Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
Jgill:
Yes. That which you sit on might well be a chair, and it could be something else. We probably would agree to call it a chair.
You say ideas can be construed as objects. I don’t disagree that people do that. I’m saying that is what constitutes objectivization.
(BTW, this philosophical tactic of looking at the impermanence of objects as a means to show how labels and things are unsubstantial is quite old—a couple of thousand years. The insight has pretty much stood the test of time against counter-arguments—for what it’s worth.) With that said, however, no syllogism can deduce what “unbounded wholeness” is. It’s not anything that can be grasped with mind because it seemingly transcends consciousness. This is where poetry has helped, as well as other means of wisdom (instinct, narratives, emotions, etc.).
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
And MH2, while you grumble and carp, put that aside for a moment and address the contention: What are the limits of science?
Why do the limits of science matter to you, JL?
They do not matter to me. Science looks for truth one small truth at a time. If there are limits how are they to be found other than taking one step at a time?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
MikeL, I think Ed maybe thinks mind is an object 🎯
the contradiction is field theory, both classical and quantum, and the tremendous success both have had in quantifying what we understand about reality...
Maybe in the same sense he may say Gravity is an object?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Science looks for truth one small truth at a time.
Everything is already there.
What are looking for?
Just as that monk was saying in Galen Rowell's book. "Many People Come looking looking."
But they're blind .......
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
What are the limits of science?
There is absolutely no limits.
The limits are the living entities artificial separation from it's source.
Everything is always illuminated.
The gross materialists, atheists rebel against the source.
Thus the source never reveals it's self completely and only in limited amount .......
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
All I am saying Ed, is that there is no such thing as an objective experience, because you are not an object.
Hmmmm. We're not objects??? Well our body's most certainly are. But I'm gathering after over 5000 posts what your demising as a "no thing" part of the body being is our ego with the attachment of awareness or consciousness. So why can't "no thingness" be a place inside or outside the mind, yet still be a "thing" or an "object"? Essentially aren't you saying no thingness is an energy without form or space or boundary? If true, tell me how you would visual this, please. Why is it you are not willing to think of awareness or consciousness as an object, an object contrived by the brain/body but nonetheless a thing separate from the body. Is your opinion that there is some sorta United One consciousness that is only separated by the individual body, and is only constricted by the naive brain? I being a Christian believe the holiest of hollies, The Holy Spirit is a thing, an object, even an individual person. But He can be anywhere at once 🙏
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Largo: Of course what we have been saying all along is that meditation is a group process and the experiences worth having are in essence the experiential process of what arises when you sit with a group under the leadership of a teacher.
Again, the statement above is mindlessly ignorant and akin to saying the only climbing experiences worth having are on a climbing team under the leadership of a coach. Your statement is breathtaking for what it says about you, arrogance and a desperate affinity for certitude. And no, you're not Japanese or Buddhist, but you are obviously afflicted by a level of dogma and influence as those who were so easily turned to militarism.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
So what's it mean to "science the sh#t out of the problem"?
Michael Shermer's review of The Martian...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shermer/science-and-hollywood-whe_b_8022266.html?utm_hp_ref=matt-damon
8.4 at imdb, too.
Apparently the book and audio book are most excellent, Grade A, as well.
Can't wait to see it.
"The Science-and-Hollywood connection was evident at the press conference, starting with comments from the Director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Charles Elachi, who emphasized the important role science fiction plays in envisioning the future and inspiring people to become a part of it by helping make it." -Michael Shermer
whatever time frame turns out to be most realistic, there seems to be little doubt that the peopling--and even colonization--of Mars is coming.
Yeah, baby!
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
You just have to appreciate a genre called "science fiction." The sound of it just evaporates into irony don't you think? Always liked Ray Bradbury, so descriptive and so surreal... sometimes even poetic.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
You just have to appreciate a genre called "science fiction." The sound of it just evaporates into irony don't you think?
No, not to me. That is a superficial reaction which offers little evidence of knowing the kind of writing, its history, depth, and diversity.
What were books that influenced you early in life, Paul, say between 8 and 12 years old? Did you outgrow the early influences or did the tree incline as the twig was bent?
