|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: soldatheero]
#13836709 - 01/23/11 01:04 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
If you re-read the quote you'll see that that's exactly what it says.
Sort of, "in a sense" it is what it says.
Quote:
So you believe that God is perceiving everything at all times?
If perception is defined as God then yes. It is said that God is everything, God is the sole existence and all else is an illusion or outcome of God because God is perception and only perception exists.
"God is infinite reality, whereas cosmos is infinite illusion. But both are not infinite in the same sense. God is one infinite, and illusion is infinite in numbers. God is infinite unity, and illusion infinite duality. Always God is. All along illusion is not. Illusion or no illusion, God remains beginningless and endless, while illusion has a beginning in illusion and it also ends in illusion. The infinite illusion includes an infinite number of suns, stars, moons, planets and worlds. The whole of the creation goes on evolving ad infinitum in illusion." Meher
These are my beliefs anyway.. If you want more arguments for this then read the work of Christopher Ott.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: Poid]
#13836722 - 01/23/11 01:06 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Poid said: I don't see how that concept can be considered to be part of a "hard science", since there's no way to prove that such a reality actually exists. 
There's no way to prove YOU exist, either. At some point we have to start making assumptions based on common sense.
Quote:
soldatheero said:
Quote:
So you believe that God is perceiving everything at all times?
If perception is defined as God then yes. It is said that God is everything, God is the sole existence and all else is an illusion or outcome of God because God is perception and only perception exists.
Wouldn't God be a perceiver instead of perception itself? Perception implies something or someone who is doing the perceiving...
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Poid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir




Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: deCypher]
#13836728 - 01/23/11 01:08 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deCypher said: At some point we have to start making assumptions based on common sense.
Will there ever come a point where we have to start proving these assumptions?
-------------------- Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. -- Bob Dylan  fireworks_god said:It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.
|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: deCypher]
#13836730 - 01/23/11 01:09 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Yes I agree that is why I believe reality is perception even though I cannot prove it it is backed by logic and is the best theory.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
deCypher



Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: soldatheero] 1
#13836737 - 01/23/11 01:10 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Poid said:
Quote:
deCypher said: At some point we have to start making assumptions based on common sense.
Will there ever come a point where we have to start proving these assumptions?
Go for it if you can. 
Quote:
soldatheero said: Yes I agree that is why I believe reality is perception even though I cannot prove it it is backed by logic and is the best theory.
To each his own.
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
 
|
Poid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir




Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: deCypher] 1
#13836745 - 01/23/11 01:12 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deCypher said:
Quote:
Poid said:
Quote:
deCypher said: At some point we have to start making assumptions based on common sense.
Will there ever come a point where we have to start proving these assumptions?
Go for it if you can. 
I wish I was a genius like Will Hunting.
-------------------- Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. -- Bob Dylan  fireworks_god said:It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.
|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: soldatheero]
#13836782 - 01/23/11 01:20 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Wouldn't God be a perceiver instead of perception itself? Perception implies something or someone who is doing the perceiving...
Not necessarily. The "I" is latent within perception, it is an outcome via the prcoesses of continiously evolving perception. Perception alone is occuring, before there was any disction of perceiver or anything perceive, perception was occuring.
Quote:
Perception precedes the conceived distinction of subject (seer) and object (seen).Some will argue that it is not possible that perception could take place without someone doing the perceiving. From a purely logical point of view it is possible. Consider Descartes’ cogito, “I think; therefore I am.” Descartes is not deriving his existence as he claims to be. Rather he assumes his existence in his premise, in the word “I” in “I think.” Strictly speaking, the only logical conclusion Descartes could have derived from his immediate experience would have been, “Experience is occurring; therefore experience is occurring.” Descartes did not guess that perception might be occurring independently of its subject and object, forming the impression of both through the power of complex evolved schemata. Descartes could never have guessed that an evolution of perception gave rise to subject and object, for concepts such as process theory and evolution were not available to him.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
NastyDHL



