What is "Mind?"

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 4141 - 4160 of total 4627 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Jan

Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
Aug 26, 2014 - 06:23pm PT
And Tvash, I'm glad that you are so happy with the American families and teenagers you know. Optimism is also an American trait. I guarantee you that if you were raised in Japan, hardly a Third World Society, you would not be touting the glories of individualism.

As for America, I go by statistics rather than personal experience, and these are not quite as wonderful as your experience. Rates of divorce, single parenthood, children from broken homes living in poverty, drugs, incarceration, and violence in America do not compare favorably with other societies. Rich or poor, developed or not, part of family life is having an evening meal together, yet this is no longer the statistical norm in America. You may see that as individualism but the rest of the world regards it as social impoverishment.
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Aug 26, 2014 - 07:00pm PT
I generally agree with Jan in the above post. But I would not attribute the diminution of family and community life seen in recent times in the West to individualism.
America very firmly subsisted on rugged individualism for most of its history---- and yet the family and community played a much greater role in daily life than it does today. Even in Europe, which lacked an individualistic pioneering ethos, we have seen nearly the same outcome as regards the family, and other similar demographic trends.

Many of the social changes we are now witnessing , negative or positive , are a direct result of technological change, rather than commonly shared ideologically-based creeds----which themselves are likewise molded ,modified, and perhaps even eventually eliminated by historical, demographic, and technological factors.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition

MH2

climber
Aug 26, 2014 - 08:12pm PT
Thanks for the reply, PSP also PP. One of my climbing partners a few years ago was severely dyslexic. He could not handle conventional school. He could not read without great difficulty. However, he was very smart. If he was shown how to do something, like tie a knot or build a stairway, he only needed to see it done once and then he could do it himself. He was creative, also. Last I knew he was making beautiful wood furnishings for homes in the Taos area. And skiing a lot.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 26, 2014 - 08:46pm PT
He wrote:

"The difference, and this is crucial in understanding much of the discussion having transpired on this thread, is that the practitioners of fiddle playing or hard math or sonnets are not ---as a matter of course, establishing and sustaining ironclad antithetical distinctions between their transcendent discipline versus normal default modes of mental functioning. A fiddle player is not positioning his special knowledge or experience as an equivalent ontological or epistemological rival to ordinary non-fiddle knowledge . Nor is the fiddle player requesting that you spend years fiddle playing as the indispensable condition for validating your considered criticisms of any non-empirical heuristic claims ,with which ,on the face of it, you just might happen to disagree .

"To do so creates an unbridgeable chasm based upon an oppositional framework . IMO it's about high time to bring the "meditative arts " into proper appositional perspective, like fiddling, as a healthy corollary to daily living ---and thereby hopefully rid it of any awkwardly high pretensions of a profoundly existential nature."



I see this as an emotional rant whereby the discursive is feeling done out of knowledge that is rightfully held as its own, usurped of its hegemony by some high-blown woo. In my experience, what is being said is that there are more than one way to use the mind, and while the content and experiences of the various paths are not mutually exclusive, there are limitations to both discursive and open focus modes that immediately come up in the practice. The belief, if not the conviction that the discursive cannot wrangle all of reality is based on a certain view of mind.

When I say “discursive,” I am thinking in a technical sense, specifically per the techniques of using the three cornerstones of sentience – awareness, focus and attention – in several ways.

The discursive use of the mind can broadly speaking be said to be the technique of objectification. To create a mental object, we need to tease out one person, place, thing or phenomenon from the rest of reality. We do this by narrow focusing our awareness, which is the similar to the “capture” or “lasso” function on a graphics design program like Photoshop.

Here, we basically cut out a horseshoe or a planet or an ocean (“narrow” focus is a very relative term) and hold it apart from the rest of reality, whereby this “object” of our awareness is given our attention (“pay attention”). Think of awareness as light, focus as a magnifying glass, and the burning orange dot is our attention that is “paid” to whatever we are objectifying.

Through this discursive process we can work up our fantastic measurements and physical breakdowns of discrete physical phenomenon. Obviously we can never achieve this if our awareness was toggled wide open and we never focused on a given pine cone or quark or honey beaver.

The limitation of narrow focusing is that while sentience can be consciously used to isolate out most any damn thing, by objectifying it “out there,” and crunching the data with our meat brains, sentience cannot escape itself, so to speak, to posit itself, external to and separate from itself, for discursive viewing.

