Home | Community | Message Board

World Seed Supply
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


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: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
OfflineNetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
Re: "It's not in my nature." [Re: g00ru]
    #14340414 - 04/23/11 08:25 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

guruu said:
could you expand on this opinion? I'm sure you have before but I dig dualism so I'd like to hear more.



Oh, I have before, many times, only to be met with "just look inside yourself." But I'll elaborate again anyway.

There is not one single thing in existence that is not qualia; some sort of sense perception. Touch, taste, sight, sound, smell, etc- our universe is sensed. Even thoughts are qualia. They are sensations in the same way as pain or taste. To us, everything is some sort of sense perception.

If you don't believe me that thoughts are just sense perceptions, like sounds or smells, try to explain what it means to "know" something. It's just something you feel intuitively, without being able to explain. It's like trying to define a word without using other words.

Sense perception itself is not definable; you can't explain how you know red is different than blue. You just do. But, this doesn't mean that sense perception is anything apart from the physical Universe. In fact, it is the physical Universe. So often people develop the idea of a soul, or a mind, "inhabiting" a body because they get the idea that they have a dual nature- as a thinking thing and as a feeling, sensing thing. But your thoughts are just senses too. You are only one kind of thing- a sensing thing.

This can further be realized by an examination of consciousness. Consciousness is never something isolated, by itself. It's always consciousness of something. In fact, consciousness is inseparable from the objects of which it is conscious. If I'm holding a glass, you can't separate my awareness of the glass from the glass itself. There is no duality; consciousness is its object; the observer is the observed.

There is no ghost in the machine. The ghost is the machine. That being the case, everything is equal; no one part is any more spiritual, special, or "holy" than any other, because everything is one. Claiming some sort of special power beyond the physical Universe is egotistical. You are the physical Universe, and it is you. This is why empirical investigation is so useful. It's an investigation directly into our own nature.

If you don't have anything to say to that other than claiming you mystically know that I'm wrong, don't bother responding. :shrug:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezoomfan
doubt 'er
Male

Registered: 07/16/09
Posts: 505
Loc: eastern Canada
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
Re: "It's not in my nature." [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #14340697 - 04/23/11 09:13 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

OrgoneConclusion said:
In Mel Gibson's latest interview, he explains how his emotional meltdown was not in his nature.

"It's one terribly awful moment in time, said to one person, in the span of one day and doesn't represent what I truly believe or how I've treated people..."

I guess the same applied when he bashed Jews a few years back in a drunken rage. He doens't really hate Jews. :rolleyes:




haha i saw that on tmz today, funny enough, what one of the guys on there said was exactly what i would argue philosophically, everyone has good and bad in their nature, belief systems only allow us to associate ourself with the good ones though usually. the fact is though that were all capable to differing degrees of any and all emotions and actions. i went to jail for armed robbery after my life went to hell and you would never think it to talk to me today.


--------------------
Thinking is dreaming wake up and enjoy the dream.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineg00ru
lit pants tit licker
Male User Gallery


Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
Re: "It's not in my nature." [Re: NetDiver]
    #14344563 - 04/24/11 05:33 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Samurai Drifter said:
Quote:

guruu said:
could you expand on this opinion? I'm sure you have before but I dig dualism so I'd like to hear more.



Oh, I have before, many times, only to be met with "just look inside yourself." But I'll elaborate again anyway.

There is not one single thing in existence that is not qualia; some sort of sense perception. Touch, taste, sight, sound, smell, etc- our universe is sensed. Even thoughts are qualia. They are sensations in the same way as pain or taste. To us, everything is some sort of sense perception.




Ah, but there is something that is not sense perception. "I".  True, the sense of being does seem to arise in the body, and as a matter of fact when you meditate on it this sense will increase.  However, it's more than that.  You can't point to any single sensation and say "that's I. That's me."  Seriously, look for it.  Look for the sense perception that constitutes you.  It's not there, I feel quite confident in saying.  All the same, "I" is sensed, which is great cause you have something to focus on.  This is really difficult to even talk about honestly because "I" is indeed an object, but that which gives life to our sense of individuality is not an object, it's totally formless.  But because "I am" is the original and most intimate thought, focusing on it brings us right into that formless reality.

Quote:

If you don't believe me that thoughts are just sense perceptions, like sounds or smells, try to explain what it means to "know" something. It's just something you feel intuitively, without being able to explain. It's like trying to define a word without using other words.




Yes, I would call that knowing something in the heart, when it's intuitive as well as rational.  But here's an experiment: what the fuck kind of sense perception is the voice in your head? Who is this person up there talking?  What physical sense is that? And who observes it? :strokebeard: WHO AM I? I definitely think thoughts are perceptions but of an entirely different nature than sounds or smells.  Take imagination: you can create an image in your mind.  Are you really seeing that? Yeah, obviously it's somehow possible to see a mental image, but its different in some fundamental way from our physical seeing.  You're not seeing it at all with your fleshly eyes, but somehow you can still perceive it.  You're seeing it with your third eye, the mind's eye. :pipesmoke:

Quote:

Sense perception itself is not definable; you can't explain how you know red is different than blue. You just do. But, this doesn't mean that sense perception is anything apart from the physical Universe. In fact, it is the physical Universe. So often people develop the idea of a soul, or a mind, "inhabiting" a body because they get the idea that they have a dual nature- as a thinking thing and as a feeling, sensing thing. But your thoughts are just senses too. You are only one kind of thing- a sensing thing.