Registered: 04/04/08
Posts: 3,586
Loc: New England
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: NastyDHL]
#13837680 - 01/23/11 04:13 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
NastyDHL said: Sex is absurdly taboo though at the same time its such a driving force in human nature that its entirely unescapable so its almost like we repress ourselves from it while teasing ourselves about it.
Where does conformity come from?
I think the masses are very subtly influenced in very formative years of their life by fear. Fear of what? I think it has much to do with anxiety of sex and of not being able to get a mate. People doubt their self and intuition and lose self-trust when the sudden onset of immense bullshit in our society starts piling on. And it's like mass repression of all this bullshit.
If the heart is always open and the mind is what closes then I'd think the alignment and balance of a youths mind and heart would probably not have the courage to tackle AN ENTIRE SYSTEM OF LIFE THAT IT IS BEING BROUGHT INTO. So the mind at a very low level of consciousness gradually starts to make compromises with the heart promising selfish successes within the context of the group. But if the connection between mind and heart is strong enough people are going to either stand up to the subtle bullshit influences that people's intuitions become prey to or they begin to doubt their fucking sanity. It's hard to stay that grounded when EVERYONE AROUND YOU APPEARS INSANE FOR LIVING HOW THEY DO.
We all adopt this bullshit and the proportionate level of mental repression/denial that accompanies living so self absorbed a life. We begin to mindlessly play by subtle influences of social 'rules.
Then people get impatient with life and the bullshit and they think on a level of very low consciousness "Fucking bullshit! I am playing by all of these goddamn rules and I STILL DON'T HAVE IT. I STILL DON'T HAVE WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR. I'M STILL NOT WHOLE BECAUSE I SACRIFICED A PART OF ME FOR EGO AND MY OWN SELFISH GAIN WAY BACK IN THE DAY AND I COMPROMISED MY TRUST IN MY INTUITION BY TAKING ON THIS FOREIGN SET OF RULES. I COMPROMISED MY CONNECTION WITH MY HEART AND MY FULLNESS OF BEING BY ACCEPTING RULES AND BOUNDARIES THAT DO NOT MESH WELL WITH MY NATURAL EMOTIONAL EQUILIBRIUM."
We all play by rules, conscious or subconscious. But most of us DO NOT play by our own. We just didn't have the fucking courage then and now we just don't have the awareness of the bullshit thats accumulated in our patterns of behavior and lies hidden by denial and repression. Now most of society's members' courage comes from having a decent amount of success at sometimes hideous social games.
"Every man has his own courage, and is betrayed because he seeks in himself the courage of other persons. " -Emerson
I think everybody is just scared that they don't really have that motherfuckin funk to smash the finest pussy or get the hottest dick so they try to compete with others to get that confidence.
wat u guys think?
|
Poid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir




Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: NastyDHL]
#13837796 - 01/23/11 04:33 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I think you have failed to consider asexual individuals.
-------------------- Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. -- Bob Dylan  fireworks_god said:It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.
|
juloxx
Superjail Inmate


Registered: 01/16/11
Posts: 179
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: Poid]
#13837836 - 01/23/11 04:40 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
That there is more too life than what the eye can see
-------------------- "My mind is my glock, Keep my 3rd eye cocked." -Method Man Youtuber, focus on Psychedelic Tourism in S/SE Asia. Come follow along! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYxVIVVZ2qrX5iJbXhuu_VA/videos
|
Poid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir




Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: juloxx]
#13837850 - 01/23/11 04:42 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I'm pretty sure society acknowledges the fact that we have other senses besides sight.
-------------------- Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. -- Bob Dylan  fireworks_god said:It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: soldatheero] 1
#13838190 - 01/23/11 05:46 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
soldatheero said: Idealism is more simple as a materialist not only has to explain matter but also has to explain how matter causes experience, an Idealist simply there is only experience IE) matter is the result of evolved experience.
Idealism does explain "mind" (mind as what most people imagine as a being container of thoughts) as the result of a highly evolved stream\continuum of perception or experience.
Hmmm...this explanation doesn't seem to address the correlations we do find between the mind and the physical brain. I don't think we'll ever find a particular set of neurons associated with a particular memory or viewing a particular scene, but we do find evidence that particular parts of the brain are associated with different types of mental tasks. As for the example of the hand, I think Berkeley is correct in pointing out that the hand you see is in fact your real hand and not a mere representation of a hand that we don't really see, but that has more to do with the fact that I have an ecological view of mind influenced by the idea of enactivism. I think it is more helpful to define matter as something that exists in relation to perception rather than simply deny its existence, for if my hand exists because I perceive it, why can't I choose to perceive a claw instead, and have it be so? There is something which is there to be perceived. Perception is always the perception of something.
I think an important insight we get from quantum mechanics is the notion of entanglement. I was an interesting video recently that explains, among other things, how we can better understand the double-slit experiment by realizing that measurement and entanglement are basically the same thing. I would take this a step further and suggest that perception is merely a kind of entanglement. This would help us get avoid the messy implication of idealism that would suggest that the moon isn't there when you're not looking at it.
I prefer to think of matter and experience as a kind of mobius strip with two sides which are at the same time one and the same thing. Both aspects exist in a dynamic relation to one another as interacting/processing. Rather than identify with either materialism or idealism, I prefer to go with Whitehead's organicism.
--------------------
|
Sleepwalker
Overshoes

Registered: 05/07/08
Posts: 5,503
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: Poid]
#13838400 - 01/23/11 06:26 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Poid said: I'm pretty sure society acknowledges the fact that we have other senses besides sight.

