Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 17581 - 17600 of total 22780 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
MikeL

climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
Oct 8, 2013 - 08:04am PT
I love it. When you press the materialists or so-called scientific reasoners on an issue of detail and substance, they respond with humor, cynicism, or just plain avoidance. You folks talk a high-minded game, but there's no there there.

Wish Ed were back here. At least he knew something, and said when he didn't honestly.
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Oct 8, 2013 - 08:13am PT
One more time: where does creativity or talent come from? How can it be explained?

Hard work and luck. Not necessarily in that order.

Perhaps you'd like fancier words?















MH2

climber
Oct 8, 2013 - 09:08am PT
When you press the materialists or so-called scientific reasoners on an issue of detail and substance, they respond with


"I usually hold myself against categorizations categorically, because of an early and deep conviction that people who begin sentences with, 'Redheads are - ' or 'Hungarians are - ' are about to speak nonsense."

~ Theodore Sturgeon



MikeL,

It would take a long response to cover a question like, "Where do talent and creativity come from?" Authors and artists get asked and have trouble answering. Ursula K. Le Guin when asked where she got her ideas would often reply, "Out of my head."


Going a little further,

"It will be a vision, a more or less powerful or haunting dream. A view in, not out."

~ Ursula K. Le Guin



Her talent and creativity came from the saurian ooze of her childhood.
cintune

climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
Oct 8, 2013 - 10:28am PT
When you press the materialists or so-called scientific reasoners on an issue of detail and substance, they respond with humor, cynicism, or just plain avoidance. You folks talk a high-minded game, but there's no there there.

Too bad satire is legitimate critique, but lucky it can be batted away with such gratifying disdain.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Oct 8, 2013 - 10:47am PT
I love it. When you press the materialists or so-called scientific reasoners on an issue of detail and substance, they respond with humor, cynicism, or just plain avoidance. You folks talk a high-minded game, but there's no there there.

Excuse me? This thread has been taken over and been run by the Buddhists for going on six months. I'm not aware of any real debate going on at the moment.

As I recall, Ed left when Largo accused him of being dishonest. He was super pissed about that, but when he left, it cleared the stage for JL and you, Mike. Nobody argues with you, nobody questions your statements. You've got it made, kind of like talking to a mirror.

I'm quite willing to discuss anything that I can, but you guys use weasel words all of the time.

NOW. What exactly was your question about some issue of detail and substance? I must have missed it.

Note. I like you guys personally. You don't threaten me or science in general in any way. You can't. Right now this thread is running along with the topic being human perception of reality. It is an interesting topic, but if somebody disagrees with you, don't get personally upset about it. A degree of mutual respect is what has kept this thread going for three years now. I respect you and Largo.

For lack of a better term, this thread has substance.

WBraun

climber
Oct 8, 2013 - 10:48am PT
Without understanding the science of the soul the root cause will never be fully understood and ultimately lead to all of the mental speculations and incomplete knowledge .....
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Oct 8, 2013 - 12:01pm PT
Soccer vs Football
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Oct 8, 2013 - 12:54pm PT
You folks talk a high-minded game, but there's no there there.

Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Oct 8, 2013 - 01:01pm PT
Nina Simone and The Curtis Institute
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Oct 8, 2013 - 01:49pm PT
Gustave Courbet - The Origin Of The World

Posting an art photo - "The Origin Of The World" - on the Politics, God and Religion vs. Science-thread - what would that have made the art photo - an argument for the physical part of the world? art and only art? annoying porn? an offensive act? a creative act? an expression of the grand server of life? a liberating act? a silly provocation? just what's seen there... what's seen there?...

Fort: TFPU!
Norton: It's art...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhUES1sbl6g&feature=player_detailpage
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Oct 8, 2013 - 01:58pm PT
Now that they've found her head, everything has changed.



... a good answer in the analysis, Marlow.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 8, 2013 - 02:25pm PT
As I recall, Ed left when Largo accused him of being dishonest. He was super pissed about that, but when he left, it cleared the stage for JL and you, Mike.


The issues of dishonesty is worth revisiting.

For starters, I am not a Buddhist. And never have been. I've practiced Zen in formal and nonformal settings since I was a kid, but was never interested in Japanese formalities nor yet Buddhism per se. Zen is a particular technique that shares much with many other techniques but has no content in and of itself.

All of these subjective adventures are experiential. All the thoughts and so forth spring from the primary experience. It has been determined from many thousands of years of doing this that it always works as such. An this work is not another kind of take on discursive reasoning, nor yet an idling down of your brain power to a vegetable state. Nothing of the sort. But to be sure, you have no chance whatsoever of knowing one thing about this work sans the experiential aspect. It matters little that you believe me or that Ed believes me on this point or not. It simply is so. Materialsts cannot fathom the fact that the non-discursive is not assailable to the discursive. But fellows, it ain't. We would have done it that way if it was remotely possible or it it worked. Why do you think people have to go to all the trouble to do the silent retreats and all the other shenanigans? For fun? Man, it's too much work. It goes beyond fun in every direction. This isn't a bunch of slackers screwing off.

