The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 2:35 pm Dana
Sila
Kshanti
Virya
Dhyana
Prajna

Do you agree with the following definition:

A bodhisattva is an enlightened being in Buddhism who delays entering nirvana to help others.

Do we even know that "nirvana" exists? And if so, how do we know this? Maybe "bodhisattvas" delay entering nirvana because it's not there for them to enter in the first place? That would also explain why "bodhisattvas" don't enter nirvana. Has anyone entered "nirvana" that anyone else has been able to verify? Do we know the Buddha entered "nirvana"?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 6:04 pm Do we even know that "nirvana" exists? And if so, how do we know this? Maybe "bodhisattvas" delay entering nirvana because it's not there for them to enter in the first place? That would also explain why "bodhisattvas" don't enter nirvana. Has anyone entered "nirvana" that anyone else has been able to verify? Do we know the Buddha entered "nirvana"?

Not suitable questions with regard to ANY religion.

Religions are the sort of thing that while people of that religion can answer questions of that sort, the answers will be of no use to people not of that religion. No use EXCEPT to possibly understand how people of that religion think about the fundamental questions in terms of that religion.

MikeNovack wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 6:25 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 6:04 pm Do we even know that "nirvana" exists? And if so, how do we know this? Maybe "bodhisattvas" delay entering nirvana because it's not there for them to enter in the first place? That would also explain why "bodhisattvas" don't enter nirvana. Has anyone entered "nirvana" that anyone else has been able to verify? Do we know the Buddha entered "nirvana"?

Not suitable questions with regard to ANY religion.

Religions are the sort of thing that while people of that religion can answer questions of that sort, the answers will be of no use to people not of that religion. No use EXCEPT to possibly understand how people of that religion think about the fundamental questions in terms of that religion.

My questions were suitable. Your response isn't suitable for a philosophy forum, though. But I'll let it slide this time.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 6:04 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 2:35 pm Dana
Sila
Kshanti
Virya
Dhyana
Prajna

Do you agree with the following definition:

A bodhisattva is an enlightened being in Buddhism who delays entering nirvana to help others.

Do we even know that "nirvana" exists? And if so, how do we know this? Maybe "bodhisattvas" delay entering nirvana because it's not there for them to enter in the first place? That would also explain why "bodhisattvas" don't enter nirvana. Has anyone entered "nirvana" that anyone else has been able to verify? Do we know the Buddha entered "nirvana"?

Gary, you have noted the degree to which I am aligned with The Dark Forces of ‘the way the world is’. And I only submitted that your philosophy is in various ways Buddhist in it’s ethics.

I take the philosophy of a Bodhisattva to be an ideal for any Buddhist-like person. It is a way of reconciling oneself with life in this bizarre & dangerous realm.

Try this:

A bodhisattva is a being who helps others.

The question, I guess, is How can we really help others?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2026 4:12 pmThe question of how many millions is still undetermined. Likely because of the ideological battles …

This seems to be both an authoritative and a comprehensive source of immigration statistics for the period you want to talk about: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... mmigrants/

I can’t find a clear answer to the question “flood of many many millions or massive influx of millions or increase of a few million” question. That’s at least in part because it isn’t clear who should be counted and how. But I’ll be interested to hear what you make of it, AJ.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2026 4:12 pmAnd the Biden administration was complicit in this …

That’s the right wing lie that you keep repeating without even an attempt to link to a source of evidence.

mickthinks wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2026 10:07 amAnd I’m going to go out on a bit of a limb here, and predict that you won’t even make the attempt.

mickthinks wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 9:42 pm I can’t find a clear answer to the question “flood of many many millions or massive influx of millions or increase of a few million” question. That’s at least in part because it isn’t clear who should be counted and how. But I’ll be interested to hear what you make of it, AJ.

