Home | Community | Message Board


Mycotrop.com
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: Swami]
    #1042594 - 11/11/02 07:00 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

I am going to steal this line form you some time in the future. 




:grin: Feel free,  I borrowed it from a good friend of mine anyway!

Quote:

  That is my biggest bitch about most claiming some form of spiritual progress; they still beat their kids, are rude, cheat on their wives and taxes, etc.




Most of the people I know who have practiced seriously over a period of time show improvements in negative behaviours and habits. None of them are perfect and the old habits still surface from time to time. However, I also believe you can hold asanas, chant mantras and live on a mountaintop but at the end of the day if your only doing it as a game to enhance your ego's sense of its own worh little will change, apart from an increase in pomposity etc.

Werent we talking about belief anyway??  :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: GazzBut]
    #1042597 - 11/11/02 07:03 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Do you mean objective reality is made of our theories of it??


theories/opinions/beliefs or whatever, yes. imo anyhing  could be true because  nothing really is, not in any absolute sense of this "truth" existing outside of our own perceptions via our 5 senses in tandem with our inate ability to reason or "think"....which to  Me  means essentially to sort out and assimilate/reassemble the incoming data as provided by the senses in a manner that best upholds our own workld view according to whatever belief system it is that we adhere to.....

    i realize that this may constitue a somewhat "flimsy" point of view to the rational mind that holds firmly onto beliefs about the nature of "reality", but until someone can come along and convince me i'm wrong, it IS my position......get those objective reality blocks out and  Fire away fellas  :grin: 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1042638 - 11/11/02 08:14 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Well i think I agree wiith part of what your saying. But the way i see it all our theories are reflections of objective reality. We can obviously only experience this objective reality through the human perceptual system, hence our theories and their subjective nature. But to say that our theories are actually the very building blocks of any objective reality just doesnt really work for me.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: GazzBut]
    #1042648 - 11/11/02 08:27 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

But the way i see it all our theories are reflections of objective reality.

Okay, fair enough. However if what you are saying is true, then why don't we all share the same theories/beliefs about the nature of reality.....why are there so many various interpretations if there IS in fact one single objectifiably and empiracally demonstable reality?


But to say that our theories are actually the very building blocks of any objective reality just doesnt really work for me.

Fair enough yet again, as i was only stating my own personal opinion  :laugh:
 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: GazzBut]
    #1042679 - 11/11/02 09:01 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Perhaps some clarification of my essential position is in order here. i am in no way implying that the "physical world" does not exist.....it is my undestanding(partially from direct experience) that when the eastern philosophers/metaphysicians say that the "Awakening"(enlightenment, w/e) destoys the universe, that they are only refering to it any longer being a force which impinges externally upon any given time bound subject/object type conciousness....

It is no longer experienced as a limit upon conciousness but rather s a joyous playground...but even in THAT state, walk in front of a moving car and yes, you will get hit(your body will at any rate)....mercifully when one IS in such a state, in my experience, one has the wisdom not to do anything that would be detrimental to the well being of the physicsal organism in which they are still encased(but no longer "entombed")

And i DO understand(as i am in much the same mode of thought right now as most of the people reading this, regualar egoistic conciousness)) that most(if not all) of what i have said is pure nonsensical jibberish to the rational mind.....

And yet on a more profound and ultimatly REAL level based on my own experience and apperception, i KNOW this to be true beyond any doubt....although to convince someone who has ONLY known egoistic subject /object empiracally verifiable reality is excedingly difficult.....if not totally futile....

as stated B4, in a previous post, Franklin Merril wolf's 2 books*(i "think" there may have been a 3rd) come closest to ME to expressing, to the rational egoistic mind what i find to be ineffable.....but just because the experience/mode of BEING can not be dissected and or "filed" away under some category the intellect finds convienient is NO sure proof that this state does not exist, in fact(based on personal experience) this state of BEING IS life life/force itself.....

Those 2 books being:"pathways through to space, a personal transformation in conciousness" as well as "The philosopy of conciousness without an object", which strangely enough(in my own experience) is ALSO conciousness without a subject, as in short the two are fused(but not confused)....

