|
 raytrace
Stranger
Registered: 01/15/02
Posts: 720
|
 Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack*  [Re: raytrace]
#2281539 - 01/28/04 05:02 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I suppose I am not making much sense to some (maybe to all) but I will continue anyway.
There is a problem that arises with the accumulation of knowledge. Knowledge has the potential to be used in many ways. One of them is to gain power. And indeed we can see how most scientific and technological developments so far have been used in this direction. The problem becomes apparent when you consider where increasing power leads. It is an one way road. Power will eventually have to be released and if the power is massive, this equates destruction. You can see that in history.
A way around this, is to use the knowledge to create games that are culturally oriented. That will allow us to express ourselves, communicate and bring us closer to each other. Cultural games do not necessarily lead somewhere, you just play around, I mean sooner or later we have to do something, we can?t just meditate all day.
So, when it comes to choosing a new technology, it would be good to consider whether it is culturally oriented or power oriented. When new toys arrive, be conscious where they lead to.
Edited by raytrace (01/28/04 06:11 PM)
|
buttonion
Calmly Watching
Registered: 04/04/02
Posts: 303
Loc: Kansas
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: raytrace]
#2281594 - 01/28/04 05:41 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
So lets play the realists, but lets not forget we just play.
Great quote! That's the point I was hoping to make in a nutshell. This is basically the conclusion of most of Alan Watt's books. Now everyone is to linger in this view- by all means don't forget it- and see what unfolds.
--------------------
Concepts which have been proved to be useful in ordering things easily acquire such an authority over us that we forget their human origins and accept them as invariable.- Albert Einstein
|
raytrace
Stranger
Registered: 01/15/02
Posts: 720
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: buttonion]
#2281635 - 01/28/04 06:09 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
 I have my sources too
|
 Shroomerious
OO
Registered: 07/27/03
Posts: 534
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: buttonion]
#2281839 - 01/28/04 07:38 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
An object exists. Subjectively and only subjectively.
--------------------
|
Anonymous
|
 Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Ped]
#2283203 - 01/29/04 08:12 AM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -
|
kaiowas
lest we baguette
Registered: 07/14/03
Posts: 5,501
Loc: oz
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: ]
#2283604 - 01/29/04 11:03 AM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
wow, I wish I had come here earlier 
i remember when I was a kid, if I put a blanket over my couch and the coffee table, I now have a fortress!!!!! hehehehehe  I think it is the intent on the object the determiens how it's viewed.
i agree with the point of view (yes point of view) that we exist only because our conciousness tells us so. I have been thinking about this for such a long time, and here's what broke me out of thinking that everything is objective.
here's one for ya MM, I think physics will really shine in this case.
Physics always talks about a frame of reference. The next time you see a table, go and touch it. is it hot, or is it cold? go and touch a wall, is it hot or is it cold? now compare with the wall and the table. the wall is only cold relative to you because there is stuff inside of you moving around faster than that of the wall. is the wall colder than the table? it may be slight or you may not tell. does that mean they are at the same temperature? what IS TEMPERATURE? so are you gonna say that the table is actually cold?? no, cold and hot don't exist, but only to the viewer. in physics they would always say that the table is cold relative to you, the observer.
i just touched my chin with my hand, my hand is coldER than my chin, it's all a part of me, so am i to say I am hot (am i?? hehe), or am I cold, or am i both, or is just really me attaching stuff to what I think is a part of me.
when I go to a concert, a band will come on and do their best (or thats my assumption anyway) one person may like it, and one person may hate it. so did they put on a great performance??
"I see the relationship between conciousness and existence to be the ultimate dependent relationship which has brought all of our universe into being, and continues to propell it. We can understand that a system cannot operate without the continuous input of some form of energy. We can also understand that energy which is put toward structured use occurs in dependence upon the relationship between two causal factors. A magnet and a coil of wire on their own are inert. The moment they become involved in a dependent relationship, energy is produced. In this same way, conciousness on it's own is inert unless involved in a dependent relationship with an existential plain. And an existential plain is inert unless involved in a dependent relationship with an apprehending conciousness."
with the coil and magnet you are referring to is farade's law. sincey ou are referring to physics, energy isn't released, energy is just an idea that describes what the interaction is taking place. energy is this sence (the physics sense) is not released, it just changes. I think this will fit nicely with the motif you have constructed.
