objective psycho/spiritual connection with higher consciousness?

Of course such an idea is very unhip and unworthy of the dignity of modern philosophy. Manliness would be the ability to receive from above so as to give to below. Those of the Greta mind insist there is no above and below so nothing to receive. We just create our own reality based upon our own subjective interpretations and make scapegoats of what interferes with our imagined righteousness

Religion was intended as a means of switching back to attentiveness - to stopped being stressed and busy and to once again notice the wonder, and thus refresh and recharge. Now religions are mainly just political affiliations.

Religion was the attempt to establish a connection between ourselves and our idolatry. Attentiveness was a necessary part of it but not the goal. An esoteric school taught techniques furthering the cause of conscious evolution and man’s potential to be more than just a particle of nature but also a conscious being.

The religion has gone out of the religion. A naturalist like David Attenborough seems vastly more spiritual than the preachers of hate in the religions of love. Attenborough "gets it" - he sees the wonder, the miracles of nature. He's not blind to it, or just focused on its utility but appreciates it for what it is, and how it came to be.

A teaching initiating with a conscious source must lawfully devolve over time into a secularized religion functioning within society and reflecting the hypocrisy of the human condition. The initial teaching remains underground to protect itself. Where a secularized or openly false teaching is easy to get into but hard to get out of, the true teaching is hard to get into and easy to get our of.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 5:41 pm

I think humans are conditioned to "switch off" from the wonder of reality so we can get things done, to order our lives. So we "put aside childish things" and focus on surviving the human social terrain. This is what dopey-head is referring to as "spirit killing" - training people to be hard-nosed adults to survive in a hard-nosed adult world (that mostly theists built, it should be said - "spare the rod and spoil the child" seems to have caught on more than "love thy neighbour").

The Greta mind believes as the young begin their transition into adulthood they should switch off reality so they can be indoctrinated into becoming conditioned functioning atoms of society in service to its god the Great Beast.

Every simple observation I make is is attributed to what the "Greta mind" wants. This is muddled thinking.

I did not enjoy school, the teaching methods or syllabus either. However, this is not about me or what I want, but what is happening in reality. Do you understand this?

If you cannot parse observation and desire, you cannot do philosophy. This is your fault line. You cannot tell your own desires from reality either, which is why you interpret bland observations from others as the desperate need. No, they are just reporting.

The very most basic requirement to perform philosophy is to question yourself, to aim to be an objective reporter, while acknowledging that the goal is an aspirational rather than realistically attainable. If one cannot separate their desires from their observations, as is the case with you, the result must always be polemic, as is the case with your postings.

Nick_A wrote:Must the “switch off” be inevitable?

If your boss is happy for you to ignore your work because you are too busy thinking about God, then sure, you need not switch off.

Nick_A wrote:What is a Man? We know from D Ps reaction that the question of manliness is too insulting to consider. But suppose manliness doesn’t exclude reality for conditioning? Suppose manliness deals with the problems of the world while maintaining his awareness of reality and his objective psycho/spiritual connection with higher consciousness?

That's a new one - a penis being an essential requirement for multitasking.

Look, just forget it. Your well of bullshit runs too deep. Every time I think there can't be more stupidity, you up the ante.

***

Despite all your theosophy and male fantasies, I would have loved to have gone to a Steiner School. That would have been my dream at the time. I was actually a good example of one whose "spirit was killed" at school. I had multiple undiagnosed breakdowns during high school. However, the "spirit killing" did not stem from the syllabus or teaching methods, but daily rejection and bullying from jealous, anti-intellectual, nerd-hating peers.

It is bullying that kills children's spirits much more so than just being trained "to be another brick in the wall". People have always been trained to be "atoms of their societies", from tribal initiations through to modern education systems in an unbroken line.

When we enjoy the advantages of group living, we should happily contribute and learn how to contribute well rather than constantly scream and complain about society's demands - as you do, ungrateful child that you are.

Greta

If you cannot parse observation and desire, you cannot do philosophy. This is your fault line. You cannot tell your own desires from reality either, which is why you interpret bland observations from others as the desperate need. No, they are just reporting.

The very most basic requirement to perform philosophy is to question yourself, to aim to be an objective reporter, while acknowledging that the goal is an aspirational rather than realistically attainable. If one cannot separate their desires from their observations, as is the case with you, the result must always be polemic, as is the case with your postings.

The trouble is that we do not observe with impartiality. We attempt to justify our desires and preconceptions. Only a rare few are worthy of the word philosopher as the love of wisdom. The rest are talented BS artists. Your trouble is that you are unwilling to verify the human condition as it exists in you. How can this lead to meaningful philosophy? My advantage over you is my willingness to admit the necessary foundation that I am the wretched man.

If your boss is happy for you to ignore your work because you are too busy thinking about God, then sure, you need not switch off.

You are referring to daydreaming or escapism and I am referring to conscious awareness. I doubt you even accept the difference.

