|
|
Post by topology on Jul 4, 2013 11:47:20 GMT -5
Greetings.. I have seen him disengage with you. But it's speculation as to his reason for disengaging. You ask about other people's agenda, but you clearly have one when you engage Enigma. Is your agenda to understand him or make him wrong or something else? My agenda is to openly, honestly, and directly explore what is actually happening with him.. when i and or others are trying to explore what is actually happening, he and other similarly aligned members interject their opinions without the willingness to openly and honestly explore their own understandings.. E seems to lead that group, and so it's easier to discuss with one than a group of personalities intent on converting people's understandings to align with their's, which they avoid examining in the openness of clarity.. seriously, i'm very interested in exploring what is actually happening, without attachment to beliefs.. the first priority is understanding the nature of 'belief'.. Be well.. What is the nature of belief to you? |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 4, 2013 12:11:40 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. My agenda is to openly, honestly, and directly explore what is actually happening with him.. when i and or others are trying to explore what is actually happening, he and other similarly aligned members interject their opinions without the willingness to openly and honestly explore their own understandings.. E seems to lead that group, and so it's easier to discuss with one than a group of personalities intent on converting people's understandings to align with their's, which they avoid examining in the openness of clarity.. seriously, i'm very interested in exploring what is actually happening, without attachment to beliefs.. the first priority is understanding the nature of 'belief'.. Be well.. What is the nature of belief to you? Belief, as i understand it, is the attachment to an idea/concept that cannot be demonstrated as irrefutably accurate.. the 'claim' of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the claim.. similarly, a challenge to the claim of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the challenge.. What we see is a lot of speculation stated as 'true', without the evidence to support the claim, then.. when challenged, the claimant appeals to self-proclaimed authority, stipulating that the challenger doesn't 'get it' because the challenger hasn't had the same experience.. actually, it's likely that the challenger has had the same experience and simply interpreted it differently.. I remain hopeful that there is opportunity to explore the interpretations, rather than arguing about beliefs.. toward that end, i suggest dropping beliefs, even for a short interval, just so we can more closely discuss the experience itself.. then we can examine the interpretation, not as attachments but as how they actually relate to the experience itself.. Be well.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2013 12:49:17 GMT -5
Greetings.. What is the nature of belief to you? Belief, as i understand it, is the attachment to an idea/concept that cannot be demonstrated as irrefutably accurate.. the 'claim' of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the claim.. similarly, a challenge to the claim of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the challenge.. What we see is a lot of speculation stated as 'true', without the evidence to support the claim, then.. when challenged, the claimant appeals to self-proclaimed authority, stipulating that the challenger doesn't 'get it' because the challenger hasn't had the same experience.. actually, it's likely that the challenger has had the same experience and simply interpreted it differently.. I remain hopeful that there is opportunity to explore the interpretations, rather than arguing about beliefs.. toward that end, i suggest dropping beliefs, even for a short interval, just so we can more closely discuss the experience itself.. then we can examine the interpretation, not as attachments but as how they actually relate to the experience itself.. Be well.. Your belief in God is merely an escape from your monotonous, stupid and cruel life. Jiddu Krishnamurti |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jul 4, 2013 12:52:49 GMT -5
Greetings.. Belief, as i understand it, is the attachment to an idea/concept that cannot be demonstrated as irrefutably accurate.. the 'claim' of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the claim.. similarly, a challenge to the claim of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the challenge.. What we see is a lot of speculation stated as 'true', without the evidence to support the claim, then.. when challenged, the claimant appeals to self-proclaimed authority, stipulating that the challenger doesn't 'get it' because the challenger hasn't had the same experience.. actually, it's likely that the challenger has had the same experience and simply interpreted it differently.. I remain hopeful that there is opportunity to explore the interpretations, rather than arguing about beliefs.. toward that end, i suggest dropping beliefs, even for a short interval, just so we can more closely discuss the experience itself.. then we can examine the interpretation, not as attachments but as how they actually relate to the experience itself.. Be well.. Your belief in God is merely an escape from your monotonous, stupid and cruel life. Jiddu Krishnamurti Well...I like it and I don't like it. I think that quote' is full of chances to psychoanalyze Mr. Krishnamurti. 'God' may appear useless / nonexistent, but he/she cares and that's more than a lot of us do.  And don't tell me I already know it's a belief.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2013 13:14:25 GMT -5
