Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 14681 - 14700 of total 23238 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jun 14, 2013 - 07:49pm PT
OK, Thats a Big 10-4 Rubber Duck!

But, you must serve this by an itemized line by line inventory so that the scientific minds can c-a-t-o-r-i-g-i-z-e..

Jus Play'in
BB
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jun 14, 2013 - 07:57pm PT
That's the point of harping on separating out the subjctive and objective. They both form one reality, but quantifiers like to consider the objective as a stand alone thing, and noting is stand alone. Nothng has independent existence. The fact that my discursive mind can objectify something, and measure it, and test it, and can yank one tree out of the forest to analyze does in no wise mean there are trees that live all alone somewhere, separate from not only the forst but from life and perception and reality itself. This is how the discursive mind tricks all of us, but you will never come to "know" anything outside of your own perceiving of it, so our true efforts of removing the observer from reality are always doomed to fail, by design.

^^^Poetic...



Edit: do U have a trademark?
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 14, 2013 - 08:00pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Jun 14, 2013 - 08:01pm PT
Perhaps the aliens could "see" what the Gazelle was thinking. Or what was on the Gazelles conscious.

Inventive and interesting.

Perhaps this is something some of us can already do, or that all of could do, if sensitized to noticing it. I suspect we have far more than 5 senses.

When you and I meet on the street, and I say, "how's it going," so do you give a pleasant social response, do you think, "mmmmm, I dunno: how IS it going for me today?", or do you do or say something that falls outside of either? What's really going on when we're writing to each other here? Are we communicating, or are there other things altogether different going on?

I'm getting the sense that communications, visions, hearing, tactile feelings, thoughts are simply the most rudimentarily perceived energy flows. I mean a lot seems to be going on, but calling it (labeling) what it seems to be seems rudimentary, almost childish.

So instead of enunciating some social pleasantry when we meet or attempting to respond to the words denotatively, perhaps I should simply say, "energy flow," and you say the same.

One can almost feel the flux of energy when one walks into a room, eavesdrops on to a conversation, enters into a chat room, touches another person, or observes animals in their habitats. It can be electrifying and profound. But since we've been taught to pay attention to only our physical senses, we discount these things. "They're nothing but silly superstitions" or "complex visual cues."

I could see beings sensing what gazelle were thinking or feeling.


Edit: What are those, Dr. F. Looks good enough to eat!
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jun 14, 2013 - 08:01pm PT
I Love THIS life!!!
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Jun 14, 2013 - 08:22pm PT
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jun 14, 2013 - 08:23pm PT
, if sensitized to noticing it.

I try to become more sensitive to the Hummingbirds that enter my yard everyday!
(I have some good pics Mh2). And also to the lizards. They all seem VERY predictive, and droll..

I think I was too sensitized to my dog "jake". I believe God let him be taken away early,
so that I would become MORE sensitiZed toward my family?
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Jun 14, 2013 - 09:20pm PT
The irony lies in trying to use the analytical tool of language to describe (and apparently promote) a state of consciousness that doesn't require (and apparently resents) language, because language points to things, and things are exactly what it's not interested in.

Let me guess - "No, you simpleton, that's precisely where you've got it wrong, and seemingly always will."

Mmmm. Okay, then.

So, in my darkness, I also wonder about the repeated comment that zen "has no content." Because that sounds like, really zen dude, but something that has no content would, by definition, leave no trace. And yet we have these apparent things out in that shimmering void that look like this:



...that by virtue of their existence denote content, even if that content is essentially only an apprehension.






Let me guess....
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jun 14, 2013 - 09:31pm PT
Guessing is futile.
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Jun 14, 2013 - 09:38pm PT
MH2

climber
Jun 14, 2013 - 10:43pm PT
I like lizards. I did before I had a word or name for them. What I have learned since has added to my liking for lizards.
MH2

climber
Jun 14, 2013 - 10:54pm PT
And so those of us who have decided to try anothr tact, and to actually venture inside the house


When I was a kid I loved to leave the house early in the morning. It would be light but the sun would not be up yet. The air was damp and full of smells. Birds would be singing and animals would be on the move. I would explore the hills and creeks, turn over rocks and logs, and climb the trees. The world outside the house was full of fascinating colors, shapes, sounds, textures, patterns, and creatures. The house itself was fine for getting in out of the rain and for snacks.

When I read the descriptions of meditation and self-contemplation on this thread it makes me think that parts of some of your houses need repair and that your practice helps with that.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Jun 14, 2013 - 10:59pm PT
When I was a kid I loved to leave the house early in the morning. It would be light but the sun would not be up yet. The air was damp and full of smells. Birds would be singing and animals would be on the move. I would explore the hills and creeks, turn over rocks and logs, and climb the trees. The world outside the house was full of fascinating colors, shapes, sounds, textures, patterns, and creatures. The house itself was fine for getting in out of the rain and for snacks.

Excellent paragraph .
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Jun 14, 2013 - 11:06pm PT
So, in my darkness, I also wonder about the repeated comment that zen "has no content." Because that sounds like, really zen dude, but something that has no content would, by definition, leave no trace. And yet we have these apparent things out in that shimmering void that look like this:


Sometimes it's a little tricky to know if a person is being sincere or is just sort of wanking around the tree on these subjects, but yours are common and valid qesstions despite the "hey, dude" projections - which is your business.

When investigating any of the internal stuff, a literal handling is always slippery and not always useful. Of course we always want to know what something IS, but here, you can almost always outsmart yourself by finding contentions that really do make perfect sense. But you keep having to dig in and see where the truth lies.

