Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Cannabis Seeds Zamnesia
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

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!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: Drakion]
    #11049598 -

Not sure if you are asking me or someone else, but if you find some information is now obviously not so good to follow, what gives you the idea that the rest of the information is good to follow when it conflicts with modern ideas?


--------------------
The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: explosiveoxygen]
    #11051263 -

So what is a "fairy tale" by your standards?


--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11051274 -

My opinion is that the bible is a text that is relevant to our current situation.

Indeed it is. All religious text is. It is IMO, a reflection of the dysfunctional nature of the human psyche.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11051555 -

Quote:
Do you not believe that our accumulated wisdom allows us to see past works in a different light? Just because it's widely accepted today that Greek mythology is untrue, does that mean that we do not gain as much as the ancient Greeks when reading Iliad?



First, I don't think of mythology as 'untrue'. Validation/invalidation of myth in general, as I have described, is a useless pursuit in my opinion. An investigation into the substantial roots of a myth is what I am suggesting.

I would read the Iliad in the same general manner that I would read a Christian myth. Between now and then, there are certain values that have changed and certain values that have not changed. I disagree with most propositions that attempt to separate the present from the rest of history (because this itself is a historical tradition) or less explicitly, the suggestion of an enlightened present state of being that is insusceptible to mythology of the past.

If you can grok that Greek mythology may somehow be relevant, or however worthwhile of study, you probably realize that it is not either just the differences in values, nor just the similarities that make it this way. It is somehow our present susceptibility to the same issues, a dialect of differences and similarities which provide us with contrast (that is something like "a vision", rather than to suggest contrast as merely 'difference'.) We see the the differences in past values, and they only strike us as significant due to similarities (and vice versa).

Now, if you follow me, what does "fairy tales" mean in its usage in this thread? It seems to suggest that this text is not worth considering, and so seems to imply that our present state has enlightened itself of whatever issues that may have been raised.

Concerning the particular myth I have brought up, I beg to disagree. Apparently "we" have not discovered a better existential inquiry than "to eat or not to eat". My focus is initially upon the integrity of that question, not its answer. In posing this question towards substance we inject our existential security/insecurity into it. The questions we are afraid to ask concerning our own being, as well as the questions we are eager to wager upon, are interrogative of an external "entity", through the previously described political syntax of "particular and general" substance. This basically serves to presuppose or assert a "self evidence" of being, which our ontology (the differences between particular things such as substance) is then presumptively based upon.

Substance is concrete, in that it is simply that ideal material to which we behave in accordance. But it is still we that behave, and a substance simply is what it is today, just as it was yesterday. This notion of substance endures in a strict sense, although our political projection has ontologically derived some notion of its pliability, and in that, a convenient ambiguity through the horizon of history. In a word, there is a faux inquiry into the ontology of what the "forbidden fruit" was.

If we for a moment let that vain question pass us by, and adhere to what we can ideally know for sure of substance (what IS A forbidden fruit) we would not need to assume.


--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Edited by daytripper23 (09/13/09 04:39 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11053682 -

daytripper23 said:
in past values, and they only strike us as significant due to similarities (and vice versa).

Now, if you follow me, what does "fairy tales" mean in its usage in this thread? It seems to suggest that this text is not worth considering, and so seems to imply that our present state has enlightened itself of whatever issues that may have been raised.



Fairy tales means they are not to be taken as a guide to living, like stoning people for various reasons. They are however a reflection of our beliefs and ideas, especially since most people did follow these Fairy tales to the word for many centuries in the past.


--------------------
The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: explosiveoxygen]
    #11054038 -

If they are "not to be taken as a guide to living", how exactly are they to be considered relevant? One must somehow relate in accord - or are your remarks what they seem to be; a figurative book burning?

With all that you have said, it seems to me that you are the one who sets forth the text as an authority. You call your poor authority a "fairy tale", and that leaves speculation as to whatever is your better one.


--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Edited by daytripper23 (09/13/09 09:34 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11055599 -

daytripper23 said:
If they are "not to be taken as a guide to living", how exactly are they to be considered relevant? One must somehow relate in accord - or are your remarks what they seem to be; a figurative book burning?

With all that you have said, it seems to me that you are the one who sets forth the text as an authority. You call your poor authority a "fairy tale", and that leaves speculation as to whatever is your better one.



If you mean by book burning that I am saying it is garbage and need not be read then no. Not sure what you mean by the second paragraph at all.