|
soldatheero
lastirishman


Registered: 03/09/07
Posts: 2,856
Loc:
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: Sleepwalker]
#13877903 - 01/30/11 05:22 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I think it is more helpful to define matter as something that exists in relation to perception rather than simply deny its existence, for if my hand exists because I perceive it, why can't I choose to perceive a claw instead, and have it be so? There is something which is there to be perceived. Perception is always the perception of something...
I would agree that perception is the perception of something that exists but I believe perception is perceiving itself. I do not think matter is unreal or does not exist I just believe the way we think of it as existing is wrong. Like you say it exists in relation to perception but I think perception causes it to exist.
We take our sensing of matter to actually be matter.
Perception is not an image. When we try to see perception, or smell perception or taste perception or any other sensing of perception, we are trying to see, smell, taste something that has no smell, image or taste. If we take our sensing of perception to be the reality of what we are perceiving we are mistaken and we are believing in an illusion.
If we take the image to be what is actually there instead of the cause of the image, we are greatly mistaken.
Consider a tree as a state of highly evolved perception, it's a stream of experience, its a being.
We sense this being the only way we can IE) with our senses. The representation of this state of perception (the tree) is the matter that makes up the tree, it is what we sense, its the image. The actually cause of what we sense is the being, but being is invisible so what we see is matter. What we see, the image, the matter, is a secondary effect of the primary real cause which is the actual tree (which is perception).
Quote:
prefer to think of matter and experience as a kind of mobius strip with two sides which are at the same time one and the same thing
Agreed.
Quote:
Rather than identify with either materialism or idealism, I prefer to go with Whitehead's
I do not subscribe to idealism either, of the older theories it simply fits the closest. I believe the work of Christopher Ott is phenomenal. It fit's in with the metaphysics of Meher Baba, who I believe had gnosis. Their ideas differ from idealism.
Christopher Ott mentions Whitehead on that page I linked.
Quote:
Another ironic aside is that Alfred Whitehead, whose tentative beginnings in process theology (the idea that consciousness evolves out of God's Existence) were ignored by modern philosophical gurus, had been Bertrand Russell's teacher as well as his partner on the famous logical treatise Principia Mathematica. In other words, Whitehead, one of the good guys, was no logical lightweight by any means. Yet he is regarded today only for the logical partnership with Russell, and even then as the second name, and not for his process theory that anticipates Meher Baba's God Speaks.
Quote:
This would help us get avoid the messy implication of idealism that would suggest that the moon isn't there when you're not looking at it.
This does not apply to the way I see things.
Ott adresses this issue.. It also explains why you can't perceived your hand to be a claw.
Quote:
There are several concerns that arise when people contemplate this idea deeply.These concerns are usually the result of reading into the idea expectations derivedfrom old ideas.Some of these concerns will be addressed here.One concern is that it seems this system implies that the world is a dream. Infact, it does not. A dream is a representation of a more real archetype, an imperfectcopy of something more original. There is no representation in this system.The image that one experiences is the original archetype. In this system one’s image of a cup is more authentic than it is under materialism, in that one’s image of the cup is the actual cup. The authenticity of the cup is undiminished. It is the cosmology of the cup, and not the cup itself, that is altered. Does the cup have substance? Yes. But the substance evolved out of a process. The result of the new system is direct perceptual realism, not idealism. The thing that you see is the thing in itself, with all of its substance. In the new system, you are in direct contact with the actual world.
A second concern is that this system implies the cup I see is in my head. Not true. Materialism implies that the cup I see is in my head (the image is occurring in my brain). In materialism, the image of the cup I see merely represents a real cup outside my head that I do not see. In the new view, my head is part of the image along with the cup.
Thus, the cup is outside of my head.Some people, on hearing that perception is the underlying cause of objects, fall into a misunderstanding of what is being said. They begin to assume that what is being said is that when a person exits from a room the room disappears.
This confuses the body and its sensory machinery with perception. The room is not dependent upon the presence of the human body. Rather it is dependent upon perception, which precedes the image that includes all bodies, both human and otherwise. Even the sense of individuality that is experienced is part of the image. So, when a person leaves a room, the room persists in reality in conformity with common sense.
As said before, these kinds of concerns are the result of assumptions left behind by materialism. Let’s examine some of those assumptions...
Also, Quote:
We do not mean to disparage the belief that things are made of atoms. That wouldbe absurd. Materialism is more than atomism. It states that things are fundamentallyexplainable in terms of substantive particles. We mean to disparage that materialist assumption that atomism as a fundamental theory can account for all phenomena.
-------------------- ..and may the zelda theme song be with you at all times, amen.
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 10 years, 3 days
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: soldatheero]
#13878424 - 01/30/11 06:54 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Here are my top 5;
This is just my POV, please feel free to throw down with them.
Note: Most if not all of these beliefs arise usually out of an inability to undue years of mental programming and cultural suffocation in a largely Christianized society.
1. (I will write this one last)
2. That people still feel uncomfortable with homosexuality even though we claim to accept it.
3.That it is wrong not to care what people think.
4. That we all still hold moralistic assumptions about reality that should never be questioned and that are wrong to question. Ie. many people in our society never question why it may be wrong to murder, steal, lie, cheat, rape, etc. We tend to go on how we feel rather than how we think.
5. That a subtle form of racism still exists in the back of our minds.
NUMBER ONE!!!!!
1. That women deep down do not want equality in all aspects of their relationships with men and are more comfortable with inequality.
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
NastyDHL



Registered: 04/04/08
Posts: 3,586
Loc: New England
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: Unacknowledged Truths in Society [Re: AlphaFalfa]
#13878917 - 01/30/11 08:28 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
!. nobody fully respects love
|
|