|
Post by michaelsees on Jan 14, 2011 12:35:45 GMT -5
Karen you need to write longer posts to give him more to poke at he he
Michael
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jan 14, 2011 12:47:21 GMT -5
Enigma, you're very good at picking apart non-sequiturs. If you ever see that with me, please poke away! Hey Karen, What part of my stated conclusion doesn't support my premise, I mean, if the logic seems like a fallacy to you?
|
|
|
Post by karen on Jan 14, 2011 12:55:17 GMT -5
Karen you need to write longer posts to give him more to poke at he he Michael True true!
|
|
|
Post by karen on Jan 14, 2011 12:58:18 GMT -5
TRF, non-sequitur was a poor choice of words. Hidden beliefs and assumptions is better. And enigma has been pointing those out quite well.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jan 14, 2011 13:36:27 GMT -5
TRF, non-sequitur was a poor choice of words. Hidden beliefs and assumptions is better. And enigma has been pointing those out quite well. Ah, thanks for addressing me personally, your not that rude after all... Ya, sometimes I use big words too, but I usually take the time to look them up, just to see what they mean I thought I was doing a pretty good job of laying out my beliefs in the discussion, but if you've seen a hidden one, I'd appreciate the feedback. Assumptions, well, guilty as charged It's kinda like you assuming that I'm not standing here, while you make unsolicited comments about my posts...lol It's pretty hard to turn direct experience into a form, conceptually speaking, that conveys that which can't really be conveyed in words. I do agree with you, that enigma is very good at picking out what is obvious... Cheers... TRF
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 14, 2011 22:20:08 GMT -5
Okey dokey. Hehe.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 14, 2011 22:48:22 GMT -5
It's really a matter of how conscious one is, meaning not perceiving significantly from unconscious thought/feeling (i.e. Karen). Such peeps would be hard to catch with their pants down, so to speak. On the other hand, those who do perceive that way won't recognize it no matter how clearly it is pointed out. This is the intractable nature of unconsciousness which cannot see itself, and which we all express to at least some degree. It's not personal, and yet unconsciousness cannot help but see it that way, since protecting the person is the function of this form of unconsciousness. One may be highly intelligent, learned and eloquent, and be dead-in-the-water unconscious. That's a general comment not intended as a description of TRF.
BTW, I often find screen names and signatures to be highly revealing. Often, we don't know ourselves why we choose them.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jan 15, 2011 13:06:56 GMT -5
This is the intractable nature of unconsciousness which cannot see itself, and which we all express to at least some degree. It's not personal, and yet unconsciousness cannot help but see it that way, since protecting the person is the function of this form of unconsciousness. So let me see, it's unconsciousness, but if I became conscious, rather than being unconscious, I'd see how unconsciousness functions re: protecting something that unconsciousness sees, (the person), but unconsciousness can't see itself ? Did I get it right ?
|
|
|
Post by karen on Jan 15, 2011 13:33:24 GMT -5
My take is that unconsciousness is really being tightly focused on a thought that contains it's own dualistic payload. Forgive me for drawing a blank as to an example.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 15, 2011 14:09:09 GMT -5
This is the intractable nature of unconsciousness which cannot see itself, and which we all express to at least some degree. It's not personal, and yet unconsciousness cannot help but see it that way, since protecting the person is the function of this form of unconsciousness. So let me see, it's unconsciousness, but if I became conscious, rather than being unconscious, I'd see how unconsciousness functions re: protecting something that unconsciousness sees, (the person), but unconsciousness can't see itself ? Did I get it right ? Well, by definition, unconsciousness isn't conscious of itself, right? IOW, if I'm unconsciously motivated to be right (or whatever), I'm not going to be consciously aware of my motivation for the actions and perspectives and perceptions that follow directly from that. What fundamentally drives my subjective experience of that will remain hidden to me.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jan 15, 2011 16:12:34 GMT -5
So let me see, it's unconsciousness, but if I became conscious, rather than being unconscious, I'd see how unconsciousness functions re: protecting something that unconsciousness sees, (the person), but unconsciousness can't see itself ? Did I get it right ? Well, by definition, unconsciousness isn't conscious of itself, right? IOW, if I'm unconsciously motivated to be right (or whatever), I'm not going to be consciously aware of my motivation for the actions and perspectives and perceptions that follow directly from that. What fundamentally drives my subjective experience of that will remain hidden to me. It just dawned on me that your talking about the subconscious, not the unconsciousness... But the human part of consciousness, the unconscious mind...
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 15, 2011 20:04:41 GMT -5
Well, by definition, unconsciousness isn't conscious of itself, right? IOW, if I'm unconsciously motivated to be right (or whatever), I'm not going to be consciously aware of my motivation for the actions and perspectives and perceptions that follow directly from that. What fundamentally drives my subjective experience of that will remain hidden to me. It just dawned on me that your talking about the subconscious, not the unconsciousness... But the human part of consciousness, the unconscious mind... Yeah, sorry bout that.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Jan 15, 2011 22:04:55 GMT -5
It just dawned on me that your talking about the subconscious, not the unconsciousness... But the human part of consciousness, the unconscious mind... Yeah, sorry bout that. Hey, no problem... It's all good. It's a learning process for me, trying my best to learn the spiritual lingo, from a layman's position. TRF
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jan 16, 2011 11:52:23 GMT -5
Can we just clarify this some more please? Are you saying that the subconscious and unconscious have the same definition? "This is the intractable nature of unconsciousness which cannot see itself, and which we all express to at least some degree. It's not personal, and yet unconsciousness cannot help but see it that way, since protecting the person is the function of this form of unconsciousness." I agree that the unconscious is impersonal ~ though how can it protect the personal if it is not of it? I say that it is the subconscious that is reading signals from the environment constantly and that these are being processed by the conscious mind. The decision about relativity can, be made in the conscious, though often they are made subconsciously, as the conscious is only necessary for translation and interpretation. I agree that hidden aspects (unhealthy programming) are revealed to us from the sub ~ below ~ conscious in sincere engagements and that this is the beauty of an open and forgiving environment.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsees on Jan 16, 2011 12:07:52 GMT -5
I agree that the unconscious is impersonal ~ though how can it protect the personal if it is not of it? One way has to do with thoughts. Some experts say that over 60,000 thoughts come/pass by us in only one day. I feel the number is much larger. Lets just say it is 60,000. Any idea what would happen to you if those thoughts became conscious to you? At the very least you would not be able to function, you would need to be on very strong meds and probably go insane in a matter of days. Just one way unconsciousness protects you. Michael
|
|