I just said how they are relevant in the last post.


--------------------
The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: explosiveoxygen]
    #11056171 -

Yeah that may have been a stretch. I've had a fever the last few days and the world is sort of spinning around me in vague nefarious themes.

But let me explain anyway: "Reflection" is certainly adequate in my opinion, and although we have not described exactly what that can mean, it seems that further suggesting anything more than what is here "satisfactory" posits the sort of authority you were previously railing against.

For instance, if a fairy tale is fit "merely" for reflection, are you suggesting that there is some relative canon which is appropriate for something more? I mean, how else would we read a book?



--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11057508 -

daytripper23 said:
For instance, if a fairy tale is fit "merely" for reflection, are you suggesting that there is some relative canon which is appropriate for something more?




No but enough people take it as such and need to be shaken out of their hatred.


--------------------
The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: explosiveoxygen]
    #11057972 -

Then it is not "merely" reflection, but just another instance of how we are free to relate to the text. It is not "mere", but indeed a lack of outside impositions that would bar free interpretations.

This freedom might possibly entail figurative interpretation, just as well as literal interpretation; or even an entirely "withheld" interpretation that is reactionarily opposed to it.

But saying "but enough people take it as such and need to be shaken out of their hatred." - is this actually directed at the books content, or is it an extraneous imposition (hypocritical but nonetheless effective as its intention), of how or what one should be reading?.


--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11058279 -

daytripper23 said:
Then it is not "merely" reflection, but just another instance of how we are free to relate to the text. It is not "mere", but indeed a lack of outside impositions that would bar free interpretations.

This freedom might possibly entail figurative interpretation, just as well as literal interpretation; or even an entirely "withheld" interpretation that is reactionarily opposed to it.

But saying "but enough people take it as such and need to be shaken out of their hatred." - is this actually directed at the books content, or is it an extraneous imposition (hypocritical but nonetheless effective as its intention), of how or what one should be reading?.


I don't understand why you feel the need to write paragraphs where less words convey the same point, no one is telling anyone what they should be reading or how, merely that the said materials is not from the divine but the hands and minds of men.


--------------------
The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: explosiveoxygen]
    #11058952 -

Quote:
I don't understand why you feel the need to write paragraphs where less words convey the same point,


I am sure that is largely where we would disagree. But I would say that the simplicity of your language is imprecise, and inadvertently says much more than what you are explicitly aware of.

For instance, when you say things like they "need to be shaken of their hatred", you sound just as blunt as the worst of them.

Quote:
no one is telling anyone what they should be reading or how, merely that the said materials is not from the divine but the hands and minds of men.


Again, much like I asked of your method in reflection, what isn't handed down by the hands of men? What would distinguish a "fairy tale" from greek myth, or from a general work of fiction?

All in all, you haven't offered much if anything in that way of critical commentary, yet you have spouted your "opinion" through the entire thread. Because your opinions are not relative to any actual discourse but stated as self evident, all you have suggested is that everyone should simply conform to it.

It would be one thing if your comments now and again transcended the realm of criticism to mention politics, but all you have offered so far is a political precedence. You claim the world is such a way, and so we should read the book like this.

You call these your interpretive opinions, but present them in backwards order; from ideology to the text: Due to it "being an authoritarian fairy tale" it should be interpreted this way, you have said. That is entirely different than an actual interpretation, which might make the case that "due to its content, and historical value, it could be appropriately called a "authoritarian fairy tale."

In general, I can hardly believe that recognizing the correlation between religion and violence is the simple answer to all our problems, especially when the the proposed solution is just as fanatical.

I may be over complicated, but in my opinion you really need to further to clarify your opinions. I might actually agree with these opinions, at least on a some level, if you actually presented them as something more than bare ideological claims.



--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Edited by daytripper23 (09/14/09 06:21 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11059829 -

daytripper23 said:
Quote:
I don't understand why you feel the need to write paragraphs where less words convey the same point,


I am sure that is largely where we would disagree. But I would say that the simplicity of your language is imprecise, and inadvertently says much more than what you are explicitly aware of.

For instance, when you say things like they "need to be shaken of their hatred", you sound just as blunt as the worst of them.

Quote:
no one is telling anyone what they should be reading or how, merely that the said materials is not from the divine but the hands and minds of men.


Again, much like I asked of your method in reflection, what isn't handed down by the hands of men? What would distinguish a "fairy tale" from greek myth, or from a general work of fiction?