You're totally right that sense perception and the manifest universe are one and the same.  I would define sense perception as differentiation, pure and simple.  If it has a quality, it can be differentiated, and as such it's an object.  But you keep saying everything is perception, which means something is perceiving everything.  Who is this perceiver? Can the perceiver himself be perceived? Are we in our truest nature a perception? If so, doesn't that imply...something else that's doing the perceiving?

Quote:

This can further be realized by an examination of consciousness. Consciousness is never something isolated, by itself. It's always consciousness of something. In fact, consciousness is inseparable from the objects of which it is conscious. If I'm holding a glass, you can't separate my awareness of the glass from the glass itself. There is no duality; consciousness is its object; the observer is the observed.

There is no ghost in the machine. The ghost is the machine. That being the case, everything is equal; no one part is any more spiritual, special, or "holy" than any other, because everything is one. Claiming some sort of special power beyond the physical Universe is egotistical. You are the physical Universe, and it is you. This is why empirical investigation is so useful. It's an investigation directly into our own nature.




Yes you're right, ultimately the universe is totally nondual.  But I disagree that there is no ghost in the machine.  It's like the buddhist doctrine.  1. samsara (physical world) is illusory 2. nirvana (the true self) alone is real 3. nirvana is samsara.  You're jumping to that last one and saying that we are the physical universe and it is us, which is true. But that doesn't change the fact that there can exist a duality between the exterior world and our inner being, and that an understanding of this is necessary if we are to truly realize oneness in an experiential fashion.

Consciousness can indeed be separated from objects.  And this is where it just gets mystical.  You have to focus on "i am," or keep your mind totally silent, or meditate until you are totally relaxed to a point of complete stillness.  You just have to sort of push forward and just do it, it's a totally self-inclusive movement that can't be defined in rational terms because it's just beyond that.  Sorry if that's intellectually unsatisfying but hopefully you'll try, because it's....good :feelsgoodman:

Quote:

If you don't have anything to say to that other than claiming you mystically know that I'm wrong, don't bother responding. :shrug:




actually i mystically know you're right :smile:


--------------------
check out my music!
drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: "It's not in my nature." [Re: g00ru]
    #14345906 - 04/24/11 09:48 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

guruu said:
Quote:

Samurai Drifter said:
Quote:

guruu said:
could you expand on this opinion? I'm sure you have before but I dig dualism so I'd like to hear more.



Oh, I have before, many times, only to be met with "just look inside yourself." But I'll elaborate again anyway.

There is not one single thing in existence that is not qualia; some sort of sense perception. Touch, taste, sight, sound, smell, etc- our universe is sensed. Even thoughts are qualia. They are sensations in the same way as pain or taste. To us, everything is some sort of sense perception.




Ah, but there is something that is not sense perception. "I".


Proof?


Quote:

guruu said:
True, the sense of being does seem to arise in the body, and as a matter of fact when you meditate on it this sense will increase.  However, it's more than that.  You can't point to any single sensation and say "that's I. That's me."


That's because we are more than a single sensation.


Quote:

guruu said:
Seriously, look for it.  Look for the sense perception that constitutes you.  It's not there, I feel quite confident in saying.


It is there--everything you sense is part of you.


Quote:

guruu said:
All the same, "I" is sensed, which is great cause you have something to focus on.  This is really difficult to even talk about honestly because "I" is indeed an object, but that which gives life to our sense of individuality is not an object, it's totally formless.


Proof?


Quote:

guruu said:
But because "I am" is the original and most intimate thought, focusing on it brings us right into that formless reality.


What makes you think that is the most intimate thought? Do you honestly think you know what people's thoughts are like?


Quote:

guruu said:
Quote:

If you don't believe me that thoughts are just sense perceptions, like sounds or smells, try to explain what it means to "know" something. It's just something you feel intuitively, without being able to explain. It's like trying to define a word without using other words.




Yes, I would call that knowing something in the heart, when it's intuitive as well as rational.  But here's an experiment: what the fuck kind of sense perception is the voice in your head? Who is this person up there talking?  What physical sense is that? And who observes it? :strokebeard: WHO AM I?


What do you mean "What physical sense is that?"? The person "up there" is called the dialogical self, and each individual observes it.


Quote:

guruu said:
I definitely think thoughts are perceptions but of an entirely different nature than sounds or smells.


They are in that they're not created by processing information gathered by a sense organ, but they are perceptions nonetheless.


Quote:

guruu said:
Take imagination: you can create an image in your mind.  Are you really seeing that? Yeah, obviously it's somehow possible to see a mental image, but its different in some fundamental way from our physical seeing.  You're not seeing it at all with your fleshly eyes, but somehow you can still perceive it.  You're seeing it with your third eye, the mind's eye. :pipesmoke:


Call it what you want, but so what? Why is this so totally amazing for you, and what is spiritual about it?


