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


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!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]
Re: truth? [Re: Nomad]
    #632646 -

When I first experienced ego-loss, I decided that the assumption that my outer layers of skin are where "Me" ends and "The Universe" begins, is a very, very arbitrary one.
I have to challenge you on this one.

Webster - arbitrary:
based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something.

Where our skin ends seems to be a fairly universal constraint of what "we" are and is certainly intrinsic to the human body.

You buy clothes to fit YOUR BODY. You are concerned with YOUR appearance, ideas, sexual attraction, possessions, health, wealth, etc.

When someone close to you dies, you do NOT feel anything until you are made aware of it at some later time. It is not simultaneous. You do NOT feel what the other felt, only the emotional impact that it will have on your future which are mostly selfish feelings of loss. Your body is certainly unharmed by their injury or demise. You sensed nothing about 911 NYC until you flipped on the TV. If there was no news you would be totally unaware.

This speaks of our awareness ending at the senses of our body. Now we may be dependent on 100,000 other people to build our car, grow and ship our food, etc., but dependency and oneness are entirely different concepts.

Yet I think that a lot of pain could be spared if we would just stop arguing...
If we are all one, who is arguing with whom?

On a side note, arguing (frequently and incorrectly misconstrued as bickering) is an accepted part of philosophical debate. To deny that aspect is ignorance. (Can't we do math WITHOUT numbers?)


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: truth? [Re: Nomad]
    #632720 -

[image]http://heritage.stsci.edu/2001/05/big.html[/image]

Had to put this one!


--------------------
Simple cries pleasantly plea for a friendly follower as wisely whispers request to reveal the water's wandering

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: truth? [Re: Epignostic]
    #632737 -

A little too big, I guess?



--------------------
Simple cries pleasantly plea for a friendly follower as wisely whispers request to reveal the water's wandering

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
The jokes roll forth [Re: Swami]
    #632863 -

I love it. Swami is taking issue with ambiguous terminology. Ha!

Maybe Nomad has a "particular" definition of ambiguous in mind. Surely you can't object to that! At least Nomad's is a little more apparent from the context.

hongomon

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: truth? [Re: Swami]
    #632922 -

Webster - arbitrary: based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something.

Where our skin ends seems to be a fairly universal constraint of what "we" are and is certainly intrinsic to the human body.

To define yourself as the part of the universe within your skin is determined by individual preference (it's a definition), by convenience (it makes buying clothes easier), not by necessity (you won't die if you don't), and, finally, not by the intrinsic nature of the human body, because the intrinsic nature of the human body would be everything we can experience with this body, including ego-loss. It's arbitrary. It can be a very useful thing to do, but it's arbitrary.

You are concerned with YOUR appearance, ideas, sexual attraction, possessions, health, wealth, etc.

I'm not concerned with at least three of the things you listed above, but I won't tell you which ones

When someone close to you dies, you do NOT feel anything until you are made aware of it at some later time. It is not simultaneous.

I never claimed it is. In another post (now lost forever) I designed a simple universe which consists of you and a tree. If you take the tree away, the effect is exactly the same as if you destroy parts of your brain. Thus, I claim that the tree is part of your consciousness, a part of what makes "you". If you kill the tree, you kill a part of yourself. The very fact that you feel pain when someone else dies seems to strengthen this idea.

This speaks of our awareness ending at the senses of our body. Now we may be dependent on 100,000 other people to build our car, grow and ship our food, etc., but dependency and oneness are entirely different concepts.

I agree, but so are awareness and consciousness. I didn't claim that I'm aware of everything in the universe. But since I'm also not aware of most things that happen in my subconscious brain, the universe can still be a part of myself, even if I am not aware of everything which happens inside it.

If we are all one, who is arguing with whom?

A zen master sat quietly fanning himself with air. A disciple came along and asked, "Master, if the wind is eternal and everywhere, why are you still fanning yourself?" The master replied: "You do well understand that the wind is eternal, but you have yet to grasp the fact that it is everywhere."

On a side note, arguing (frequently and incorrectly misconstrued as bickering) is an accepted part of philosophical debate. To deny that aspect is ignorance.

Which, I assume, was related to the quote above:

Yet I think that a lot of pain could be spared if we would just stop arguing...

I admire your cleverness, but it's still a misquote (but a clever one, indeed). What follows is: ... stop arguing which is the true model of the universe.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: truth? [Re: Epignostic]
    #632933 -

html won't work


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: truth? [Re: Nomad]
    #633050 -

The very fact that you feel pain when someone else dies seems to strengthen this idea [of oneness].
Not at all. There is no pain felt upon the death of another; only on the idea of their death. This is an important distinction.

My ENRON stock goes under and I can no longer buy my new 500HP Dodge Viper, so I feel pain. Pain is merely a refusal to accept "what is"; it is hardly an indicator of oneness.


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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The jokes roll forth [Re: hongomon]
    #633061 -

I love it. Swami is taking issue with ambiguous terminology. Ha!
I love it. hongomon is trying to enter a gunfight with blanks.

hongoman has a serious reading disability in that he cannot tell the difference between "arbitrary" and "ambiguous".