All in all, you haven't offered much if anything in that way of critical commentary, yet you have spouted your "opinion" through the entire thread. Because your opinions are not relative to any actual discourse but stated as self evident, all you have suggested is that everyone should simply conform to it.

It would be one thing if your comments now and again transcended the realm of criticism to mention politics, but all you have offered so far is a political precedence. You claim the world is such a way, and so we should read the book like this.

You call these your interpretive opinions, but present them in backwards order; from ideology to the text: Due to it "being an authoritarian fairy tale" it should be interpreted this way, you have said. That is entirely different than an actual interpretation, which might make the case that "due to its content, and historical value, it could be appropriately called a "authoritarian fairy tale."

In general, I can hardly believe that recognizing the correlation between religion and violence is the simple answer to all our problems, especially when the the proposed solution is just as fanatical.

I may be over complicated, but in my opinion you really need to further to clarify your opinions. I might actually agree with these opinions, at least on a some level, if you actually presented them as something more than bare ideological claims.




You may be insane. There was no reference to religion and violence having any relation.
Your interpretation of my statements saying they are interpretations is laughable at best, there is nothing more to say about all this.


--------------------
The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11067346 -

I feel silly to have got caught up in such an argument, but I'd still like to continue the thread, maybe from a point before I got distracted.

First, I want to note that my use of Heiddeger's philosophy is something I been quite unclear about. That I have realized, is quite a complex situation in itself.

First of all, I would not claim that this is necessarily essential to the structure of my argument. For the most part I have taken a negative stance to this problem. This at least, is certainly not out of the ordinary around these parts. But really, my argument should theoretically make sense without Heidegger's philosophy, as in our apparent lack of a better question than "to eat or not to eat".

To that, part of the reason it is a poor question, is that there is no clear answer for us. But as I have said, the problem actually seems to reside in the question itself. My incorporation of Heidegger is an attempt to possibly posit an alternative inquiry: An authentic inquiry into being, rather than its projection into substance.

I will certainly admit that my current grasp on Heidegger only allows me to intuit this approach, and present it to you all in a somewhat naive manner. But I also think that based on so far of my reading, he is quite intuitive. The way he initially describes "Dasein" to even the best reader is almost what I would call immanently vague, even in his own eloquence. (I think, it HAS to be) That is, he teaches from the common starting point of what he calls "everydayness", and follows a structural, "human" approach (We won't say "flawed" in as much as this is meant to contrast "the fall") to Dasein. Though his philosophy is clearly precise, it seems to be presented much like a Koan. This certainly doesn't make my fuzziness justified, but I also think there is something analagous in the actual portrait of Dasein.

Anyways, what would be ideal, is that their are other students of his thought out there. But if not, maybe the fuzziness will have to be general there. Again though, I don't think that "positive" here is incredibly necessary, so this shouldn't be a huge problem.


--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
  The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
  The frumious Bandersnatch!

Edited by daytripper23 (09/15/09 11:53 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: "Forbidden Fruit" [Re: daytripper23]
    #11067394 -

Oh so you are saying that you stand by your attempts at telling us all what the posts you respond to imply instead of responding to what they actually say?

The argument is basically if God wrote the bible by putting the words into the writers minds or not, because if the words are just written by men then they are not worth more than as history of fiction writing.


--------------------
The Great Mycelium (TGMM) is more than you and me, we are all part of One.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* the Forbidden Fruit 2 shroominsmurf 1,244 6 06/29/02 03:43 PM
by hongomon
* The Forbidden Fruit
( 1 2 all )		 RebelSteve33 4,380 26 06/27/02 10:40 PM
by psilyhunter
* An ontological argument for absolute truth. shroomydan 2,103 13 02/11/07 09:55 AM
by shroomydan
* Truth in the Ontological Argument or Syntax Games chemkid 1,354 13 12/25/03 10:21 AM
by Anonymous
* Ontological Insecurity or Sharing Wisdom
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 EternalCowabunga 6,785 71 09/11/07 10:45 AM
by Icelander
* An Ontological Anarchists critique of traditional activism and reality? Mystic_Cannibal 1,018 3 01/04/08 12:20 PM
by Icelander
* Fruit of "knowledge of good and evil"
( 1 2 all )		 ehud 4,451 37 10/08/02 06:32 AM
by Swami
* forbidden truth white 1,588 16 06/23/05 10:48 PM
by Huehuecoyotl

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,575 topic views. 2 members, 230 guests and 19 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 15 queries.