YES, there is still an ego, or sense of SELF present, but it has been transmuted or "fused" with the higher(Divine) self, so i would end this by saying that the concept of ego transcendance may be somewhat misleading.......although it has been transformed in such a way as to produce a genuine re birth(not to be confused with "I am a born again Christian")




--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAdamist
ℚṲℰϟ✞ЇѺℵ ℛ∃Åʟḯ†У
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/24/01
Posts: 10,211
Loc: Bloomington, IN
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1042686 - 11/11/02 09:05 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Our true nature is not limited; it is like the vast ocean...
When we touch Supreme Consciousness,
then we are boundless,
we are everywhere,
we are eternal.


--------------------
:heartpump: { { { ṧ◎ηḯ¢ αʟ¢ℌ℮мƴ } } } :heartpump:


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: Adamist]
    #1042728 - 11/11/02 09:37 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Our true nature is not limited; it is like the vast ocean[/b
When we touch Supreme Consciousness,
then we are boundless,
we are everywhere,
we are eternal. *

i'd say we share the same view Adamist, only our own invidious way of expressing what  we know is totally different and uniquely our own....

* And pain is an illusion  :wink: 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1042760 - 11/11/02 09:54 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

In reply to:

Okay, fair enough. However if what you are saying is true, then why don't we all share the same theories/beliefs about the nature of reality.....why are there so many various interpretations if there IS in fact one single objectifiably and empiracally demonstable reality?





Well thats what the whole sandcastle metaphor is about. People dont even see a situation in a sports match the same so why would you expect us all to have the same interpretation of objective reality? All our interpretations are culture-time bound anyway.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: GazzBut]
    #1042769 - 11/11/02 10:00 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Well thats what the whole sandcastle metaphor is about. People dont even see a situation in a sports match the same so why would you expect us all to have the same interpretation of objective reality? All our interpretations are culture-time bound anyway.

Good point :grin: 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1042791 - 11/11/02 10:11 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

In reply to:

Perhaps some clarification of my essential position is in order here. i am in no way implying that the "physical world" does not exist.....it is my undestanding(partially from direct experience) that when the eastern philosophers/metaphysicians say that the "Awakening"(enlightenment, w/e) destoys the universe, that they are only refering to it any longer being a force which impinges externally upon any given time bound subject/object type conciousness....




Is this a temporary experience of oneness? From there when you return to normal ego mode you can still perceive it as differentiated unity?

In reply to:

It is no longer experienced as a limit upon conciousness but rather s a joyous playground...but even in THAT state, walk in front of a moving car and yes, you will get hit(your body will at any rate)....mercifully when one IS in such a state, in my experience, one has the wisdom not to do anything that would be detrimental to the well being of the physicsal organism in which they are still encased(but no longer "entombed")




What is no longer a limit? The universe?
Being in the moment, bypassing the ego as much as poss - I definitelly "believe" it keeps me out of trouble!

In reply to:

And yet on a more profound and ultimatly REAL level based on my own experience and apperception, i KNOW this to be true beyond any doubt....although to convince someone who has ONLY known egoistic subject /object empiracally verifiable reality is excedingly difficult.....if not totally futile....




I know what you mean...I try not to let the memories of ephemeral transcendent moments congeal into solid beliefs which are the exact antithesis of the experience.

All these words just cloud the view!

The franklin merril books sound interesting, I will have to check them out.





--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: GazzBut]
    #1042839 - 11/11/02 10:32 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Is this a temporary experience of oneness?
yes

From there when you return to normal ego mode you can still perceive it as differentiated unity?
i can't personally, but that may be my own personal limitation and not an indice of what someone who has "returned" may(or may not) integrate into their own life experience*

What is no longer a limit? The universe?
the physical universe  no longer "binds" the personal man(or "ego") as he has embraced his TRUE nature(and been embraced BY it) and as such is beyond  the physical world (while still being "in" the physical world he is no longer OF it).....

i think this "might be" what the various schools of eastern thought refer to as liberating one's SELF from the "snares of Maya" or destroying Samsara....
  This can be seen much in the same way as a snake shedding it's skin (a rather crude analogy but i gotta run in a bit)

