Philosophy Now Forum

Davyboi wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:25 pm

QuantumT wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:21 pm

Davyboi wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 1:12 am Please share your views, ideas people! I would be interested to know what people think? Thank you!

We are here to show our descendants how their ancestors lived and evolved.

We don't tho, in this world we live in, we are self centered, no one seems or listens to the previous generation.

Everything we do shows how we live and, when compared to previous generations, how we evolved.

History is available for study, however we can't compel our descendants to study it.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 8:50 pm Davyboi

N. Nothing to forgive as far as I'm concerned. I agree that we all contain a piece of the truth. In this way we are all different. This runs contrary to the modern belief that we are all the same so just need to be indoctrinated. Some become wise enough IMO to ponder what would happen if people could put their pieces together to better experience the whole from which their piece devolved. But experience has taught us that as a whole people prefer to argue and condemn for the sake of acquiring prestige. So once again IMO the wise minority advances in ways impossible for those obsessed with worldly prestige.

So basically it's like having a giant jigsaw puzzle, the image on the box it came in is a constant. Does not change. Yet we are all given the peices to construct this image, depending on which pieces you decide to join, and the area that you chose to construct them, depends on the view that you have. Different areas of the puzzle will give different views, yet it is still part of the same image!

Does this make sense?

“Colors are the deeds/ and sufferings of light.” ~ Goethe

Colors continually exist within NOW or the white light. They represent the vertical objective quality of the moment connecting above and below as opposed to subjective quality defined by what happens within one level of reality in linear time.

Plato described the quality of a moment as the relationship between knowledge and opinion.

Knowledge is an expression of the white light or the Good. It is knowledge of essence. Colors are opinions created by our reactions to the visible world.

The philosopher kings would have experienced knowledge allowing society to represent objective purpose, while the politicians are people of opinions.

We exist to become consciously one with knowledge serving a universal purpose as opposed to creatures of reaction expressing opinions. Of course it is denied if for no other reason because knowledge assumes a conscious source often interpreted as the dreaded G word. This is too offensive to consider in secular society limiting it to the struggle over opinions. As a result everything continues as is in accordance with earthly and cosmic laws resulting in only a change in form

Yes but that white light, is comprised of different qualities, infar red, ultra violet. They are all different wavelengths some travel faster than others, yet these differences make light what it is. Without them it wouldn't be light! I think in order to understand something you have to appreciate everything it is constructed from.

commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:12 pm

gaffo wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 4:16 am considers this. evolution has created the most successful life form on earth 2 billion yrs ago.

Germs.

I posit the germs rule this world and evolution's top dog and we are a footnote - with or without our self centered pondering about why we are and what it means.

of course it means nothing - outside of "We live" right now - until we die, and the germs consume our corpse.

If not cockroaches, virus, bacteria or fungus may well be the lifeform that outlives humans. But for now, they are not in charge. With few exceptions, each can be destroyed by humans.

lol. such hubris - silly human.
Germs were/are and will remain in charge!

what do you think happens to our World and man on it - if germs were no more?

shortly - a few years - all higher life (all plants and animals - higher than germs is the bar here) will die - due to the cycle of decomposition being no more.

gaffo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:55 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:12 pm

gaffo wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 4:16 am considers this. evolution has created the most successful life form on earth 2 billion yrs ago.

Germs.

I posit the germs rule this world and evolution's top dog and we are a footnote - with or without our self centered pondering about why we are and what it means.

of course it means nothing - outside of "We live" right now - until we die, and the germs consume our corpse.

If not cockroaches, virus, bacteria or fungus may well be the lifeform that outlives humans. But for now, they are not in charge. With few exceptions, each can be destroyed by humans.

lol. such hubris - silly human.
Germs were/are and will remain in charge!

what do you think happens to our World and man on it - if germs were no more?

shortly - a few years - all higher life (all plants and animals - higher than germs is the bar here) will die - due to the cycle of decomposition being no more.