Quote:

guruu said:
Quote:

Sense perception itself is not definable; you can't explain how you know red is different than blue. You just do. But, this doesn't mean that sense perception is anything apart from the physical Universe. In fact, it is the physical Universe. So often people develop the idea of a soul, or a mind, "inhabiting" a body because they get the idea that they have a dual nature- as a thinking thing and as a feeling, sensing thing. But your thoughts are just senses too. You are only one kind of thing- a sensing thing.




You're totally right that sense perception and the manifest universe are one and the same.  I would define sense perception as differentiation, pure and simple.  If it has a quality, it can be differentiated, and as such it's an object.  But you keep saying everything is perception, which means something is perceiving everything.  Who is this perceiver? Can the perceiver himself be perceived? Are we in our truest nature a perception? If so, doesn't that imply...something else that's doing the perceiving?


Why does a "who" have to be the perceiver? The perceiver is the organism, and yes, the organism can perceive itself--why is this so totally amazing for you, and what's spiritual about it?


Quote:

guruu said:
Quote:

This can further be realized by an examination of consciousness. Consciousness is never something isolated, by itself. It's always consciousness of something. In fact, consciousness is inseparable from the objects of which it is conscious. If I'm holding a glass, you can't separate my awareness of the glass from the glass itself. There is no duality; consciousness is its object; the observer is the observed.

There is no ghost in the machine. The ghost is the machine. That being the case, everything is equal; no one part is any more spiritual, special, or "holy" than any other, because everything is one. Claiming some sort of special power beyond the physical Universe is egotistical. You are the physical Universe, and it is you. This is why empirical investigation is so useful. It's an investigation directly into our own nature.




Yes you're right, ultimately the universe is totally nondual.  But I disagree that there is no ghost in the machine.  It's like the buddhist doctrine.  1. samsara (physical world) is illusory 2. nirvana (the true self) alone is real 3. nirvana is samsara.


Why do you just unquestioningly swallow that shit? :wow:


Quote:

guruu said:
You're jumping to that last one and saying that we are the physical universe and it is us, which is true. But that doesn't change the fact that there can exist a duality between the exterior world and our inner being, and that an understanding of this is necessary if we are to truly realize oneness in an experiential fashion.


What does it mean to "realize oneness"?


--------------------
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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineg00ru
lit pants tit licker
Male User Gallery


Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
Re: "It's not in my nature." [Re: NetDiver]
    #14349615 - 04/25/11 03:14 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

i probably should have pm'd that to you :lol:


--------------------
check out my music!
drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineNetDiver
Wandering Mindfuck


Registered: 08/24/09
Posts: 6,024
Loc: Everywhere and Nowhere
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
Re: "It's not in my nature." [Re: g00ru]
    #14350454 - 04/25/11 05:45 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

I think everything you think of as the "I" is sense perception, though. Your sense perceptions are always changing, too, so if your self is reducible to your sense perceptions, we would expect to find a personal identity that isn't fixed, either, which is exactly what we find. The person you are now is different from who you were as a child; some people have multiple identities, etc.

Identity is just a chemical house of cards. Where's the soul, the consciousness, the dual nature, separate from sense perception?

BTW, mental visualizations are still sense perceptions, which are the result of our brain's ability to abstract and symbolize based on other sense perceptions. If seeing an apple is a sense perception, imagining an apple is as well. There's probably a great degree of similarity between the two in terms of brain activity.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePoid
Shroomery's #1 Spellir
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 02/04/08
Posts: 40,372
Loc: SF Bay Area Flag
Re: "It's not in my nature." [Re: g00ru] * 1
    #14351631 - 04/25/11 08:53 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

guruu said:
i probably should have pm'd that to you :lol:


You should respond to my post, and stop fucking trolling this forum with your inane/insane bullshit.


--------------------
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.

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

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Natural/Man Made
( 1 2 3 4 all )
SpecialEd 4,793 64 04/17/04 02:28 AM
by SpecialEd
* "Natural" Perception Zero7a1 992 17 02/02/04 12:56 AM
by Ginseng
* The Unprovable Nature of Faith and Belief
( 1 2 all )
DoctorJ 2,889 33 08/11/03 07:13 AM
by fireworks_god
* preserving life after the world ends ribbit 711 11 01/16/03 12:59 AM
by ribbit
* Saints Preserved Swami 557 6 08/19/04 04:14 PM
by BlueCoyote
* Nature SkorpivoMusterion 386 0 11/07/04 07:25 PM
by SkorpivoMusterion
* How do you view nature so blissfully?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
bandaid 7,256 89 08/19/04 06:22 AM
by Zoso_UK
* Let's define the word "natural"
( 1 2 3 all )
Dogomush 3,866 40 12/11/02 10:29 PM
by andrash

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
1,384 topic views. 1 members, 7 guests and 11 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.023 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 13 queries.