Despite all your theosophy and male fantasies, I would have loved to have gone to a Steiner School. That would have been my dream at the time. I was actually a good example of one whose "spirit was killed" at school. I had multiple undiagnosed breakdowns during high school. However, the "spirit killing" did not stem from the syllabus or teaching methods, but daily rejection and bullying from jealous, anti-intellectual, nerd-hating peers.

Spirit killing is the destruction of the natural impulse in the young to be attracted to eros or the quality of reality that manifests between God and Man. Secularism seems compelled to destroy it in the young. Bullying is the attack against the feeling of self worth and is personality killing. They are both damaging but in different ways.

It is bullying that kills children's spirits much more so than just being trained "to be another brick in the wall". People have always been trained to be "atoms of their societies", from tribal initiations through to modern education systems in an unbroken line.

You are concerned for the atoms of the Great Beast and many of these are fine people even though if only by indoctrination. As I’ve gotten older I’ve become more concerned for the individuals called to the evolution of consciousness in order to experience objective human meaning and purpose. The world is against them so I support those who support them

When we enjoy the advantages of group living, we should happily contribute and learn how to contribute well rather than constantly scream and complain about society's demands - as you do, ungrateful child that you are.

A person of understanding would be capable of giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. Do you really believe Jesus was referring to daydreaming? Do you know the difference between what Jesus meant by giving to Caesar and giving to God?

Nick_A wrote: ↑Wed Aug 15, 2018 4:17 amA person of understanding would be capable of giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. Do you really believe Jesus was referring to daydreaming? Do you know the difference between what Jesus meant by giving to Caesar and giving to God?

Sure I do. JC was basically saying: Do your civic duty. Do what you have to keep the bastards off your back ... but don't love Caesar or his stuff 'cos yer supposed to love me most, not that dirty Roman bum!

So the myth went.

Bullying is more spirit killing than any kind of non-coercive indoctrination. You would know that if you understood people at all. Rather than paying attention to "what is" you are always deeming what you think people should and shouldn't do from your little ivory theistic tower. Coincidentally these strictures always seem to create a scenario where you are the superior human being, above the rest of us, seeing our ill from up on high.

In truth, you are just a pontificator who talks an extraordinary amount of BS (no offence meant). Your naive conceptions are not "above" today's but incorporated into them, the useless parts long superseded - mostly methods that have been tried and failed and then discarded. No doubt the occasional baby went out with the bathwater, but that has always been the way of cultural change over time. The knowledge of indigenous people was lost too when Christians took them over. Now some Christian knowledge is being lost in the modern age of genetic engineering and emerging AI. Most of the knowledge still remains, though, just in rationalised form that requires extrapolation and analysis to tease out the extra detail.

If you were actually in touch with reality - with this this additional "conscious awareness" as you claim, I and others would be able to tell. I see no signs of wisdom in you at all, quite the contrary. There is no sense that you are a genuine mystic or spiritualist of any stripe whatsoever. Rather, you give a very clear impression of being just another reactionary political type trying to shoehorn "spirituality" into your politics to give your hangups credibility via theism's faux rationales.

It's not a matter of "daydreaming". If one actually makes the effort to TRULY comprehend the reality of EVERYTHING around them, then they will not be functional in life.

So, the "spirit killing" blinkers must be fitted - to abstract the actual reality in, around and between us (Eros) so we can do the grocery shopping, function at work, pay the bills etc.

Otherwise I can't pay bills because I'll be looking at the keyboard - not daydreaming - but noticing the reality of its features in detail, noticing the rationales that would have lain behind each detail of the design. Then there are the complex plastic molecules and how they might have been discovered or constructed, and how they interact with the environment as waste. Then consider where it may have been manufactured, partly by machines and maybe by poor underpaid workers in harsh conditions.

It's all too much. So we need to filter a lot of it out a lot of the time ... BUT that does not mean we should forget all about the wonders of form within and around us, just that the wonder and curiosity must be deferred until practicable. So the spirit must be tamed somewhat so as to function and cooperate in a society - unless you're a pop star or evangelist preacher.

This is just solipsism. Trouble is, all these other people are having their own little irrefutable truths. So then we all get together and look at each others' irrefutable truths and see how they compare. Then we notice that almost everyone shares certain irrefutable truths and then we call that shared understanding "science

No man or woman has / knows the irrefutable truth....because man thinks he is the knower....he is not. Man is known, but not by man.

Drop the identity and the irrefutable truth reveals itself automatically ..it’s irrefutably self shining.

That’s what irrefutable truth means.

So there is no one to be a solipist...to assume a solipist is to assume an identity..which is an illusory character.

.
It’s ok to be an illusory character, as long as you are aware it’s a mask infinite spirit is wearing and it belongs to no man or woman. And to also be aware that infinite spirit is the controller here not the man or woman.

.

The mask is the action figure the veichle infinite spirit, aka intention desire uses to experience desire.

.

