Spirituality
04 Nov 10
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by bbarrBut still you see specific koans as products of “inhabitable conditions” and thus worth solely of a profound “blah”! After your "blah", what?
Yep, I'm done with the Spirituality forum. The good ol' days are gone. Too bad, really, since this was the most philosophically sophisticated of the RHP fora. Now it is a wasteland of jibberish.
No interaction no koan because
there is nobody to point it out for you. If I see no thing and you see no thing, how could we ever know that we see the same?
Taco and Vishvahetu are nothing but self-contained koans amongst else; how could they ever be "inhabitable"?
The sole space available is the space of your mind and you can go wherever you want. Which region exactly is "inhabitable"?
Methinks first one establishes specific epistemic instruments and solely then one gets access to specific epistemic objects. The choice of your own epistemic instruments and their exact function should be understood perfectly in your system, and you should offer this system with clarity. Perception, inference, recognition of likeness and testimony are the sole agents that will ease you to establish your specific set of (your) instruments, and you have to know whether a specific instrument is indicated for the specific object (of yours).
The same goes for my system too: we have already agree regarding this matter, we have also address the further question of how to establish our instruments and we know that these instruments are good guides to the objects of the World 1. In your opinion, master bbarr, how did we came to know it?
Wasteland of jibbberish
Hell
Koan
Paradise
Cause-Effect
Wu wei
This and That
methinks It's only You
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by black beetleYour prose is so opaque, I have no idea what you're asking.
But still you see specific koans as products of “inhabitable conditions” and thus worth solely of a profound “blah”! After your "blah", what?
No interaction no koan because
there is nobody to point it out for you. If I see no thing and you see no thing, how could we ever know that we see the same?
Taco and Vishvahetu are nothing but self-contained ko ...[text shortened]... h
Hell
Koan
Paradise
Cause-Effect
Wu wei
This and That
methinks It's only You
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by bbarr-- "So my dear barr you found the virtue you were looking for in wu wei in the past; me wanna dance"
Your prose is so opaque, I have no idea what you're asking.
-- "Well if I found it I certainly didn't do so by looking for it. I'm just trying, in a sense, to stay out of my own way."
-- "There is no thing to be found"
-- "But there is an inhabitable state."
-- "Who are you?"
-- "Blah."
-- "After your "blah", what?"
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by black beetleThis is just obscurity masquerading as insight. In prose, I deal in arguments, and the giving and taking of reasons. If you have a question, ask it plainly.
-- "So my dear barr you found the virtue you were looking for in wu wei in the past; me wanna dance"
-- "Well if I found it I certainly didn't do so by looking for it. I'm just trying, in a sense, to stay out of my own way."
-- "There is no thing to be found"
-- "But there is an inhabitable state."
-- "Who are you?"
-- "Blah."
-- "After your "blah", what?"
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by bbarrNew York politician allowed for measured nuance one day decades
This is just obscurity masquerading as insight. In prose, I deal in arguments, and the giving and taking of reasons. If you have a question, ask it plainly.
ago when he said, "We campaign in poetry, then govern in prose."
05 Nov 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Agergah my dear Agers but here is the crux of the matter, you may try to describe the mechanics of perception in purely materialistic terms but the arguments fail when we consider the why of the matter, for i think that you will agree that art, literature, music etc are certainly superfluous to our survival and thus to reduce them to pure mechanics is really not very satisfying at all.
Surprisingly, I don't hold any notions of objective beauty. Even more surprising, in the subjective sense, I claim that the perception of beauty *can* be reduced to wholly material terms; for example, the processing of various sensory inputs that takes place in our brains perhaps manifests the perception of "beauty" if they are in symphony with the way s of being that are beyond your perception...so challenging your notions of it is fair game.
That objective beauty exists should be the case, for art galleries and museums attract millions of appreciative visitors every year. I do not deny that you may have a predisposition towards some types of art, its a matter of taste to be sure, but that others also share this same appreciation leads me to the conclusion that its not as subjective as we think.
As for evaluating spiritual things, we have of course as beetle points out our minds and we may indeed draw inferences and reasons from the way we perceive these 'unseen', realities and this I think is where spirituality begins. As a Christian of course i may draw upon the inspiration of the ancient text also. You of course are free to challenge these notions, however, to reduce them to mechanics cannot be done, for they are spiritual and belong in the spiritual realm.
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by divegeestertaco doesnt troll. taco is a ninja. i define forum ninja like someone invisible, someone who's deeds never come to light.
By two spamming idiots vishvahetu and tacoandlettuce.
You people who encourage and tolerate their trolling are not doing this site any favours.
seriously, does anyone else post such bland and pointless crapola as taco? his posts aren't the stuff of trolls because they trigger no heated discussion. they trigger nothing whatsoever.
taco posts are a waste of space. not trolling