|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: syncro]
#28444798 - 08/24/23 08:54 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
"Materialism will be just a blip in the historical context." Kastrup's prediction
|
Buster_Brown
L'une


Registered: 09/17/11
Posts: 11,309
Last seen: 1 day, 21 hours
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: syncro]
#28444830 - 08/24/23 09:21 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Commerce as a basis for existence can never be blip in the historical context. Not 'being in trade' as distinct, schoolchildren, wives, clergy - definitions being blurry where they mix.
|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: Buster_Brown]
#28444907 - 08/24/23 10:19 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
I suppose it would be in learning to change channels. It doesn't seem it happens all at once, but for one at a time. Though for the one then the previous is not the same nor for their perceptions of the world and others.
But contracting exchange seems can be a pleasant thing, interaction and mutual benefit. Perhaps there is an inevitable darkness in the material as such, as in the thought that our conveniences are supported by perpetual war that we don't see.
There is also sometimes a perception of darkness in matter in a gnostic type bent if a convenient description, though in saying it I see it can be from any foundation.
I don't know that it's useful to consider, but mentioned has been that of incomprehensible implications, cosmic, in not a good way, of egoic natures.
Not to worry though, it is for its likeness. Whoops, that's me. I'm working on it!
|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: syncro] 1
#28444916 - 08/24/23 10:25 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
This is where the vajra stuff spinvis posted stands out, though it can be seen universally, but the idea of starting with nothing but the absolute in all phenomena if I'm saying it right.
As well surrender serves the same effect.
Edited by syncro (08/24/23 10:26 AM)
|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: syncro]
#28444945 - 08/24/23 10:42 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
I'm multi viewing so not hearing all of the video with Kastrup and the swami, but caught a question as Kastrup led up to, "Is this whole thing an error?" Swami replied it is common language in Advaita and Buddhism, etc., but added that Vivekananda said, we are not going from error to truth, but from lower truth to higher truth.
This is getting good in the second hour as I'm paying more attention.
Edited by syncro (08/24/23 10:43 AM)
|
AnattaAtman
Mad Bodhisattva

Registered: 09/25/21
Posts: 377
Last seen: 16 days, 4 hours
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: Svetaketu] 1
#28445839 - 08/24/23 10:04 PM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Hey Svetaketu, what do you think about this?
Quote:
The definition of Truth is: That which works.
This seems to suggest that God can exist and not exist at the same time. What, for example, is when your belief in God causes him to exist?
Perhaps we should reinvoce the Buddhist logic thread.
|
Svetaketu
The Devil's Avocado 🥑


Registered: 10/08/15
Posts: 1,508
Loc: United States
Last seen: 19 hours, 35 minutes
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: AnattaAtman]
#28446028 - 08/25/23 03:31 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Lol! The Buddhist logic thread, good times.
Anyway, the truth definition is very unclear to me. What do you mean by "works"?
For example, if someone believes in a god, and they believe this idea improves their life, does that mean it "works"?
Who decides whether something is working or not? Is it purely subjective?
It might "work" for someone to pretend they are a venus fly-trap and subsist off only bugs, water, and sunlight, but I think it would be very confused to say it is true that they are actually a plant.
|
AnattaAtman
Mad Bodhisattva

Registered: 09/25/21
Posts: 377
Last seen: 16 days, 4 hours
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: Svetaketu] 1
#28446066 - 08/25/23 05:35 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Svetaketu said: For example, if someone believes in a god, and they believe this idea improves their life, does that mean it "works"?
I suppose so. Who am I to deny someone an approach which improves his life, just because it doesn't fit my idea of what is true and what is false?
Quote:
Who decides whether something is working or not? Is it purely subjective?
The corresponding philosophy is called Pragmatism. Peirce explained it best, in his words:
"Consider the practical effects of the objects of your conception. Then, your conception of those effects is the whole of your conception of the object."
The main point here is that he talks about the practical effects. If a belief improves your life, and it only works for you, it is subjective, but if it works for everyone, I guess it must be objective. It can be considered true in either case. We can call it subjective truth and objective truth, or relative truth and universal truth. For example, the eightfold path works for everyone, so that means it is an universal truth. The belief in God is a relative truth, In my understanding, since it works for some and not for others.
Quote:
It might "work" for someone to pretend they are a venus fly-trap and subsist off only bugs, water, and sunlight, but I think it would be very confused to say it is true that they are actually a plant.
Well, a fly-trap cannot think. If you really believe to be a plant, you would have to stop thinking, but then again, this defies the general idea of believing to be a plant. Kind of going around in circles. A plant does not know it is a plant. This seems to mean that the whole idea is nonsense, it does not work.
Edited by AnattaAtman (08/25/23 05:41 AM)
|
connectedcosmos
Neti Neti



