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: Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |  [ show all ]
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8375771 -

Ego is a disease of consciousness, as we promote it today. There is a natural completeness to everything, and we can access it within ourselves. This stream leads to Oneness - non-differentiation.

It's really not a matter of debate, it's a matter of experience. You can experience everything as One, just as convincingly as you experience everything as other.


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

Wherever the hero may wander, whatever he may do, he is ever in the presence of his own essence — for he has the perfected eye to see. There is no separateness. Thus, just as the way of social participation may lead in the end to a realization of the All in the individual, so that of exile brings the hero to the Self in all.

joseph campbell


For, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

jesus

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #8375827 -

Quote:
but would you admit that you have a soul?


Upon what would I possible base such an assumption - a childhood story?

Because you ascribe to the we are all one POV, you never get angry, irritated or disappointed at another human being, correct?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8375839 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
There is nothing cosmic about the concept of sets and subsets; these are mere mental groupings and point to no underlying unifying strata.

I predict that 5 pages later we will have made no advancements on this subject nor will any one offer to give me all their stuff. :hissyfit:


I guess I haven't been here long enough to be burnt out on this topic...

I wish you would at least acknowledge my question though.  How can awareness be anything other than what I've said?

Awareness may be something that comes from our souls.
If you don't think we have eternal souls, than you probably see awareness as a function of the brain, yes? And the brain is not separate from reality, so awareness is a function of reality. 

In the same way that there must be mass for gravity to be evident, so must there be a certain arrangement of atoms (a brain) for awareness to appear.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8375861 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
but would you admit that you have a soul?


Upon what would I possible base such an assumption - a childhood story?

Because you ascribe to the we are all one POV, you never get angry, irritated or disappointed at another human being, correct?


I don't believe I ever said we share the same ideas, opinions, or viewpoints.  It is awareness itself which I think is shared among us all, not the contents of that awareness.  I think you're projecting other's ideas on to me simply because I mention oneness. :confused:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #8375863 -

If everything wasn't connected how would the universe stay together? Seems like basic logic to me that everything has to be connected at some point to create a solid structure.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: DimensionX]
    #8375887 -

And this is how these BS discussions always go. So now we are talking about gravity?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8375903 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
And this is how these BS discussions always go. So now we are talking about gravity?


I refuse to believe you don't understand how metaphors work.

Why are you avoiding my main point again and again?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8375904 -

Asking for what your physical body can get for itself, defeats the point of having a body. Provider and provided might work on a physical level, but on a spiritual level, this IS separation. It's the illusion of polarity as the highest reality. IOW, outside of physical needs, you have everything you need, and need nothing from me, and we are both the same in that regard.

It's when people seek emotional validation from others or some outside force, like the One Religion, or Government, or personal relationships, or... mysticism, that the illusion of separation is present. In your example, the desire for other peoples stuff, which is not needed for the body, is just another indicator of separation.

So basically, no.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Edited by Rahz (05/08/08 12:27 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #8375998 -

I refuse to believe that you fail to understand that I was replying to DimensionX.

Let's recap, shall we? So far oneness = soul, awareness, The Big Bang, mathematical sets, lack of ego, gravitational attraction, the spirit world and so on.

So no real definition, no consensus; just a shotgun of words. Hence the need to bitchslap...


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

Edited by OrgoneConclusion (05/08/08 12:56 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8376018 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
I refuse to believe that you fail to undertsnad that I was replying to DimensionX.

Let's recap, shall we? So far oneness = soul, awareness, The Big Bang, mathematical sets, lack of ego, gravitational attraction, the spirit world and so on.

So no real definition, no consensus; just a shotgun of words. Hence the need to bitchslap...


Oh my mistake, I thought you were replying to me cause I mentioned gravity.

I don't expect to find any hard answers here or anywhere else in life.  I think the difference is, where you see a shotgun of words I see a warm bubble bath of ideas.

Your bitchslap thread was actually what inspired me to finally sign up. :heart:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #8376070 -

no mind = no separation

all is one, meaning all is goose, all is beaver, all is #$@@#$), all is is. it IS, afterall, a hyperbolic soliliquy of creation perpetually...alas...goose..

Orgone, if all isn't one, what is all? is it a bunch of separate things? yet, the word all. it implies all that is as one...so all is all.. ie, all is one, ie all is goose, ie our entire existence is but a blink of the cosmic eye.


--------------------
in all of Infinite
there is but One
and it is nOne
ever and always
in every and all ways

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8376114 -

I don't really know why I'm choosing to have a discussion with someone who calls all the other opinions bullshit and says he wants to bitch slap the people who make them. I personally have better, less tiresome things to do, so ill clarify what i said then leave you guys to it.

I wasn't actually talking about gravity and never mentioned the word. If something is in no way connected to something else then they are not part of the same structure. And since its generally agreed that we are all part of the same structure which we call the universe, we must all be connected to it and be part of the same whole.

Edited by DimensionX (05/08/08 01:34 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: DimensionX]
    #8376162 -

Read again. It is not that I am calling other's opinions bullshit as first the opinion must be clearly stated. With at least half a dozen different defintions of what oneness means(so far!),perhaps you should huddle with the others  who believe in oneness and come up with something specific that we can discuss.

Let me make this perfectly clear: IT IS VAGUENESS that is bullshit and impossible to discuss.

Of course, I already stated this numerous times.

Quote:
I wasn't actually talking about gravity and never mentioned the word.


Let's see what you said:
Quote:
If everything wasn't connected how would the universe stay together?


The universe 'stays together' because of gravity.

You discount your own statement or know of another force as yet undiscovered my physicists. :rolleyes:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: DimensionX]
    #8376189 -

Quote:
we are all part of the same structure which we call the universe


Naming and grouping is a human construct and implies nothing.