I never knew what a chair was until someone told me the idea of it, until then I never really was concerned or aware of it. does a child know what the word fuck means a bad thing?? was it originally bad at all|?? the child knows something is up only if a reaction is taken from the parents. cuss words are only bad because we think they are. now you could say, well I person could say the cuss word with a lot of force, but then again the force is only there because the person put it on the word. a child has no idea until someone is like "no you can't say that" or visibly express shock. I remember flipping off my parents when I was in kindegarden, a friend showed me it, but I had no idea what it meant. it wasn't bad to me until my parents said it was.
my question is, how eaily are we all influenced then?? if one flashes the same thing on the television creen, newspapers, and just about everywhere else you go (advertisements), can that have an effect on what you think matters? After 12 years of conditioning at school, many are ready to be a consumer, and are ok with it, withot really sitting down and seeing what other avenues to take.
we are not taught about what it means to interact with nature. we never really got a chance to know. of course I am old enough now (and I did make my choice) but i feel many don't even care to make a choice. am I going to work all my liufe jsut to sit down and watch a game of super bowl on sunday jsut because in my house it's "tradition"
tradition huh??? well then my tradition will be to go to the forest every superbowl sunday
it is all in our heads how things work. if things are constantly changing (one of the premises of this post) then why do many of us go against the flow of it. is that many don't even think a flow exists?
i think this is why many people are drained and stressed. what time is it seem to be the question, oh and don't forget, time is money. it's damn near like a downward spiral.
btw much love to this thought provoking thread. 
--------------------
Annnnnnd I had a light saber and my friend was there and I said "you look like an indian" and he said "you look like satan" and he found a stick and a rock and he named the rock ooga booga and he named the stick Stick and we both thought that was pretty funny. We got eaten alive by mosquitos but didn't notice til the next day. I stepped on some glass while wading in the swamp and cut my foot open, didn't bother me til the next day either....yeah it was a good time, ended the night by buying some liquor for minors and drinking nips and going to he diner and eating chicken fingers, and then I went home and went to bed.
|
Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: kaiowas]
#2284293 - 01/29/04 02:28 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
the examples you were using (hot, cold, best, worst...) are way more relative than terms we have used in this thread..
Hot and Cold? you said "in physics they would say it is cold relative to you" or something like that - nah I think in physics they would give the temperature of the item, not say its hot or cold..
best and worst? I think in science they would say the band performed and 35% of the audience seemed to enjoy it and have a good time, but the rest of the audience was booing and seemed disappointed.
I realize everything is relative and can be broken down to mere "opinion," and that may be your point, but discussing whether or not the "thing" that we label "ROCK" exists without reference is a much more scientific angle than whether or not the notions that we label "hot" or "cold" exist without reference.
--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE
|
SkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Ped]
#2284720 - 01/29/04 04:50 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Discrimination is empty of inherent existence. It is only because we are ignorant of this truth that we are capable of assigning importance to ourselves, boundaries to our land, and ownership and exploitation of that land. If through simple logical investigation we can dissolve all boundaries between ourselves and other objects, it does not make sense to say "I am important, that is less important." It does not make sense to say "I will destroy the inhabiting animals of this place, because they are less important."
In all due debative respect, Ped, your argument is not only flawed it is self refuting. If discrimination is empty of inherent existence than how can you determine that we are in fact exploiting the natural environment. At what point do we go from a healthy environment to a polluted one. Where is the line between when an animal is extinct and overpopulated? It seems by your argument they could only exist in the human mind.