Well, the main sources seem to indicate an official count of around 10 million. But I am not going to research it further. I am in the States right now and every 6th person I run into is a foreigner. You suppose, at least I imagine you do, that I am racist because I am (like Renaud Camus) shocked by the fact of “replacement”. In his France over a half generation suddenly the people of his country were replaced. I identify with his sense of loss. But I am also a realist.

The population decline in our own Occident was inevitable with our successes, wasn’t it? Now, government must resolve to import people if only to do 25% of the labor. Maybe even more (in Germany in any case). Canada, the US and some other counties opt to bring in people, no matter from where, to keep the mills running. That is the decision that was made. In 1965 in fact with new immigration policy and programs. The US is destined, therefore, to become somewhat like Brazil.

Obviously, if I said I was “100% pro-immigration!” and proposed that happily 20-25 millions of new immigrants arrived over the last 15 years, you’d make no fuss.

The fact is I don’t exactly have a dog in this fight. Occasionally I seem to take the side of those who genuinely have something to protect — as in France where forca time I lived. But what is there to protect at this point in the US or Canada?

America is a type of industrial machine at this point. It has the outward appearance of a Nation, but in truth it has been reengineered into something quite different certainly from the original, and even from the US of my own youth (in California).

It is actually better for me economically that the US recover itself and put all the brown masses to work in “the industrial plantations of the (former) white man’s will”.

I am really just an observer at this point.

mickthinks wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 9:48 pm That’s the right wing lie that you keep repeating without even an attempt to link to a source of evidence.

It really is not. There are books, and many of them, by very mainstream researchers outlining demographic modification in America. It is known and it was predicted, planned in fact.

I think you are confusing narratives of exaggeration — and these are evident — with the facts of demography and population shift. You want to ‘shame’ the Right (a largely White demographic) for their apprehensions because, I gather, you serve some other ideal.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 10:28 pmWell, the main sources seem to indicate an official count of around 10 million.

From the Pew article I linked to above:

“An unprecedented number of immigrants – more than 11 million – arrived in the U.S. between 2020 and 2025. … Throughout this period, unauthorized immigrants accounted for most new immigrant arrivals”

So if we’re including those coming to study or take up jobs under one of the visa schemes, the figure is higher than yours. If, however, it’s just unauthorised migration we’re discussing, exemplified by the woman you met in Columbia who was on her way to the southern border, Pew doesn’t give a figure (and I can find no explanation why). It’s pretty clear that “most” means more than 50%, so more than 5.5m. I’d suggest that supports the 6.5m estimate you mentioned in an earlier post.

The fact is I don’t exactly have a dog in this fight.
I think it’s clear you do. Defending intellectual pride and avoiding cognitive dissonance can be very large dogs indeed.

… the US of my own youth (in California).
You said somewhere else that you grew up in France. Was California between Corsica and the west coast of France, or between France and India?


I am really just an observer at this point.
You keep saying this but it’s just a pose, isn’t it?

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 10:33 pm

mickthinks wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 9:48 pm That’s the right wing lie that you keep repeating without even an attempt to link to a source of evidence.

It really is not. There are books, and many of them, by very mainstream researchers outlining demographic modification in America. It is known and it was predicted, planned in fact.

Ah! By omitting the statement you’d made about Biden’s complicity that set the context for the words of mine that you quoted, you’ve worked a bait and switch.

I take it you are referring to books from reputable sources which bolster the notion of deliberate demographic modification by someone or other. That’s as may be, but unless one or more of those books examine the policies of the Biden administration and provide the receipts, you’ve missed the point:

mickthinks wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2026 9:48 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2026 4:12 pmAnd the Biden administration was complicit in this …

That’s the right wing lie that you keep repeating without even an attempt to link to a source of evidence.

mickthinks wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2026 10:07 amAnd I’m going to go out on a bit of a limb here, and predict that you won’t even make the attempt.

mickthinks wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2026 10:05 am So if we’re including those coming to study or take up jobs under one of the visa schemes, the figure is higher than yours. If, however, it’s just unauthorised migration we’re discussing, exemplified by the woman you met in Columbia who was on her way to the southern border, Pew doesn’t give a figure (they don’t explain why). It’s pretty clear that “most” means more than 50%, so more than 5.5m. I’d suggest that supports the 6.5m estimate you mentioned in an earlier post.