My point about dishonesty concern people talking about this work having never bothered to do enough of the technical side of things to ever get clear on what is going on. But at the same time weaving the most elaborate yarns about what it all "is," at all times throughout history, for all mankind, based on . . . what? A little quite time in their room? Perusing a few web articles on meditation? Some boundary experiences they have had in the course of their life. Read it again: It is a practice. You get out of it what you put into it. It is not a speculative art. You can't arrive there by normal, discursive means.

Making sweeping and universal statements about the practice having never really buckled down to it in a controlled, systematic setting with actual teachers - as we do in virtually ANY other field of study - is not only dishonest, it is complete bullsh#t. Discussing things, or even joking about them is all in fun. We're always poking fun at science geeks and dharma duffers and and Nehru coaters and blinkered materialists and so forth. But we should never make catagorical statements about work we have bothered to do. Doing so, by any definition, is dishonest, for we "speak not about which we know." We're just fobbing off guesswork as objective information. What would YOU call that?

JL

pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Oct 8, 2013 - 02:35pm PT
science rules!
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Oct 8, 2013 - 04:21pm PT
It is a practice. You get out of it what you put into it. It is not a speculative art. You can't arrive there by normal, discursive means (JL)

Clear enough. Just don't berate us if we aren't interested. It doesn't mean we lack a sense of adventure or are backing away from a legitimate challenge. It's good you have found a path to enlightenment. And it's good you will admit you haven't found ultimate truth and are convinced we need to find it as well.

I never took LSD in the 1960s either. But I suppose the choice wasn't mine to make in a conscious frame since all such decision activity takes place in the subconscious?
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Oct 8, 2013 - 04:40pm PT
Making sweeping and universal statements about the practice

As long as you don't conflate said practice with sweeping, disputable pronouncements about consciousness , or general philosophic positions and claims ---which clearly invite argument and contention.

The Base dude seemed to suggest that you Nehru guys are getting some kind of pass since Ed made himself scarce.
This is bullsh#t.
I have argued with Largo and MikeL on numerous points, and the argumentation has been generally much more varied and inclusive than those earlier polemical exchanges--- exchanges which often were ,frankly, one dimensional , circular, exasperating,and overly redundant, in a repetitive way.

science rules!

Surfers rule, bra.

Surfers rule...low-riders drool.

If you wanted chicks who would you hang with? surfers or scientists? Heh?
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 8, 2013 - 06:17pm PT
disputable pronouncements about consciousness
--


This feels like someone desperately trying to wrangle the conversation back onto solid discursive ground where, in your belief, rational arguments and speculations hold some sway.

The entire import of "the work" is to arrive at indisputable truths about consciousness made known by means and a process entirely unavailable by way of discursive mamber jamber, truths not subject to logical repostes. The question is: How or why is that so? This is the discursive wondering how ANYTHING is beyond its pale. It cannot accept nor yet fathom such a proposition.

Understand that this is not a knock against discursive reasoning, whose province is the quantifiable. The "practice" as such is only dealing with that realm as a kind of roll out or warm up position, and you can argue about that all you want. But once the process gets lift off, all the arguments are left on the ground. Put differently, the tide goes out, and what is left on the beach IS.

To see this and experience it directly is not a discursive exercise. The fact that my discursive mind thinks otherwise has nothing to do with the bare facts of consciousness, but is all about the discursive mind.

JL
MH2

climber
Oct 8, 2013 - 06:28pm PT
Martha!

That Zendo-vahs Witness is back on the front porch!
Dr. F.

Trad climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 8, 2013 - 07:09pm PT
Without understanding of science, reality will never be fully understood and ultimately lead to all of the mental speculations and incomplete knowledge that these willfully ignorant folks espouse....
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Oct 8, 2013 - 08:20pm PT

And it's good you will admit you haven't found ultimate truth and are convinced we need to find it as well (jgill)


indisputable truths about consciousness (JL)


Guess I was wrong
WBraun

climber
Oct 8, 2013 - 08:54pm PT
The Ultimate Truth is always there eternally.

By the Time the mundane science types start reducing it to their instruments it seen only as relative to them.

Thus they remain ever bewildered and make stupid contest to pay 1 million dollars for anyone to prove it to them.

The stupid fools are already looking at it right in front of them all along and then claiming it's not there.

Just like the deep cover agent.

No one recognizes him because they never even know he's there.

They're not looking for him .......



Messages 17581 - 17600 of total 22780 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