--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.
|
kaiowas
lest we baguette
Registered: 07/14/03
Posts: 5,501
Loc: oz
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Strumpling]
#2284877 - 01/29/04 05:49 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
"I realize everything is relative and can be broken down to mere "opinion," and that may be your point, but discussing whether or not the "thing" that we label "ROCK" exists without reference is a much more scientific angle than whether or not the notions that we label "hot" or "cold" exist without reference. "
nah, my point was to show that our senses fool us, a lot. with the hold or cold thing. ped used the example as the wall as a gradient for the heat, and I'm saying that the wall itself, the property we assign to it, really isn't there. we rely a lot on our senses and to me, the how cold is a rock, is one of the key indicators in my brain that "tells" me it's there.
this is why i pointed out the energy thing. people act as if energy actually exists (when talking about science) but it doesn't. it's just a term we use that discribes and anaylzes the motions of atomic particles (such as atoms moving faster feels hotter than I do).
I used the example of me touching my chin. I am one whole body, but if you look at me further, I have organs, and these organs are made of tissues, and the tissues are made up of cells and so on.
I think feeling and seeing is on the same level, especially when the co-mingle in our head to tell us what our reality is.
I see what you are saying though, and I'm sorry I didn't think up of anything on that level hehe. *shuts up*
--------------------
Annnnnnd I had a light saber and my friend was there and I said "you look like an indian" and he said "you look like satan" and he found a stick and a rock and he named the rock ooga booga and he named the stick Stick and we both thought that was pretty funny. We got eaten alive by mosquitos but didn't notice til the next day. I stepped on some glass while wading in the swamp and cut my foot open, didn't bother me til the next day either....yeah it was a good time, ended the night by buying some liquor for minors and drinking nips and going to he diner and eating chicken fingers, and then I went home and went to bed.
|
Ped
Interested In Your Brain
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
|
|
>> In all due debative respect, Ped, your argument is not only flawed it is self refuting. If discrimination is empty of inherent existence than how can you determine that we are in fact exploiting the natural environment. At what point do we go from a healthy environment to a polluted one. Where is the line between when an animal is extinct and overpopulated?
There are conventional lines between these things. Conventional discrimination, conventional distinctions. They appear to us quite vividly. Conventionally, there is a glaring distinction to be made between wealth and poverty. Conventionally, there is an observable distinction to be made between care and exploitation. Conventionally, there is a distinction to be made between chair and table, between proton and neutron. It is only because we cannot see beyond convention that these things remain true.
>> It seems by your argument they [environmental problems, and so forth] could only exist in the human mind.
And that they do. Because our minds assume conventional distinctions to be reality, it is a conventional reality that appears to us. If we could see past conventional truths, conventional problems like poverty and war would simply evaporate. The very condition upon which these problems depend falls away, and they cease their appearance to us. Avalokiteshvara (below) said when giving the Heart Sutra on vulture mountain: "There is no suffering, and there is no end to suffering." This is not so much self-refuting as it is profound and liberating, because it forces us to untie contemplative knots by assigning proper context to our experience. Ultimately, there is no suffering. Conventionally, there is no end to suffering. Ultimately, there is no exploitation of the natural environment. Conventionally, there is no end to the exploitation of the natural environment.
In the words of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso: "We all wish for world peace, but world peace cannot be achieved unless first we establish peace within our own minds." This statement suggests quite strongly that pursuing peace "out there" is a hopeless waste of time, and can never bring any real harmony to this earth. We can already see today that the UN Security council has been effective in some respects, yet still there is war, pre-emptive attacks, nuclear weapons programs, terrorism, genocide, and so on and so forth. These things will not end by constantly rearranging our outer circumstances.
Continously, for genereations, we have been searching "out there" for objects to bring us happiness. The right husband or wife, the right car, the right house, the right furniture, the right kids, the right job, the right career, the right bottle of brandy, the right friends, the right food, the right religion, the right drugs, the right city, town, country, and so on and so forth for the duration of our lives. We live and die accumulating material things, achieving no more for ourselves than what animals can achieve. Our lives are filled with hardship and difficulty, continously.
We are always searching, never finding. Why? Because we're probing into a realm that is completely pervaded by our own minds, assuming that it is entirely discrete. We cannot purify and harmonize that realm without first purifying and harmonizing ourselves.
|
SkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Ped]
#2286440 - 01/30/04 07:02 AM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Because our minds assume conventional distinctions to be reality, it is a conventional reality that appears to us. If we could see past conventional truths, conventional problems like poverty and war would simply evaporate.
Ped just to clarify and verify, could you please define in no more than one paragraph what you mean by "conventional."