All these words just cloud the view!

lol, yes, i totally agree, but i am tryng to communicate to someone who perhaps has never been in "touch" with that eternal part of themselves.....and in truth, from what i have experienced there really IS only one of us here.......as crazy as that may sound from my own current perspective. Why the multiplicity and SEEMING seapateness of all things that is not for me in my present mode of conciousness/being to say :grin:

*EDIT was a result of my own misuderstanding of your question the firrst time around(i wasn't sure if by IT, you were refering to "self" or the physical universe :smile:

 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Edited by FreakQlibrium (11/11/02 10:44 AM)


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1042976 - 11/11/02 11:43 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

self admitted or not, Lilly seems to have been at some point....a ketamine junkie.

Well he wasn't "self-admitted" it that's for sure.

I'm not really comfortable with the word "junkie". Is everyone who uses marijuana a "marijuana fiend"? It's an emotional term that doesn't really aid our understanding. Are soldiers who were addicted to heroin during the war, get prescribed heroin from their doctors and lead totally normal lives at work "junkies"? Are people who use heroin for years for terminal pain relief "junkies"?. You can use drugs without being a "junkie".

I heard Lilly speak and briefly met him. My impression was that he was probably one of the most intelligent man who have ever lived. If he says he wasn't addicted to Ketamine I'd take it pretty seriously. He was exploring the human brain and his use of Ketamine lasted for a couple of years. Doesn't sound like a junkie to me.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/19/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: Xlea321]
    #1042999 - 11/11/02 11:54 AM (18 years, 6 months ago)

My impression was that he was probably one of the most intelligent man (men) who have (has) ever lived.
Tangential and invalid reasoning. Intelligence and addiction are not related.

If he says he wasn't addicted to Ketamine I'd take it pretty seriously.
When your intelligent and drunk friend says that he is OK to drive, do you take that seriously as well?

He was exploring the human brain and his use of Ketamine lasted for a couple of years. Doesn't sound like a junkie to me.

Daily

Injected

For years

No, a junkie might not go for years and certainly not every day. Perhaps we need to invent a new word specifically for Lilly's "usage".



--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: Xlea321]
    #1043037 - 11/11/02 12:09 PM (18 years, 6 months ago)

junkie".

okay Alex, i'll admit that was aa very poor word to use, perhaps "addict" would have helped to soften the blow.

Is everyone who uses marijuana a "marijuana fiend"?
according to "reefer Madness" they are  :grin:
.....seriously though, the comparison is somewhat odious,trying to draw a parallel between smoking a few joints and the IV'ing of Ketamine(or anything else, imo) over an extencded time frame of @ 6 months

My impression was that he was probably one of the most intelligent man who have ever lived

i have no doubts of that Alex as i've read a couple of his books, from the bit of research i've done ningled witrh my own life experience i would say(imo) that many people that end up strung out on IV use of any type of substance are ofter the most intelligent, weel articualted people around.....

You can use drugs without being a "junkie".

jeez Alex, you REALLY seem to aquired a real liking for a term to said you were uncomfortable with, i digress however......

You can use drugs without being a "junkie".

The REAL question here(imo) is: Can you be a "junkie" without being dependant on drugs? :grin:




 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibledee_N_ae
\/\/¡†¢h |-|øµ§³ ¢å†
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/16/02
Posts: 2,473
Loc: The Shadow of Neptune
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1043051 - 11/11/02 12:18 PM (18 years, 6 months ago)

"The REAL question here(imo) is: Can you be a "junkie" without being dependant on drugs?"

junk?ie also junk?y  Pronunciation Key  (jngk)
n. Slang pl. junk?ies
1. A narcotics addict, especially one using heroin.
2. One who has an insatiable interest or devotion: a sports junkie.

I'm a life junkie.
Just took a big ol' hit of the internet, straight into the retinas!  :tongue:
   


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: dee_N_ae]
    #1043124 - 11/11/02 01:09 PM (18 years, 6 months ago)

One who has an insatiable interest or devotion: a sports junkie.

well when seen in THAT light, it becomes clear that the connotation of the word "Junkie" has been seriously tarnished and degraded by it's being associated with drug addiction :grin: 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: Swami]
    #1043246 - 11/11/02 01:55 PM (18 years, 6 months ago)

Intelligence and addiction are not related.