Put differently, the observer is indivisible and borderless and whatever it objectifies “out there” can never include itself, AS sentience. This strange phenomenon is comically referred to the impossibility of kissing your own lips.

Mentally speaking, whatever is viewed can never include the viewer.

The question then becomes: By what means can we use sentience to view and experience sentience itself (not the physical processes, or objective functioning, believed to "create" sentience). One way is open focus introspection.

In this attentive, borderless awareness exercise, we all begin by trying to somehow still “look” at ourselves from the open focus perspective. Somewhere in the process the looker or “I” drops away and there is just looking sans looker. But “looking” is no longer an apt metaphor. Here we are simply abiding IN sentience - wre all of our faculties - from an alert being state. Full emersion in the moment to moment experience of being sentient and being present as the panoply of people, places, things and phenomenon blow through our field or awareness, fast or slow. At first the whole shebang will seem chaotic and untenable. Then we slow down and empirical impressions are made about the basic nature of the shebang. The mistake most people make is believing that these impression are synonomous with discursive data, which is the data stream you get from narrow focusing. This data, drawn from the forest, not the trees, is of another order, neither above or below the discursive, but by no means selfsame.

This experience, while impossible to quantify or perfectly describe, is one not open to narrow focus discursive thinking, and gives one a glimpse at the all, which strangely, is not the same as the stuff or objects (meaning it's NOT the sum and substance of al the stuff out there) that flash through awareness.

JL
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Aug 26, 2014 - 09:00pm PT

Could the rise of Buddhism in India and China---at least partly---have historically amounted to a sort of social levee , or dam, against the sometimes unchecked rise of regional warlordism?

could this type of religion just fit better with their type of government?

No dictator wants to share the podium with another, especially one that says He's The Creator of the Universe.

Then there's the authority that God bestows upon each individual being solely responsible for their eternal destiny, that would be hard to swallow as a communist.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Aug 26, 2014 - 10:02pm PT
Somewhere in the process the looker or “I” drops away and there is just looking sans looker (JL)

So when you speak of the "I" dropping away, that is merely part of the process or journey to your final goal. When PSP talks about the "I" dropping away there seems to be more of a social aspect involved, becoming selfless, benign, etc. It doesn't appear that he goes as far as you in the process. ???
MH2

climber
Aug 27, 2014 - 07:16am PT
In this attentive, borderless awareness exercise, we all begin by trying to somehow still “look” at ourselves from the open focus perspective. (JL)


This is not what happens for me. I may be able to see my nose and feel the chair I sit in but my 'self' as such has nothing to do, nothing to say, and is present only as part of whatever is around it.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Aug 27, 2014 - 07:19am PT
I think Ward has touched on something that is given short shrift in this thread - the role of technology in the formation and shaping of the mind.

Certainly since the industrial age and arguably since the harnessing of fire, the domestication of ag animals and the advent of farming, the human mind is surely strongly influenced by technology.

We even toy with these ideas in our science fiction, which in the span of a few decades much has 'come true.'

I think we are witnessing the birth of a new species = Homo technologus.

The collective is forming.

Is this something about which to wring our hands? Do we think homo sapien will last forever? That its some penultimate anything?

Our technology influences the brain and therefore the mind. Pandoras box is open and only Nightfall can stop it.

(They're coming with torches)

DMT
High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber
Aug 27, 2014 - 07:36am PT
the role of technology in the ... shaping of the mind... the human mind is surely strongly influenced by technology... The collective is forming.



Homo technologicus collectivus, lol!
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Aug 27, 2014 - 07:39am PT
Find he who conjured language and burn him!

Will our eyes migrate to our chin?

Kinda wish the Selfies would wrap it up at some point. I mean, how many ways can you slice that onion?
MikeL

Social climber
Seattle, WA
Aug 27, 2014 - 09:10am PT
Tvash: Aug 26, 2014 - 09:58am PT

. . . as you say it. So it is. But, was that all it was . . . as you've described it . . . "traveling in unfamiliar wilderness for extended periods of time?" Or was there more? Have you said all that there was about it? Is that your final answer? Is there a final answer? (No?)


Jan: . . . it takes both meditative wisdom and compassion to become enlightened.

A nitpick: Absolute boddhichitta only seems to come when wisdom (emptiness) is realized. Then compassion is seen and understood. In the meantime, compassion looks to me most of the time as maudlin mawkishness. It serves no one but the believer as a proof of their own self-goodness. Both are signs of delusion. (Neither self nor goodness can be found.)


Jgill:

My comments were not about routes. I was speaking a bit more (non) metaphysically. I was using climbing as a route to higher ground.