Davyboi wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:10 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 8:50 pm Davyboi

N. Nothing to forgive as far as I'm concerned. I agree that we all contain a piece of the truth. In this way we are all different. This runs contrary to the modern belief that we are all the same so just need to be indoctrinated. Some become wise enough IMO to ponder what would happen if people could put their pieces together to better experience the whole from which their piece devolved. But experience has taught us that as a whole people prefer to argue and condemn for the sake of acquiring prestige. So once again IMO the wise minority advances in ways impossible for those obsessed with worldly prestige.

So basically it's like having a giant jigsaw puzzle, the image on the box it came in is a constant. Does not change. Yet we are all given the peices to construct this image, depending on which pieces you decide to join, and the area that you chose to construct them, depends on the view that you have. Different areas of the puzzle will give different views, yet it is still part of the same image!

Does this make sense?

“Colors are the deeds/ and sufferings of light.” ~ Goethe

Colors continually exist within NOW or the white light. They represent the vertical objective quality of the moment connecting above and below as opposed to subjective quality defined by what happens within one level of reality in linear time.

Plato described the quality of a moment as the relationship between knowledge and opinion.

Knowledge is an expression of the white light or the Good. It is knowledge of essence. Colors are opinions created by our reactions to the visible world.

The philosopher kings would have experienced knowledge allowing society to represent objective purpose, while the politicians are people of opinions.

We exist to become consciously one with knowledge serving a universal purpose as opposed to creatures of reaction expressing opinions. Of course it is denied if for no other reason because knowledge assumes a conscious source often interpreted as the dreaded G word. This is too offensive to consider in secular society limiting it to the struggle over opinions. As a result everything continues as is in accordance with earthly and cosmic laws resulting in only a change in form

Yes but that white light, is comprised of different qualities, infar red, ultra violet. They are all different wavelengths some travel faster than others, yet these differences make light what it is. Without them it wouldn't be light! I think in order to understand something you have to appreciate everything it is constructed from.

I agree. white light is a vibration and in its pure form is beyond our sensory perception. Colors exist within white light as potentials. A potential is a lessening of a vibrational frequency which we are able to experience. White light is the highest frequency of vibration which contains all the potentials of its slowing.

Knowledge in the Platonic sense is like this. It is a quality which contains all potentials for its expression. Roundness is essential knowledge. A basketball is said to be round but is not roundness. The essence is within what we call a basketball.

We lack knowledge in the Platonic sense so are limited to opinions as to "value". Yet some are called to sacrifice their identification with opinions so as to open to the experience of knowledge. They are hated for not "fitting in" with what is called normal expressions of individuality but also necessary if humanity as a whole can consciously evolve from its identification with opinions as a measure of human intelligence.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 10:32 pm

gaffo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:55 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:12 pm

If not cockroaches, virus, bacteria or fungus may well be the lifeform that outlives humans. But for now, they are not in charge. With few exceptions, each can be destroyed by humans.

lol. such hubris - silly human.
Germs were/are and will remain in charge!

what do you think happens to our World and man on it - if germs were no more?

shortly - a few years - all higher life (all plants and animals - higher than germs is the bar here) will die - due to the cycle of decomposition being no more.

you understand.

I thank you Sir .

Davyboi wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:10 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 8:50 pm Davyboi

N. Nothing to forgive as far as I'm concerned. I agree that we all contain a piece of the truth. In this way we are all different. This runs contrary to the modern belief that we are all the same so just need to be indoctrinated. Some become wise enough IMO to ponder what would happen if people could put their pieces together to better experience the whole from which their piece devolved. But experience has taught us that as a whole people prefer to argue and condemn for the sake of acquiring prestige. So once again IMO the wise minority advances in ways impossible for those obsessed with worldly prestige.

So basically it's like having a giant jigsaw puzzle, the image on the box it came in is a constant. Does not change. Yet we are all given the peices to construct this image, depending on which pieces you decide to join, and the area that you chose to construct them, depends on the view that you have. Different areas of the puzzle will give different views, yet it is still part of the same image!