Registered: 02/07/15
Posts: 7,426
Loc: The Pathless Path
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: Svetaketu]
#28446077 - 08/25/23 06:01 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
I really like that definition of truth
Because the definition of truth is shady business anyway
Itll lead one in to a viscous circle of the three words truth, fact, reality
--------------------
 54. The true nature of things is to be known personally , through the eyes of clear illumination and not through a sage : what the moon exactly is , is to be known with one's own eyes ; can another make him know it?
|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: connectedcosmos] 1
#28446087 - 08/25/23 06:27 AM (5 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Truth is what works implies means, so though appealing, Anatta's statement is instead, what works for you is correct if not violating other things. Then there is the idea of an absolute truth as Svekatu is speaking of which is where there is conflation.
But what are we absolutely? By the same reasoning we could say we are also pretending to be humans, like venus fly traps. So all truths perhaps, conventional or not, are means to find something that works, and not absolute.
But there are immovable truths in the world of forms, like a triangle of certain proportions. So the mind easily makes absolute truth that seems not to be found in the world.
Quote:
The world of forms, also known as the realm of ideas or the realm of concepts, is a philosophical concept introduced by Plato. It refers to a non-physical realm where perfect and eternal forms or ideas exist. These forms are considered to be the true reality, while the physical world we perceive is merely a flawed reflection or imitation of these forms.
|
spinvis
Stranger

Registered: 09/15/20
Posts: 586
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: syncro] 2
#28446369 - 08/25/23 12:30 PM (5 months, 19 hours ago) |
|
|
Ramesh S. Balsekar - Foreword - Wei Wu Wei - Fingers Pointing Towards the Moon: Reflections of a Pilgrim on the Way;
Quote:
Consciousness is all there is; other than Consciousness, nothing is. And this is a concept. . . . Make no mistake: whatever I say—whatever its impact—is a concept. It is not the truth. A concept is something that someone may accept and someone may not. The Truth is that which no one can deny. And therefore the only Truth, in phenomenality, is “I AM”—the impersonal Awareness of Being. On this basis, whatever any sage has ever said, whatever any scripture of any religion says is a concept.
Alan Watts - Intelligent Mindlessness;
Quote:
Now, what is the real world? Some people have the theory that the real world is material or physical. They say it’s made of a kind of stuff. Other people have the theory that the real world is spiritual or mental. But I want you to point out that both those theories of the world are concepts. They are constructions of words. And the real world is not an idea, it is not words. Reality is: [GONG] You’ll find, therefore, that if you get with reality, all sorts of illusions disappear.
|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: spinvis]
#28446386 - 08/25/23 12:49 PM (5 months, 19 hours ago) |
|
|
Though forms are consciousness, it's said as well, on a level, these are eternal. As said, because (if) they are loving, they are like the divine, therefore eternal. I wonder often, then if of mind, why aren't unloving thought forms eternal?
I think because they cannot be untroubled, and therefore are unstable, with no substantial sustaining force. But on some level, as we see before us, such thoughts reappear as if eternal, though always in impermanence, attached/repulsed to forms themselves without love.
Edited by syncro (08/25/23 01:37 PM)
|
durian_2008
Cornucopian Eating an Elephant



Registered: 04/02/08
Posts: 16,666
Loc: Raccoon City
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: spinvis]
#28446388 - 08/25/23 12:50 PM (5 months, 19 hours ago) |
|
|
I would like to tweek such an illusion for long enough to have a joyride, within God's permissive will, with no harm intended toward innocent bystanders.
|
spinvis
Stranger

Registered: 09/15/20
Posts: 586
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: durian_2008]
#28446453 - 08/25/23 01:38 PM (5 months, 18 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
syncro said: Though forms are consciousness, it said as well, on a level, these are eternal. As said, because (if) they are loving, they are like the divine, therefore eternal. I wonder often, then if of mind, why aren't unloving thought forms eternal?
I think because they cannot be untroubled, and therefore are unstable, with no substantial sustaining force. But on some level, as we see before us, such thoughts reappear as if eternal, though always in impermanence, attached/repulsed to forms themselves without love.
If I'm understanding this correctly, this is also somewhat related to our other discussion with regards to manifestation of the "shadow"? In that case see my reply in that thread here.
Quote:
durian_2008 said: I would like to tweek such an illusion for long enough to have a joyride, within God's permissive will, with no harm intended toward innocent bystanders.