I met her in Colorado. She drove Lift. And it’s Colombia. And my understanding is that it is impossible to know what the total of illegal entrants is.

I think it’s clear you do. Defending intellectual pride and avoiding cognitive dissonance can be very large dogs indeed.

You know, it may be you who suffers from skewed perception when the sociological and political issues of the day are considered. Have you considered that? That is, your ideas and perceptions, your value-system, may well influence and determine the stances that you have right now, and in this rather silky and circular conversation that you seem to want to direct. You keep referring to “Rightwing narratives” that are untruthful. OK, very well. But define what about them is so. And define what you understand to be ‘the truthful view’ to have.

When I say I do not have a dog in the fight it does not mean (I expressed this clearly) that I do not have concerns or preferences. But I am not part of a network of political activists attempting to change things. I am quite literally a passive observer. Additionally, I can be flexible in regard to any idea I hold. Except perhaps those ideas that determine or influence my own personal conduct.

On this forum and generally in polarized environments where discourse occurs, the manoeuvre you attempt is common: you attempt to tell me that what I tell you about me is not the truth. I might say “I went to the corner store to buy milk” and your retort is “No, that’s dishonest. Yes you bought milk but something darker was involved”.

You see? Everyone is deeply suspicious of their “opponents” and misconstrues what they say by projections of doubt about motives. Quite honestly, Mr. Mick, I doubt strongly that you have done much analysis if your own positions and prejudices.

Defending intellectual pride — whatever could that mean?

You said somewhere else that you grew up in France. Was California between Corsica and the west coast of France, or between France and India?

And what are you actually asking esteemed Mick? You should really get clear as to what you hope to achieve in your continued attempts at conversation.

mickthinks wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2026 1:28 pm
It take you are referring to books from reputable sources which bolster the notion of deliberate demographic modification. That’s as may be, but unless one or more of them examine the policies of the Biden administration and provide the receipts, you’ve missed the point:

You can if you like continue to hammer on this point, but there is very little in it for you. There certainly was ‘complicity’ in the strategy of advertising a porous border. And the administration of Biden, in concert with the Democrat Left generally, was clearly and obviously complicit in this.

But you have to — i.e. a careful and rational person — must understand the atmosphere and the conditions of anarchical rebellion occurring at that time. The border, massive illegal and quasi-legal immigration, the George Floyd riots, the DEI activism in which even corporations participated, and of course the ideological renovations attempted during that period, the mobs that destroyed hundreds of monuments of historical figures …

See, Mick, if you were rational and balanced you would recognize that the consequential activism in America, the lawless and anarchical activism, was carried out by Lefty Progressives. The Left, it seems to me, can never really see itself clearly. What it does, whatever it does, is ordained and justified because of its self-proclaimed righteousness. But when it is examined carefully another face becomes clear.

In any case, no part of my assertions have changed. Try as you might to rewrite and reframe what I have said, it remains fair, clear and balanced.

I met her in Colorado. ... And it’s Colombia.

My mistake, and my mistake again! Thanks for correcting me.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2026 1:40 pm Try as you might to rewrite and reframe what I have said, it remains fair, clear and balanced.

What are you talking about, AJ? I haven’t attempted to rewrite or reframe your claims about Biden’s presidency. I have just called them out, challenged you to substantiate them, and pointed out that you haven’t done so.

There’s still time, but if you prefer, you can just fulfill my prediction:

mickthinks wrote: ↑Mon Sep 07, 2026 10:07 amAnd I’m going to go out on a bit of a limb here, and predict that you won’t even make the attempt.