The love of exploration seems to go to something very deep and intrinsic to our nature. We wont to explore because we want to find ourselves, and we do so by throwing ourselves out into the world in innumerable ways. But if that is all that it takes to explore who and what we are, we'd have found satisfaction and ourselves by now after so many lives and years.

Solving our riddle of what and who we are solves us, at which point we should finally be able to rest.

Pragmatically (and personally), when would that be, John? It seems to me that to finally rest, we'd have to give-up on finding answers to an unending list of questions. What would it take to completely let go of those? (You don't really want to jump off THAT cliff, do you? I mean, . . . then what?)
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Aug 27, 2014 - 10:52am PT
I don't explore because I want to 'find myself'. I know where I am. I explore because I want to lose myself in the world.

Seekers. Curiosity, addiction, dissatisfaction, narcissism, or just another form of being stuck?

Speaking of 'self', not too many seekers in service work, I've noticed.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 27, 2014 - 11:46am PT
MH2 said: In this attentive, borderless awareness exercise, we all begin by trying to somehow still “look” at ourselves from the open focus perspective. (JL)


This is not what happens for me. I may be able to see my nose and feel the chair I sit in but my 'self' as such has nothing to do, nothing to say, and is present only as part of whatever is around it.


In fact once you get jiggy with open focus work, your nose and your sensations are all like your self - simply elements of ALL that surrounds you, inside and out.

Imagine that you didn't have a localized perspective, but were totally present and sentient. What might that experience be like for you?

And Tvash, any viable path these days has a service component, usually a big one, having NOTHIGN to do with recruiting neophytes. This is an outgrowth of the recovery moment, where service is the cornerstone to augment narcissism - our tendency to be "bound by self." And "self" here means being entirely addicted to self-serving behaviors, not to the agency of being, which most traditions hold as divine, however you might understand that word.

JL

Tvash

climber
Seattle
Aug 27, 2014 - 11:59am PT
Service as an outgrowth of the recovery movement?

None of the service folks I'm thinking of - and that's a pretty large crowd at this point, have ever experienced an addictive day in their lives, you self-absorbed moron. They're just good, selfless people who believe in making the world a better place and who don't have time in their schedules for your brand of narcissistic bullsh#t.

One just won a landmark case involving a flagrant violation of the Voter's Rights Act in our state. You know, real sh#t that actually matters.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Aug 27, 2014 - 12:36pm PT
The love of exploration seems to go to something very deep and intrinsic to our nature. We wont to explore because we want to find ourselves (MikeL)


I explore out of curiosity, Mike. In math I play with simple concepts and try to create a tiny bit of new knowledge of no real significance. I'm just interested in seeing where a path will take me. I'd be doing the same among the rocks if I still climbed. If "finding myself" means generating that tiny thrill of discovery, then I plead guilty . . . but that's not it. I'm not introspective. To explore my psyche would be a droll slog.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Aug 27, 2014 - 12:44pm PT
I can't pass a dirt road off a highway somewhere without wondering where it might go and what it's like...

and if I go by that dirt road enough times I'll eventually head on down it. Some sooner'n others.

I think this is a characteristic of many of you participants in this thread? Taint afraid of no side roads to no where?

DMT
Tvash

climber
Seattle
Aug 27, 2014 - 12:54pm PT
Plus, it's handy to know a few places where you can hide a body should the need arise.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Aug 27, 2014 - 12:59pm PT
Oddly I was just talking about that yesterday... ;)

Seriously, I was. A friend said, 'you could hide a body anywhere out here.'

I just laughed quietly at first....

:D

DMT
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 27, 2014 - 01:14pm PT
None of the service folks I'm thinking of - and that's a pretty large crowd at this point, have ever experienced an addictive day in their lives, you self-absorbed moron. They're just good, selfless people who believe in making the world a better place and who don't have time in their schedules for your brand of narcissistic bullsh#t.


In the "work," what just jumped up in our boy Tvash is known as "The Beast." Behind this is a self-ritiousness (his friends are above all addictive behaviors, and are the more better, more altruistic, purer article) that feels itself offended - the very core of the ego-bound "I." We all have it, but rarely is it seen so transparently as in Tvash's last rant.

You might want to review what ppssppss was saying earlier, cowboy - or keep eating that broken glass and stinking up the joint, believing yourself a white rose.

JL
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Aug 27, 2014 - 01:44pm PT
Next page.
Messages 4141 - 4160 of total 4627 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