Nick_A ...If you cannot parse observation and desire, you cannot do philosophy. This is your fault line.

Hey now, come on, this is all your problem Nick, it's all your fault, because you cannot do philosophy correctly, so no one on this forum is going to understand anything you are saying.

How are you going to get around this fault line, obstacle Nick? ..can you see away to seal the breach? or does that breach need to be here?

...any ? Nick.



.

Hey, if you cannot parse observation and desire Nick, you are just going to become a big epic failure in this institution we call the world of knowledge.

Now get your act together, you wouldn't want to be known as a fail would you?

.

Greta wrote: ↑Wed Aug 15, 2018 5:33 am

Greta, ever wonder how a solipsist keeps a complex world going in their head, long enough to reach maturity, when they don't know how to spell, walk, or wipe their own butts?

Also, why do solipsists ruin their own world, by creating a world that is not fulfilling to them? Personally, I'd create a really fun world to live in, if I could.

Greta

Sure I do. JC was basically saying: Do your civic duty. Do what you have to keep the bastards off your back ... but don't love Caesar or his stuff 'cos yer supposed to love me most, not that dirty Roman bum!

Not a clue!

Bullying is more spirit killing than any kind of non-coercive indoctrination. You would know that if you understood people at all. Rather than paying attention to "what is" you are always deeming what you think people should and shouldn't do from your little ivory theistic tower. Coincidentally these strictures always seem to create a scenario where you are the superior human being, above the rest of us, seeing our ill from up on high.

This is typical of people living in denial. They only read or hear what fits their preconceptions. How many times have I written to the effect that secularism is concerned with what people do while the essence of religion is concerned with what we ARE. Yet Greta accuses me of desiring to tell people what to do regardless of how many times I’ve written of the importance of concerning ourselves with what we ARE. In reality Greta is telling us what we should do while completely oblivious of what we are.

In truth, you are just a pontificator who talks an extraordinary amount of BS (no offence meant). Your naive conceptions are not "above" today's but incorporated into them, the useless parts long superseded - mostly methods that have been tried and failed and then discarded. No doubt the occasional baby went out with the bathwater, but that has always been the way of cultural change over time. The knowledge of indigenous people was lost too when Christians took them over. Now some Christian knowledge is being lost in the modern age of genetic engineering and emerging AI. Most of the knowledge still remains, though, just in rationalised form that requires extrapolation and analysis to tease out the extra detail.

Since we are as we are, everything is as it is. You complain about what is and what has happened. I support the efforts of those concerned with what we are and adopting methods to make us more human. These methods beginning with opening to ideas must be rejected and hated just as you do. Doing otherwise invites questioning the relativity of what we ARE in relation to the potential for human “being” which is intolerable for the secularist closed to the concept of relativity

It's not a matter of "daydreaming". If one actually makes the effort to TRULY comprehend the reality of EVERYTHING around them, then they will not be functional in life.

You don’t know what making efforts means. Such people desiring to experience what is necessary to inwardly verify objective human meaning and purpose can live very functional lives but will be hated by the secularists for disturbing the peace. Plato explains in the cave allegory what will happen to these people who for some reason have experienced the light and become surrounded by spirit killers:

[Socrates] And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the cave, while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable) would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes; and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death.

It's all too much. So we need to filter a lot of it out a lot of the time ... BUT that does not mean we should forget all about the wonders of form within and around us, just that the wonder and curiosity must be deferred until practicable. So the spirit must be tamed somewhat so as to function and cooperate in a society - unless you're a pop star or evangelist preacher.

When is it practicable for the special people capable of opening to objective human meaning and purpose so as to become themselves and serve as an inspiration for others to become themselves?

It is unclear whether Simone Weil knew of Thomas Merton, but Merton records being asked to review a biography of Weil (Simone Weil: A Fellowship in Love, Jacques Chabaud, 1964) and was challenged and inspired by her writing. “Her non-conformism and mysticism are essential elements in our time and without her contribution we remain not human.”

When is it practicable to introduce what is essential to become human especially since the dominance of secularism opposes what is essential in favor of indoctrination? Is it really any surprise that under these conditions the young turn to drugs?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Aug 15, 2018 11:26 am Nick_A ...If you cannot parse observation and desire, you cannot do philosophy. This is your fault line.

Hey now, come on, this is all your problem Nick, it's all your fault, because you cannot do philosophy correctly, so no one on this forum is going to understand anything you are saying.

How are you going to get around this fault line, obstacle Nick? ..can you see away to seal the breach? or does that breach need to be here?

...any ? Nick.



.

Hey, if you cannot parse observation and desire Nick, you are just going to become a big epic failure in this institution we call the world of knowledge.

Now get your act together, you wouldn't want to be known as a fail would you?

.

First things first. The solution begins with an evening of good wine, shrimp and lobster hors d'oeuvres, and an adventurous cute blonde. After absorbing their impressions a man can begin to think rationally and acquire what is necessary to deal with the parsing problem.