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



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The jokes roll forth [Re: Swami]
    #633085 -

hongoman has a serious reading disability

Tell me about it...
Hongo- I'm not trying to pick on you if have a diagnosed learning disability. So, please, let us know if you do have a handicap (I mean this in an extremely polite way).


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The jokes roll forth [Re: Swami]
    #633212 -

Arrgh! Well, at least it's nice to know that even when I put one word--ambiguous--when another--arbitrary--is intended, my meaning is not lost in ambiguity.

I could challenge your definition of "serious reading disability," (for a malapropism??) but why bother?

Furthermore, Nomad has shown very well that he was not arbitrary in his selection of "arbitrary."

hongomon

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The jokes roll forth [Re: hongomon]
    #633278 -

I could challenge your definition of "serious reading disability," (for a malapropism??) but why bother?

Doubtful.
But hey, if you get a kick out of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, then by all means....


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Question sclurchster [Re: Sclorch]
    #633652 -

Who the fuck are you anyway? Swami's little sidekick? The Sancho to the Don? I've been reading back into the archives here and I've noticed a pattern.

Well, ya got me. It took me a while to realize that Swami the cake contaminant, the dude my issues are with, is in the john or something, and the little yes-man sclurchster is eating the leftovers.

I'm done for now. With both of you. Maybe another time. There are some really interesting people on this forum (like I said I've been reading back), and no offense, but you're not two of them. It's not just that you seem to enjoy the battle more than I do, it's not just that half of what you say illicits a "heh?" or a snort and not much more, it's not just the irratating chimera-like appearances you often make, and it's not just the fact that I already feel guilty enough for the contention I've brought in. It's a combination of these things.

See ya

hongomon

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The jokes roll forth [Re: Swami]
    #633653 -

are you ignoring me swami? or you just don't want to answer the question?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The jokes roll forth [Re: deep_umbra]
    #633659 -

Maybe sclorch can answer for him.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: truth? [Re: ]
    #633681 -

In reply to:

That's not even the galaxy we live in. It's far far away.



Oh! I thought NASA had drivin their spaceshuttle 20000 lightyears out there to take a photo of our galaxy..

hehe sorry

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The jokes roll forth [Re: hongomon]
    #633687 -

In reply to:

Maybe sclorch can answer for him.



Maybe.. but I think Sclorch is too busy hanging out in a pig pen playing in mud or something.. possibly with swami?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Question sclurchster [Re: hongomon]
    #633890 -

Baby killer...

I had a girlfriend like you once... well, she was less bitchy.
Same emotional rollercoaster though. Oh well....


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Question sclurchster [Re: Sclorch]
    #633895 -

I thought the point of this board was spirituality and philosophy. I fail to see where "and personal attacks" comes in. Why cant people share ideas and arguments, with respect, without getting personal, even if it is tempting.
Some people wont ever change their point of view, even with rational arguments, but venting the resulting frustration in a personal attack never achieves anything (that I've discovered anyway, If someone can show me evidence of it, then I might be willing to change my mind)

Just a thought.

Cheers,
Jono


--------------------
Our problem results from acting like cowboys on a limitless frontier when in truth we inhabit a living spaceship with a finely balanced life-support system." David C. Korton

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Question sclurchster [Re: jono]
    #634142 -

I think you're right, Jono. I apologize. I may slip back some day, but in the meantime I'll try a little harder.

peace,

hongomon

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Let the Bong Decide [Re: jono]
    #634299 -

I thought the point of this board was spirituality and philosophy. I fail to see where "and personal attacks" comes in. Why cant people share ideas and arguments, with respect, without getting personal, even if it is tempting.


But he... he.. he starte...
*pointing finger at ______*
Aw.... fug it!
*click click burbleburbleburble*
It's cool man...


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds

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

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Truth constantly changing MushroomTrip 2,072 14 04/14/07 08:52 AM
by MushroomTrip
* On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense *DELETED* Lakefingers 1,377 6 04/21/06 02:37 AM
by Shroomerious
* The Official Truth Thread - No jokes please!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )		 World Spirit 20,225 178 10/31/02 12:23 AM
by Strumpling
* Independent Truth- a road to greater empowerment and freedom
( 1 2 all )		 gettinjiggywithit 3,100 25 09/04/04 06:59 AM
by Simisu
* Truth the_phoenix 1,347 18 12/25/04 07:39 AM
by the_phoenix
* The Nature of Truth AlteredAgain 1,602 12 09/21/07 09:54 AM
by Icelander
* Reality and Truth
( 1 2 3 all )		 TheShroomHermit 4,595 43 04/17/04 12:27 AM
by Zero7a1
* Killing Truth
( 1 2 all )		 Nomad 1,735 25 04/15/06 06:23 AM
by BlueCoyote

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
5,938 topic views. 0 members, 33 guests and 9 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 0.027 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 15 queries.