I could take a group of 100 people and group them in near-infinite ways: young and old; male and female, black and white, conservative and liberal; ALL of these are constructs and do not speak to any underlying reality.


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

Edited by OrgoneConclusion (05/08/08 02:33 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8376200 -

so all is not one to you, kind sir Orgone? :etbig:


--------------------
in all of Infinite
there is but One
and it is nOne
ever and always
in every and all ways

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8376522 -

OrgoneConclusion said:
Read again. It is not that I am calling other's opinions bullshit as first the opinion must be clearly stated. With at least half a dozen different defintions of what oneness means(so far!),perhaps you should huddle with the others who believe in oneness and come up with something specific that we can discuss.

Let me make this perfectly clear: IT IS VAGUENESS that is bullshit and impossible to discuss.




Many spiritual ideas can be understood through implication, but don't lend themselves to deconstruction into words.

I know, you probably have an issue with the phrase 'spiritual ideas' too. That's fine. Phrases are problematic for everyone, particularly to anyone insists everything is verbally definable. To give something a name is to replace it mentally with a word. It works great for all kinds of objective concepts whose nature can be reduced to a phrase (and handled mentally by that phrase), but our gorgeous language falls short for everything else. Do you contend there is no "everything else" in this context?

So, no we can't really have a meaningful explicit discussion about it; that does not mean the concept of oneness holds no meaning. Any dialogue concerning oneness (or whatever ultimately erroneous term you choose) is going to be vague and may make little rational sense if you want everything to be tied up into neat little english-language definitions and concepts. Language has limited capability to convey understanding, and anything outside that limit does not make good thread material.

That is why this topic will go on for pages and pages without yielding that perfect combination of letters and words that will give you your objective basis. Don't worry, we're almost halfway to five pages already, then you can pat yourself on the back stick your tongue out at everyone if you like.

The inadequacy of conceptualizing spiritual ideas is well known.


--------------------
Welcome evermore to gods and men is the self-helping man.  For him all doors are flung wide: him all tongues greet, all honors crown, all eyes follow with desire.  Our love goes out to him and embraces him, because he did not need it.

~ R.W. Emerson, "Self-Reliance"

:heartpump:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #8376586 -

Well if the concept of oneness is being described as the concept of a singularity point, and a singularity point contains everything, it must also contain separatism.

So I conclude we are all one and all separate at the same time. So, no, in this context you can't have my stuff and one love, brother.


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

"I'm looking at you looking at it"

SUBSCRIBE TO MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL PLEASE! www.youtube.com/apollyphelion



Creator of the World's Worst Comic Book

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: Sleepwalker]
    #8376597 -

I believe Orgy is particularly irate at Oweyervishice because he hasn't really described his point very well; it all just appears as a jumble of words with no real meaning.

Quote:
I assume we all have experiences.

Yes.
Quote:
Experience implies that there is someone experiencing.

By definition, yes.
Quote:
This awareness seems to reside in the brain, which is a construct of the universe.

Assuming you refer to the fact that it's a physical object, then yes.

So I'm with you on your premises. Can you take this further and explain exactly what your point is?


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: zouden]
    #8376608 -

zouden said:
I'm with you on your premises. Can you take this further and explain exactly what your point is?


Sure, I'll repeat this one more time...

You agree with me that awareness and experience implies there is someone having these experiences. So who am "I"?

Those same skeptics who refuse the idea that we are all one, are also usually the ones who refuse the idea that we have individual souls. It seems to me, though, you can't discard both of these. Awareness either resides in the soul, or in the brain. Saying that awareness is a result of brain activity is the same as saying that your sense of "I" is a result of brain activity. If your sense of self is simply brain activity, simply an illusion, all that is left is the ONE, the UNIverse.

It is hard for me to tell if I've made this point clear...over and over...because it has been nicely sidestepped every time.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Oneness vs Skeptics [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8376619 -

Quote:
To those who believe we are all one, send me your money, drugs, fast car and hot girlfriend. You would not deny yourself, would you?


Why do you equate 'oneness' with 'believe we are all one'?

All of my experiences with 'oneness' have been in altered states (induced from meditation or from drug use). With this in mind, I have no idea of the validity of my experiences as they relate to our perceived reality.

For me, oneness is the dualistic opposite of duality; something that coexists with our reality, in paradox, in order to define the nature of our reality.

For me, oneness implies that 'being' is seen as a whole, all at once. Although it implies that we are all part of the same, it does not prevent us from being separate as well; much the way white light is both a single color and a collection of individual colors depending upon how it is viewed.

There is a Zen koan that goes something like: "The fish in the pond screams in pain when I kill the mosquito on my arm." The koan sums up what I am trying to express very nicely.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

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

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* More on Descartes UrQuattro 1,033 8 06/05/02 05:41 AM
by Papaver
* Scary thoughts on hell
( 1 2 all )		 Crasher 8,114 38 06/25/24 10:47 AM
by DBATCCATP
* The Skeptic System LearyfanS 2,556 18 04/20/02 10:07 AM
by Floydian
* Damn Close-Minded Skeptics Swami 2,989 18 06/20/02 02:19 AM
by LOBO
* Whats wrong with being a skeptic
( 1 2 3 all )		 seeker 4,899 42 06/08/03 11:04 PM
by Sclorch
* Thoughts on Magick...
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Anonymous 6,236 68 11/20/01 02:40 AM
by Swami
* No such thing as a skeptic Swami 1,455 10 05/02/02 05:00 AM
by Nomez
* The Contamination on the Cake...
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 3,728 37 04/16/02 02:46 PM
by CACA

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
13,774 topic views. 0 members, 195 guests and 42 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 0.031 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 15 queries.