Does this make sense?

“Colors are the deeds/ and sufferings of light.” ~ Goethe

Colors continually exist within NOW or the white light. They represent the vertical objective quality of the moment connecting above and below as opposed to subjective quality defined by what happens within one level of reality in linear time.

Plato described the quality of a moment as the relationship between knowledge and opinion.

Knowledge is an expression of the white light or the Good. It is knowledge of essence. Colors are opinions created by our reactions to the visible world.

The philosopher kings would have experienced knowledge allowing society to represent objective purpose, while the politicians are people of opinions.

We exist to become consciously one with knowledge serving a universal purpose as opposed to creatures of reaction expressing opinions. Of course it is denied if for no other reason because knowledge assumes a conscious source often interpreted as the dreaded G word. This is too offensive to consider in secular society limiting it to the struggle over opinions. As a result everything continues as is in accordance with earthly and cosmic laws resulting in only a change in form

Yes but that white light, is comprised of different qualities, infar red, ultra violet. They are all different wavelengths some travel faster than others, yet these differences make light what it is. Without them it wouldn't be light! I think in order to understand something you have to appreciate everything it is constructed from.

There are many reds, blues, greens and yellows out there believing themselves to hold the white light of truth. It seems that the view of one's own conception from the inside looking out is white. After all, why would be believe what we do if we didn't think it true?

We struggle to comprehend our solipsism or our blinders. We are evolved not to perceive actual reality, but just the parts that have been most successful to date in bringing survival and fecundity.

Greta wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 11:50 pm

Davyboi wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:10 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 8:50 pm Davyboi



Does this make sense?



Colors continually exist within NOW or the white light. They represent the vertical objective quality of the moment connecting above and below as opposed to subjective quality defined by what happens within one level of reality in linear time.

Plato described the quality of a moment as the relationship between knowledge and opinion.

Knowledge is an expression of the white light or the Good. It is knowledge of essence. Colors are opinions created by our reactions to the visible world.

The philosopher kings would have experienced knowledge allowing society to represent objective purpose, while the politicians are people of opinions.

We exist to become consciously one with knowledge serving a universal purpose as opposed to creatures of reaction expressing opinions. Of course it is denied if for no other reason because knowledge assumes a conscious source often interpreted as the dreaded G word. This is too offensive to consider in secular society limiting it to the struggle over opinions. As a result everything continues as is in accordance with earthly and cosmic laws resulting in only a change in form

Yes but that white light, is comprised of different qualities, infar red, ultra violet. They are all different wavelengths some travel faster than others, yet these differences make light what it is. Without them it wouldn't be light! I think in order to understand something you have to appreciate everything it is constructed from.

There are many reds, blues, greens and yellows out there believing themselves to hold the white light of truth. It seems that the view of one's own conception from the inside looking out is white. After all, why would be believe what we do if we didn't think it true?

We struggle to comprehend our solipsism or our blinders. We are evolved not to perceive actual reality, but just the parts that have been most successful to date in bringing survival and fecundity.

what are yours views WRT to Solipsism?

which i know you mush know i am of.

in the spirit fo disscussion.

gaffo wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:52 am

Greta wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 11:50 pm

Davyboi wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:10 pm
Yes but that white light, is comprised of different qualities, infar red, ultra violet. They are all different wavelengths some travel faster than others, yet these differences make light what it is. Without them it wouldn't be light! I think in order to understand something you have to appreciate everything it is constructed from.

There are many reds, blues, greens and yellows out there believing themselves to hold the white light of truth. It seems that the view of one's own conception from the inside looking out is white. After all, why would be believe what we do if we didn't think it true?

We struggle to comprehend our solipsism or our blinders. We are evolved not to perceive actual reality, but just the parts that have been most successful to date in bringing survival and fecundity.

what are yours views WRT to Solipsism?

which i know you mush know i am of.

in the spirit fo disscussion.

To be honest bud, I don't know what WRT to SOLIPSISM is! I am only recently joined, so just getting to grips with things..I still have a lot of subjects and information to study..