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
The fact that objective and subjective are not reducible has more to do with the construction of the two concepts as dialectics than it has to do with anything real, they are constructed to be exclusive, as an approximate description of the perceived boundary between what we experience that is unique to ourselves and what we all can agree upon is common (Ed)
As usual, Dr Ed has hit the nail squarely on the head. All the bantering that goes on here is no more than philosophical flapdoodle. JL likes what he sees in his Zenstate, and science-types like what they see in their theory and calculations. Two sides of a coin.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
What were books that influenced you early in life, Paul, say between 8 and 12 years old? Did you outgrow the early influences or did the tree incline as the twig was bent?
I was a precocious kid and broke my twig at an early age. As for books, well, I only read comic books but then I only eat candy too... however, the term "science fiction" has always struck me as kind of funny. Sort of the opposite of "mythical non fiction."
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
Seems like the democrats have lost compassion for life. Or maybe they only have compassion for the strong and the popular. Now they've made legal the murdering of the old and frail, along with the weak unborn. Guess it comes from all that evolution their pushing in the schools.
That's what I was gonna say.
But actually it's about money. If your over 65 on Medicare and catch a cold, watch your back. The democratic doctor will tell you there's no need to suffer, just sit down and take this pill 💀
http://kff.org/medicare/fact-sheet/10-faqs-medicares-role-in-end-of-life-care/
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
Largo: Of course what we have been saying all along is that meditation is a group process and the experiences worth having are in essence the experiential process of what arises when you sit with a group under the leadership of a teacher.
Healje said :Again, the statement above is mindlessly ignorant and akin to saying the only climbing experiences worth having are on a climbing team under the leadership of a coach.
Healje I don't know if you have much meditation experience or if you have had formal guidance by a teacher. The group setting with a teacher is the fastest way to make progress and meditation is so very subtle it is very difficult to learn it correctly and do it by yourself.
The reason why the group setting (where you live together) works so well is because your likes and dislikes come up faster in a group setting and since you are sitting alot with each other in silence you get a chance to observe your attachments to your opinions about your house mates. And if you sit alot you realize that your negative opinion about other people are just thinking that you created and that you don't have to hold that opinion rigidly. A key tool to live peacefully with other people. You attain this alot faster living in a group setting and it is a key part of the zen practice (letting go of your opinions or not being attached to them).
In group practice everybody does everything together at the same time. So no matter how you feel (good or bad) you just have to do it. When you are in a group they can help you get through the rough times . If you are by yourself you tend to only do what you like to do and not what you don't like; this leads to a stronger ego and more pain and suffering.
That said when practitioners get more experienced they will often go on solo retreats where they can really push the edge; but this requires experience to be fruitful.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
Sort of the opposite of "mythical non fiction."
If you are literal-minded.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
If you are literal-minded.
And please, what scientist is not "literal-minded?"
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
In group practice everybody does everything together at the same time. So no matter how you feel (good or bad) you just have to do it
Reminds me of my time in the USAF.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
I really disagree with the group meditation thing. I think Zen and its emphasis on the group evolved out of Japanese culture. Tibetan Buddhism is very different. Even in the large monastic establishments, if you want to make progress, you have to go into solitude for 3 years, three months and three days. That means you speak to no one but your guru and that seldomly. Food is left for you and taken away silently. Three years, three months and three days with no human conversation except dharma talk with your guru.
Beyond that, the Tibetan ideal is the lone hermit, the saint Milarepa being the prime example. He spent years in isolated caves eating almost nothing but tsampa and dried nettles. Hence his iconography shows him with his skin painted green. He was the first to master tumo, the art of raising one's internal body heat. How else do you get through a Himalayan winter at 12,000 wearing only a loin cloth?
There were other meditators who spent their three years in a completely dark room, with no human contact whatsoever. Some went insane, while others came out with unique abilities in the mind focussing business.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Healje I don't know if you have much meditation experience or if you have had formal guidance by a teacher.
I've had extensive 'meditation experience' and among that a significant amount of group meditation experience as well. But none was directly under a teacher. But again, however facilitative or fast-tracking a teacher may be, the idea that:
...meditation is a group process and the experiences worth having are in essence the experiential process of what arises when you sit with a group under the leadership of a teacher
...is beyond tragically flawed, it's - to quote the Peter Voit's blog title: 'not even wrong' - but rather just sad and arrogant doctrinal claptrap pure and simple.
It's one of those of those 'how did the first teacher learn?' sort of deals. Mindless.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!