Lets get back to basics, it sounds like you need it.

If you use something regularly does that mean you are "addicted" to it? Do you go to work every day? Are you a "work junkie"? Or do you simply choose to go to work?

Do you have a wife? Do you see her every day? Are you addicted to your wife?

Why do you think that if you choose to use drugs regularly you must be "addicted" or a "junkie"? Because that's what George Bush told you?

You can use drugs regularly for other reasons than being "addicted" to them. Try and grasp this point and you may get somewhere.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1043263 - 11/11/02 02:04 PM (18 years, 6 months ago)

i would say(imo) that many people that end up strung out on IV use of any type of substance are ofter the most intelligent, weel articualted people around.....

The point is if Swami was addicted to ketamine then sure - he'd be a plain fucked up junkie. When it's someone with the intelligence of John Lilly then you can take seriously the possibility that he was using Ketamine for other reasons.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleFreakQlibrium
Son of Uncle Meat
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 19,058
Loc: Toronto Canada
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: Xlea321]
    #1043302 - 11/11/02 02:15 PM (18 years, 6 months ago)

The point is if Swami was addicted to ketamine then sure - he'd be a plain fucked up junkie.

i believe that statement was strongly coloured by your seeming animosity towards Swami, and as such i must dismiss it as it is based on it being(imo) an emotional response rooted in what i percieve as hostility..... even IF that sort of response is cloaked under the guise of pursuing the truth with a "passion"

John Lilly then you can take seriously the  possibility  that he was using Ketamine for other reasons.

as long as you say "possibility" there i have no problem with your statement........however, there are other ways(from what i understand) to ingest Ketamine, and extended long term(every day?) use via IV would seem to indicate (to me) that there was indeed some sort of chemical addiction/substance abuse problem going on there.........regardless if Lilly "admitted" it or not.........and whether or not he "denied the concept" of addiction  :grin:

 


--------------------
"Being crazier than a shithouse rat is not sufficient grounds for banishment"



Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Belief revisited... [Re: FreakQlibrium]
    #1043384 - 11/11/02 02:37 PM (18 years, 6 months ago)

and as such i must dismiss it as it is based on it being(imo) an emotional response rooted in what i percieve as hostility

I take it your a pal of Swami's? You seem to concentrate on my "hostility" and ignore Swami's...

The point still stands regardless. If John Lilly tells you something it's best to be quiet and listen rather than throwing your interpretation on his behaviour. Especially Oprah level ideas like "denial"

seem to indicate (to me) that there was indeed some sort of chemical addiction/substance abuse problem going on there

Maybe it does indicate to you but that doesn't make it true. People can choose to use drugs regularly for other reasons than addiction.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Filter  Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Disbelief revisited... Nomad 497 2 11/12/02 03:06 PM
by Adamist
* Faith vs Belief ZenGecko 1,064 8 07/02/04 05:27 PM
by Swami
* can you prove the existence of absolute, objective morality?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Anonymous 18,746 157 12/21/04 08:31 AM
by deafpanda
* Firewalking revisited
( 1 2 all )
Swami 1,354 25 08/21/04 09:22 PM
by Mushmonkey
* Sleep paralysis revisited, or How real is real? Anonymous 979 7 05/08/04 04:54 PM
by Redo
* Rational vs. Irrational Beliefs
( 1 2 all )
Swami 10,117 39 01/14/05 07:58 PM
by Alan Stone
* The Unprovable Nature of Faith and Belief
( 1 2 all )
DoctorJ 2,553 33 08/11/03 09:13 AM
by fireworks_god
* Unproven Beliefs Silversoul 2,038 15 02/16/05 12:11 PM
by moog

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, Jokeshopbeard, DividedQuantum
8,424 topic views. 2 members, 0 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
ElevationChemicals.com - Reagent Test Kits
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.029 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 14 queries.