--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.
|
infidelGOD
illusion
Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
|
|
let me take a stab at that,
convention = consensus + context
?
btw, I plan to read this whole thread when I have the time, but until I do, it doesn't exist
|
Ped
Interested In Your Brain
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
|
|
Conventional truth in one paragraph:
In the context of interpreting our physical experience, a convention is considered a conventional truth if it correctly performs the function it implies. For example, our conventional minds tell us that an object such as a chair is an island of physical existence amidst many other totally distinct physical objects. This is perfectly acceptable because, as ordinary beings, we need to be able to distinguish between objects in order to function in our daily lives. If we could not make this conventional distinction, we could not perform such simple tasks as sitting on a chair.
And the follow up:
Our minds spontaneously apprehend objects as though they were discrete and inherently existent. Speaking as a Buddhist, we need to soften this mental habit. As ordinary beings, the key is not to completely abandon conventional truth, but to realize fully and completely that our reality is actually structured much differently. We need to find the balance between these two extremes. An accomplished Tantric Bodhisattva has directly realized the wisdom understanding true nature of reality, but is still able to use a pen to write a book. He has trained his mind not to be deceived by ordinary conventional appearance. Eventually, it is desirable to abandon conventional truth entirely and become a Buddha, to depart this realm and enter what's called the Dharmakaya, the Truth Body.
http://selfknowledge.com/109716.htm
--------------------
 Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace
|
SkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Ped]
#2286766 - 01/30/04 10:18 AM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
In the context of interpreting our physical experience, a convention is considered a conventional truth if it correctly performs the function it implies. For example, our conventional minds tell us that an object such as a chair is an island of physical existence amidst many other totally distinct physical objects. This is perfectly acceptable because, as ordinary beings, we need to be able to distinguish between objects in order to function in our daily lives. If we could not make this conventional distinction, we could not perform such simple tasks as sitting on a chair.
Ped with all due respect, you cannot use the term you are defining to define said term. Please define the term in less than one paragraph without actually using the term.
--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.
|
Ped
Interested In Your Brain
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
|
|
A conventional truth is a popularly recognized fact conforming to the established practice or accepted standards of ordinary beings who are either perceptually aware, merely conceptually aware, or completely unaware of ultimate nature.
A simple definition does not clearly define the term and leaves it open to misinterpretation. Examples are absolutely necessary if the definition is to be made clear. The meaning of conventional nature has been presented quite clearly. I'd suggest that you read the rest of this thread carefully, as this topic has been discussed at legnth with many examples.
|
SkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
|
 Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Ped]
#2287733 - 01/30/04 05:31 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
A simple definition does not clearly define the term and leaves it open to misinterpretation. Examples are absolutely necessary if the definition is to be made clear. The meaning of conventional nature has been presented quite clearly. I'd suggest that you read the rest of this thread carefully, as this topic has been discussed at legnth with many examples.
No one asked you for a "simple" definition. What you were asked for was a clear and coherent definition which did not include the word being defined. This is a rather "conventional" rule of philosophy and logic and is the place at which all real philosophical discussion generally begins.
I have read this entire thread and most of your logical errors can be traced back to your first error. That being the idea that consciousness has primacy to existence. A thing must exist before you can be aware of it. If nothing existed there would be nothing to be aware of. We may not necessarily know what a thing exists as and often what we perceive changes depending upon the tools we use for perception, but our perception does not actual change the thing.
The idea that our consciousness has primacy to existence seems rather arrogant coming from someone who seems concerned with humility.
--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.
|
Ped
Interested In Your Brain
Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
|
|
Okay. You've made your position quite clear.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Ped]
#2288060 - 01/30/04 08:02 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -
|
Strumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: ]
#2288183 - 01/30/04 08:48 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
lol this is well past me now
--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE
|
Anonymous
|
Re: *cough* EXISTENCE *hack* [Re: Strumpling]
#2288206 - 01/30/04 08:53 PM (20 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
- Post History Deleted Upon User's Request -
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Red Vein Kratom 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
fearfect
Ego Death
whiterastahippie
Shroomalicious
Bavet
Larrythescaryrex