Hahaha what makes you believe that wouldn't be a valid part of the whole 
|
durian_2008
Cornucopian Eating an Elephant



Registered: 04/02/08
Posts: 16,666
Loc: Raccoon City
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: spinvis]
#28446464 - 08/25/23 01:48 PM (5 months, 18 hours ago) |
|
|
Also, why does she have to wait for the cookies to get done.
|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: spinvis]
#28446479 - 08/25/23 02:00 PM (5 months, 18 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
spinvis said:
Quote:
syncro said: Though forms are consciousness, it said as well, on a level, these are eternal. As said, because (if) they are loving, they are like the divine, therefore eternal. I wonder often, then if of mind, why aren't unloving thought forms eternal?
I think because they cannot be untroubled, and therefore are unstable, with no substantial sustaining force. But on some level, as we see before us, such thoughts reappear as if eternal, though always in impermanence, attached/repulsed to forms themselves without love.
If I'm understanding this correctly, this is also somewhat related to our other discussion with regards to manifestation of the "shadow"? In that case see my reply in that thread here.
I saw and appreciated that post. Mine may have not been such a relevant reply to your quotes. But just saying that I agree with the absolute nature of consciousness or being beyond perception and form, though also, forms, thoughts, are or can be eternal.
And then musing around why unloving thoughts though appearing so, are not said to be eternal.
|
Svetaketu
The Devil's Avocado 🥑


Registered: 10/08/15
Posts: 1,508
Loc: United States
Last seen: 19 hours, 35 minutes
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: syncro]
#28447392 - 08/26/23 12:40 PM (4 months, 30 days ago) |
|
|
I mean, I have no problem with pragmatism in practice. If something is working for you, by all means continue using it. In general I don't care what people believe or do as long as they aren't hurting anyone.
I just also believe that there is an objective reality outside of our awareness. It's my personal goal in life to get as close to understanding this reality as possible.
Of course that's sort of a fools errand, as basically nothing is actually verifiable in the absolute sense.
But IMO, with some very basic assumptions (the laws of Identity, contradiction, and excluded middle) most things that actually affect my life in the here and now can come into focus, and can be easily be communicated to others if they understand basic logic.
I would love it if humanity could agree on some kind of consensus reality, as most of our history is people slaughtering each other on the basis of confused imaginary nonsense. Again, I realize this is a fools errand, but I can't help trying.
Pragmatism has an allure, but the pure subjectivity of it bothers me. Reality is not subjective. The problem with subjective truth is that anyone can use it to justify anything that they want, including atrocities and insanity.
|
durian_2008
Cornucopian Eating an Elephant



Registered: 04/02/08
Posts: 16,666
Loc: Raccoon City
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: Svetaketu]
#28447455 - 08/26/23 01:39 PM (4 months, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I mean, I have no problem with pragmatism in practice. If something is working for you, by all means continue using it. In general I don't care what people believe or do as long as they aren't hurting anyone.
No one should get led on a wild gooschace by any hypothetical line of discussion I have started.
When it comes to giving false hope to the medically disabled or terrorizing someone with legal responsibilities, I think that outright lying on the part of a snakeoil salesman should provoke a shitstorm of Medieval proportions.
|
AnattaAtman
Mad Bodhisattva

Registered: 09/25/21
Posts: 377
Last seen: 16 days, 4 hours
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: Svetaketu]
#28512948 - 10/21/23 12:27 PM (3 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Svetaketu said: For example, if someone believes in a god, and they believe this idea improves their life, does that mean it "works"?
You are right, that does not necessarily mean that God exists. I think the pragmatic approach would be prayer.
If prayer works, then God exits.
|
syncro
Registered: 01/14/15
Posts: 2,696
Last seen: 6 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: What are your thoughts on this line of thinking? [Re: AnattaAtman]
#28513084 - 10/21/23 02:06 PM (3 months, 5 days ago) |
|
|
How about Buddhist prayer such as use of mantra that doesn't imply God per se? Though it still would imply divine or subtle natures, so for practical purposes, God. Tilopa's, "the mind is a bright light", might as well be theist though as a tantric doesn't represent all of Buddhism.
|
|