WRT may mean with respect to

WRT to is a typo

mush is must

fo is of

gaffo wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:52 am

Greta wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 11:50 pm

Davyboi wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:10 pm
Yes but that white light, is comprised of different qualities, infar red, ultra violet. They are all different wavelengths some travel faster than others, yet these differences make light what it is. Without them it wouldn't be light! I think in order to understand something you have to appreciate everything it is constructed from.

There are many reds, blues, greens and yellows out there believing themselves to hold the white light of truth. It seems that the view of one's own conception from the inside looking out is white. After all, why would be believe what we do if we didn't think it true?

We struggle to comprehend our solipsism or our blinders. We are evolved not to perceive actual reality, but just the parts that have been most successful to date in bringing survival and fecundity.

what are yours views WRT to Solipsism?

which i know you mush know i am of.

in the spirit of discussion.

Well, as I say, whatever we believe to be true is true so, in this discussion about "colours of truth", almost everyone perceives their views as closer to "white" than everyone but their mentors. If people don't think their views are correct then they qualify or change them.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 1:36 am WRT may mean with respect to

WRT to is a typo

mush is must

fo is of

yeslllllllllll

assuming you are not a dick in midest =- ok with

otherwise i return your mindset

weclome if you i should like you are not Comm...........welcome clarification.

Greta wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 1:46 am

gaffo wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:52 am

Greta wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 11:50 pm
There are many reds, blues, greens and yellows out there believing themselves to hold the white light of truth. It seems that the view of one's own conception from the inside looking out is white. After all, why would be believe what we do if we didn't think it true?

We struggle to comprehend our solipsism or our blinders. We are evolved not to perceive actual reality, but just the parts that have been most successful to date in bringing survival and fecundity.

what are yours views WRT to Solipsism?

which i know you mush know i am of.

in the spirit of discussion.

Well, as I say, whatever we believe to be true is true so, in this discussion about "colours of truth", almost everyone perceives their views as closer to "white" than everyone but their mentors. If people don't think their views are correct then they qualify or change them.

??? just a dumb white guy.

barely literate.

welcome small words and short sentences per your intent.

you seem a kewl chich BTW...............sorry for my sexism.

it is as it is. ;-/,

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 1:36 am WRT may mean with respect to

WRT to is a typo

mush is must

fo is of

So what is SOLIPSISM then?

Greta wrote:

There are many reds, blues, greens and yellows out there believing themselves to hold the white light of truth. It seems that the view of one's own conception from the inside looking out is white. After all, why would be believe what we do if we didn't think it true?

We struggle to comprehend our solipsism or our blinders. We are evolved not to perceive actual reality, but just the parts that have been most successful to date in bringing survival and fecundity.

Here it becomes interesting and depicts the basic problem of the human condition – the inability to admit our ignorance of the whole in favor of our concerns with pragmatic self interests.

Socrates explained it well in his defense. He was called a man of wisdom by the Oracle since he knew that he knew nothing. Of course we cannot know why we exist when we cannot begin with verifying that we know nothing about the essence of things. The experts in silliness always give the impression that they are closer to the truth of objective human meaning and purpose. They become spirit killers and successful in creating metaphysical repression in the young.

The dangers of self deception would be obvious to any seeker of truth but the power of imagination is too strong to resist for the majority and especially the experts in silliness who for some reason have become considered intellects in modern education and influential in modern society.

Mark 8:36

What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?

How can anyone consider the question of why we are here without pondering the depth of Jesus’ remark? But the observation is mocked, scorned and denied as rubbish by dominant secularism and taken advantage of by philosophical and spiritual charlatans.

This is why all those seriously concerned with why we are here must find others with the same question and work together to open to the conscious path that connects us with our source. Even though the world must hate Jesus’ remark there is a minority who feel its value and strive to understand what it means to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. Without opening to what this means, how can anyone seriously open to the path which transcends opinions in the direction of knowledge?