Per the fact that Zen has no content, what that means is that the actual practice of Zen is not not aimed at quantifying, analyzing or even knowing the details about what arises moment to moment in your awareness, but rather learning to let go of our attachments to whatever comes up. This is not the same thing as shining something on, rather it is the art of suspending judgement and being radically open to whatever the content is, good or bad, without having to cling or hold onto or push away. In this sense the practice itself is not about what comes up, ie content, but rather holding a neutral frame. Zen, in one sense, is the art of holding this neutral frame, which is the natural disposition of our awareness when out ego or discursive mind does not tell us what to think about this or that. There's more to it than that, but this is the start of it.

Another way to look at it is this: When we normally operate in the world, our awareness trombones in and out of narrow to wide focus depending on what we want to discursively wrangle at a given time. Note that there are really two things going on here. You have the figure, which is what we are narrowly focued on, and we have the so-called ground, which is the background in which the content arises. The discursive arts are focused on the figure, the thing, though we tend to vasicilate narrow to wide because we can only hold a tight focus for a while before we need a break, and during the times when our focus goes lax and we are relaxing, doing nothing, the answers come to us - and most will belive they are supplied mechanically by the unconscious (not entirly so, but that's another story). But notice what happens when you hold your focus wide, and when the ground, rather than the figure, is paramount.

I have invited the biggest doubters and staunchest physicalists on this list to partake in a few very simple exercises to illustrate the limits of the discursive, and simply notice how they dash away from the invitation like rats from a burning ship, or "can't be bothered," while harping continuously on the very subject - so long as they can do so discursively. You'd think I was inviting people to swallow koolaid.

And note Craig kept preaching to us how all "Masters" were entirely deluded, I offered to pay for him to go on a short retreat with one and he flat out refused. So we have to use these examples as empiracle evidence that even the soberest foray outside of discursive is largely an imposibility for most people, even those of an adventurous bent. They simply can't muster the resolve or effort to do anything but stick with the comfortable and known status quo.

But if you really want to understand issues like "no content," the surest way is not to rag on the seeming ironies, but to jump in and find out for yourself what this really means. There's really no need to fear the unknown reaches of your own mind.

M2: When I read the descriptions of meditation and self-contemplation on this thread it makes me think that parts of some of your houses need repair and that your practice helps with that.

I would just point out the tendency for countertranfrence in this regards. But so long as you try and evaluate (all negative - let that be true because it is) others, as opposed to bring the game on home to your own field, the boon of subjective adventures will remain lost on you, as it apparently is at this juncture.

JL
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jun 14, 2013 - 11:21pm PT

The house itself was fine for getting in out of the rain and for snacks

You've gott'in a belly laugh from me more than once! I only wish that I could show you the expression on my face through words on a screen. This is why I think the Internet is so queer!!
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Jun 14, 2013 - 11:27pm PT
Interesting that you can't tell the tone, so therefore it's either a despicable jab or a facile query. How convenient. But no fear, I for one have no great anxieties about blowing my mind, and as for the exercises you've recommended so far, they're old news to anyone who grew up in the seventies and had any interest in these so-called experiential arts. Mother's milk, perhaps taken for granted. But if it's what made you who you are and you feel a need to preach it to a largely imaginary blinkered crowd of gapers, well, then, that's your business, I suppose.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Jun 14, 2013 - 11:42pm PT

countertranfrence

Is it just me?, or does Largo seemingly come up with his own language with every post?

Wikidictionary didn't know this word. But the rest was indisputable
The Chief

climber
Climber from the Land Mongols under the Whites
Jun 14, 2013 - 11:54pm PT
Pure Modern ZEN here:




And here:




Clearly one or two will understand. Truly.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Jun 14, 2013 - 11:56pm PT
they're old news to anyone who grew up in the seventies and had any interest in these so-called experiential arts.


You're not only a sage, Cintune, but a clairvoyant, LOL, insofar as I haven't yet described what these exercises actually are.

What's genius here is that out of one side of your mouth you can say you simply don't get this whole no-mind, no-content gig - or ridicule the subject with glib and puerile quips - and then out of the other side you can trot out your "old news" rant. Damn, dude, you've tied your own mind into such a Gordian knot that veriily, there might be no untying it no how. And so far as ever saying exactly what you mean, and truly meaning what you say, you simply must be that dusty old rummy who the Red Man once referred to as having a "forked tongue," meaning no sober person would ever know for sure what you really felt or mean or want or know. What's more, there seems a vast amount of insincerity in looking at any of these issues beyond a strictly surface kind of silly game.

Nobodies preaching to you, Cintune. Your capacity to listen and learn fell fatally compromised by a kind of toxic impulse to lampoon. No harm there - no one here is beyond reproach, least of all me. But when the lampooning insinuates that you understand the subject matter intimately, and that it's "all old news," when in fact your are a totaly pretender per this material, then an otherwise bit of clowning around starts smelling of fraud, ill-will and posturing.

I might be entirely wrong about all of this. But how about this. I invite you to ask one honest question about any so-called spiritual or subjective adventure, dealign with something for which you are honestly inerested, and for which you have no understanding and no "right" answer already in your head. I will make no attempt to answer this myself, but it might open an interesting line of discussion since staunch quantifiers seem to have an almost impossible time asking questioins on any of this.

JL
jogill

climber
Colorado
Jun 15, 2013 - 12:00am PT
. . .and simply notice how they dash away from the invitation like rats from a burning ship, or "can't be bothered," while harping continuously on the very subject - so long as they can do so discursively

You continually provoke and heighten the level of bellicosity, John. I suspect there is some other agenda in play here, but I would hesitate to speculate. The game is more than attempting to convert a few science types.

And, yes,those types do follow your lead and thrust back.

As the original stonemaster it's a peculiar game you play . . . but it's fascinating to watch for your next move.
Messages 14681 - 14700 of total 23238 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews