|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 24, 2012 15:53:03 GMT -5
Contains psychoanalysis
truth is liberating
|
|
|
|
Post by silence on Feb 24, 2012 15:54:55 GMT -5
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001930/(Narcissistic personality disorder.) The most ironic part of it is this: "Treatment Psychotherapy (for example, talk therapy) may help the affected person relate to other people in a more positive and compassionate way."
|
|
|
|
Post by silence on Feb 24, 2012 15:56:07 GMT -5
Symptoms:
A person with narcissistic personality disorder may:
React to criticism with rage, shame, or humiliation
Take advantage of other people to achieve his or her own goals
Have excessive feelings of self-importance
Exaggerate achievements and talents
Be preoccupied with fantasies of success, power, beauty, intelligence, or ideal love
Have unreasonable expectations of favorable treatment
Need constant attention and admiration
Disregard the feelings of others, and have little ability to feel empathy
Have obsessive self-interest
Pursue mainly selfish goals
|
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 24, 2012 16:02:16 GMT -5
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001930/(Narcissistic personality disorder.) The most ironic part of it is this: "Treatment Psychotherapy (for example, talk therapy) may help the affected person relate to other people in a more positive and compassionate way." Everyone knows who Narcissus was, right?  Even more ironic for me, personally, is that this is one of my favorite Caravaggios |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 24, 2012 16:03:03 GMT -5
Symptoms: A person with narcissistic personality disorder may: React to criticism with rage, shame, or humiliation Take advantage of other people to achieve his or her own goals Have excessive feelings of self-importance Exaggerate achievements and talents Be preoccupied with fantasies of success, power, beauty, intelligence, or ideal love Have unreasonable expectations of favorable treatment Need constant attention and admiration Disregard the feelings of others, and have little ability to feel empathy Have obsessive self-interest Pursue mainly selfish goals
liars should look in the mirror and ask themselves how lies benefit anyone....groupthink is antithetical to this path, especially when it is based in a form of lying.....truth is liberating |
|
tath
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by tath on Feb 24, 2012 16:05:06 GMT -5
Symptoms: A person with narcissistic personality disorder may: React to criticism with rage, shame, or humiliation Take advantage of other people to achieve his or her own goals Have excessive feelings of self-importance Exaggerate achievements and talents Be preoccupied with fantasies of success, power, beauty, intelligence, or ideal love Have unreasonable expectations of favorable treatment Need constant attention and admiration Disregard the feelings of others, and have little ability to feel empathy Have obsessive self-interest Pursue mainly selfish goals contains and is pointing toward thoughts thinking thoughts about thoughts as an aside.... every enlightened guy in history, has been describe by some academic as having Narcissistic personality disorder.... its cliché ;-) and an easy thing to do, every enlightened person can be moholed in this way, including Buddha and Jesus. establishes a ficticious mischaracterization that propagates a false story line, and is therefore lying
liars should look in the mirror and ask themselves how lies benefit anyone, especially themselves...groupthink is antithetical to this path, especially when it is based in a form of lying.....truth is liberating |
|
tath
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by tath on Feb 24, 2012 16:06:23 GMT -5
establishes a ficticious mischaracterization that propagates a false story line, and is therefore lying
liars should look in the mirror and ask themselves how lies benefit anyone....groupthink is antithetical to this path, especially when it is based in a form of lying.....truth is liberating clearly, and minding ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by question on Feb 24, 2012 16:08:06 GMT -5
What does it mean to say Truth is self evident? Knowledge requires evidence to support it, and so no knowledge is self evident, but Truth does not refer to knowledge. This self evident, non-conceptual nature applies to all genuine realizations, no matter how small, because the nature of a realization is the seeing of what is NOT so; the collapse of a belief. This realization is not an idea or a thought or conclusion, and so it is not seen as part of the temporal flow of experience as events occurring in time. As such, realization is timeless, and occurs as a flash of insight. We've all had them so it's not something woo woo. Since it is not thought, it is not the knowing of some knowledge that can be stored in memory and recalled later. As such, a realization can only be realized NOW. No matter how many times you notice it, it will never become a part of your knowledge base as something that you know. You cannot know anything. All knowledge is subject to doubt. Since a realization is not knowledge, it is not seen as something that can be true or false. For the same reason it's also not subject to the need to be supported by evidence. There a 'rule' in logic that says you can't prove a negative. We all intuitive know that it would be impossible to search every corner of the universe to prove that unicorns don't exist, but the dilemma is more obvious than that. It's not so much that a negative can't be proven, but that it doesn't require proof. As they say, the burden of proof is on the one making the assertion. No knowledge or evidence is required to realize that something is NOT so, assuming that this is the case. The realization that there is no volition is not the knowing of some knowledge that you acquire and then believe to be true. It is not something that you need evidence to support. It is not a thought or a conclusion any more than 'no unicorns' is true knowledge that you can support with evidence. It's the realization that volition was an idea, an assumption, conclusion that never had any more foundation than unicorns. You are not left with a belief in nonvolition, or a true concept about volition, you are left with nothing. Volition is irrelevant. The realization of oneness is not knowledge about oneness or the visceral experience of everything mushed together into a oneness glob, it's the seeing that the idea of separation was assumption, conclusion, imagination, and never had a leg to stand on. The issue of separation is irrelevant. The realization that you are not a mind/body is the noticing that the idea that you are a thing or a label is absurd. The issue of identification is irrelevant. As realizations are not in the domain of thoughts and proof and doubt, you cannot turn your realization over to mind for it to think about. If you do, mind WILL find evidence to support it's preferred conclusions. This is why I talk about your realizations being sovereign. You see what you see, timelessly with absolute self evident clarity. Mind is the servant of that seeing, not it's master. I still have no idea what a realization is. According to your definition of 'realization' it appears like I've never had one. You're saying that realization isn't knowledge, it's not about true/false, it isn't subject to evidence and yet it self-evident. You employ the example of seeing through unicorns and volition. However, seeing through either IS a function of thinking. In the case of unicorns you are correct to say that one can never prove that there aren't unicorns, it's the Russell's teapot riddle. However, one can prove that there is no volition, the proof is perfectly logical and consists in showing and seeing the paradox within the notion of volition. We disprove volition the same way that we disprove squared circles. Contrary to your assertion there is no rule in logic that you can't prove a negative, negatives are easily provable. We can prove that volition and seperation are false excactly the same way that we prove that squared circles are nonexistent. According to you, however, all this would still be mind and you're looking for something entirely different. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 24, 2012 16:08:34 GMT -5
Contains psychoanalysis
establishes a ficticious mischaracterization that propagates a false story line, and is therefore lying
liars should look in the mirror and ask themselves how lies benefit anyone....groupthink is antithetical to this path, especially when it is based in a form of lying.....truth is liberating
|
|
|
|
Post by question on Feb 24, 2012 16:11:41 GMT -5
About Tath:
Guys, can we agree to just ignore him? It's obvious that he has psychological problems and our ridicule isn't going to do him any good. We also can't help him. The best we can do is to write him messages, but he won't listen and will only get more and more furious. So, can we please just ignore him? Maybe then he will go away?
|
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 24, 2012 16:12:50 GMT -5
What does it mean to say Truth is self evident? Knowledge requires evidence to support it, and so no knowledge is self evident, but Truth does not refer to knowledge. This self evident, non-conceptual nature applies to all genuine realizations, no matter how small, because the nature of a realization is the seeing of what is NOT so; the collapse of a belief. This realization is not an idea or a thought or conclusion, and so it is not seen as part of the temporal flow of experience as events occurring in time. As such, realization is timeless, and occurs as a flash of insight. We've all had them so it's not something woo woo. Since it is not thought, it is not the knowing of some knowledge that can be stored in memory and recalled later. As such, a realization can only be realized NOW. No matter how many times you notice it, it will never become a part of your knowledge base as something that you know. You cannot know anything. All knowledge is subject to doubt. Since a realization is not knowledge, it is not seen as something that can be true or false. For the same reason it's also not subject to the need to be supported by evidence. There a 'rule' in logic that says you can't prove a negative. We all intuitive know that it would be impossible to search every corner of the universe to prove that unicorns don't exist, but the dilemma is more obvious than that. It's not so much that a negative can't be proven, but that it doesn't require proof. As they say, the burden of proof is on the one making the assertion. No knowledge or evidence is required to realize that something is NOT so, assuming that this is the case. The realization that there is no volition is not the knowing of some knowledge that you acquire and then believe to be true. It is not something that you need evidence to support. It is not a thought or a conclusion any more than 'no unicorns' is true knowledge that you can support with evidence. It's the realization that volition was an idea, an assumption, conclusion that never had any more foundation than unicorns. You are not left with a belief in nonvolition, or a true concept about volition, you are left with nothing. Volition is irrelevant. The realization of oneness is not knowledge about oneness or the visceral experience of everything mushed together into a oneness glob, it's the seeing that the idea of separation was assumption, conclusion, imagination, and never had a leg to stand on. The issue of separation is irrelevant. The realization that you are not a mind/body is the noticing that the idea that you are a thing or a label is absurd. The issue of identification is irrelevant. As realizations are not in the domain of thoughts and proof and doubt, you cannot turn your realization over to mind for it to think about. If you do, mind WILL find evidence to support it's preferred conclusions. This is why I talk about your realizations being sovereign. You see what you see, timelessly with absolute self evident clarity. Mind is the servant of that seeing, not it's master. I still have no idea what a realization is. According to your definition of 'realization' it appears like I've never had one. You're saying that realization isn't knowledge, it's not about true/false, it isn't subject to evidence and yet it self-evident. You employ the example of seeing through unicorns and volition. However, seeing through either IS a function of thinking. In the case of unicorns you are correct to say that one can never prove that there aren't unicorns, it's the Russell's teapot riddle. However, one can prove that there is no volition, the proof is perfectly logical and consists in showing and seeing the paradox within the notion of volition. We disprove volition the same way that we disprove squared circles. Contrary to your assertion there is no rule in logic that you can't prove a negative, negatives are easily provable. We can prove that volition and seperation are false excactly the same way that we prove that squared circles are nonexistent. According to you, however, all this would still be mind and you're looking for something entirely different. You know, I find it .. entertaining, anymore, how the mind/ego will go to any length in order to disprove the pointers to Truth. |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Feb 24, 2012 16:14:50 GMT -5
Yes, Question. Please. Every time there's a decent discussion going on, it gets waylaid.
|
|
|
|
Post by relinquish on Feb 24, 2012 16:15:27 GMT -5
Sorry Tath but I think you are mistaking your opinion for truth again. what is the only TRUTH stillness...is it realizations that occur about the mind? in any form, is it "THIS", but by this we mean direct sensory experience without any other types of mental movements happening? or is truth the Essential Nature of pure awareness is TRUTH the Awareness, or what Awareness is aware "of" look closely at most of the posts here, especially the ones by ZD and Enigma, and see if they are talking about Awareness, or what awareness is aware "of".... The two go together Tath. There is nothing wrong with talking about either because one necessarily includes the other. I don't know what the truth is Tath, other than to say that it can not be 'something'. But I do know that mistake your opinion for the truth a hell of alot. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 24, 2012 16:15:53 GMT -5
About Tath: Guys, can we agree to just ignore him? It's obvious that he has psychological problems and our ridicule isn't going to do him any good. We also can't help him. The best we can do is to write him messages, but he won't listen and will only get more and more furious. So, can we please just ignore him? Maybe then he will go away? I tried that, actually. He's tenacious. He won't go away, and he won't engage anyone here in civil discourse. Hence, I have no choice but to throw the mirror at him. Maybe if he sees what a trolling, moronic imbecile he's become, he might at least become a little more subdued. |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Feb 24, 2012 16:17:17 GMT -5
Maybe if he sees what a trolling, moronic imbecile he's become, he might at least become a little more subdued. Not a chance. |
|