Your belief in God is merely an escape from your monotonous, stupid and cruel life. Jiddu Krishnamurti Well...I like it and I don't like it. I think that quote' is full of chances to psychoanalyze Mr. Krishnamurti. 'God' may appear useless / nonexistent, but he/she cares and that's more than a lot of us do. And don't tell me I already know it's a belief. I won't challenge the belief just offer this interpretation of it... I think JK is saying that people grasp after things for their own imagined convenience and comfort. They grasp for riches and rewards desperately clinging to life. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jul 4, 2013 13:19:30 GMT -5
Well...I like it and I don't like it. I think that quote' is full of chances to psychoanalyze Mr. Krishnamurti. 'God' may appear useless / nonexistent, but he/she cares and that's more than a lot of us do. And don't tell me I already know it's a belief. I won't challenge the belief just offer this interpretation of it... I think JK is saying that people grasp after things for their own imagined convenience and comfort. They grasp for riches and rewards desperately clinging to life. Yes, I see what you're saying, but he doesn't have to be so.......mean!   |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 4, 2013 13:21:39 GMT -5
Greetings.. (-- mounts_parallel_bars --) For a choice to embody actual control the expected outcome would have to be a certainty with no possibility of interference from any unexpected factor external to the parameters of the choice. Every intersection you drive through could be the portal for a distracted driver to blindside you. Put another way, there is no certainty in this world and if you think otherwise it is because you've deceived yourself. (-- dismounts --) Your stipulation is flawed.. there need only be a reasonable expectation that the choice will have the intended result.. that life is uncertain is not cause for denial of choice, choice is the mechanism used to preserve physical, mental, and spiritual harmony within that uncertainty.. <-- trips over Bill's gym bag --> Be well.. Control and choice are different phenomena and there's no need to link the two. To project this onto the intersection metaphor, the realization that a wayward texter is possibly around every corner doesn't mean hands are suddenly dropped from the steering wheel. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 4, 2013 13:22:18 GMT -5
(-- mounts_parallel_bars --) For a choice to embody actual control the expected outcome would have to be a certainty with no possibility of interference from any unexpected factor external to the parameters of the choice. Every intersection you drive through could be the portal for a distracted driver to blindside you. Put another way, there is no certainty in this world and if you think otherwise it is because you've deceived yourself. (-- dismounts --) *puts a saddle on Laughter's back and mounts* I don't think that's the kinda control Tzu is talking about. *Laughter bucks and Top swings a 10 gallon hat around* I think he was talking about the exertion of control in making a decision *Laughter bucks harder and Top has to grip the saddle horn to stay on* But that kind of control is an illusion *Laughter finally bucks Top and he is thrown to the ground. Top rolls, picks himself up and starts to dust himself off* We are not in control of how our mind thinks. We are not in control of how our mind frames and presents the options to decide between. We are not in control of our predispositions and preferences. *Top feels a very sharp pain in his hind quarters and turns around to see Laughter's horn three inches deep into his left buttock* To Laughter: Fine you win, and if you think you can control your environment through exercising choice between imagined scenarios, you're kidding yourself. *Laughter shoves his horn deeper. Top winces* And to claim control, responsibility, origination, as a person/individual is a form of arrogance. To Laughter: Can you take your effin' horn outta my as.s now? *Laughter pushes harder for good measure* Owwee. Yes! I am very horny and like buttflesh! |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 4, 2013 13:24:54 GMT -5
Greetings.. What is the nature of belief to you? Belief, as i understand it, is the attachment to an idea/concept that cannot be demonstrated as irrefutably accurate.. the 'claim' of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the claim.. similarly, a challenge to the claim of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the challenge.. What we see is a lot of speculation stated as 'true', without the evidence to support the claim, then.. when challenged, the claimant appeals to self-proclaimed authority, stipulating that the challenger doesn't 'get it' because the challenger hasn't had the same experience.. actually, it's likely that the challenger has had the same experience and simply interpreted it differently.. I remain hopeful that there is opportunity to explore the interpretations, rather than arguing about beliefs.. toward that end, i suggest dropping beliefs, even for a short interval, just so we can more closely discuss the experience itself.. then we can examine the interpretation, not as attachments but as how they actually relate to the experience itself.. Be well.. The ones that can be demonstrated have a future appointment with the sh!t can as well.  |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 4, 2013 16:04:56 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Belief, as i understand it, is the attachment to an idea/concept that cannot be demonstrated as irrefutably accurate.. the 'claim' of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the claim.. similarly, a challenge to the claim of irrefutable is not valid without evidence to support the challenge.. What we see is a lot of speculation stated as 'true', without the evidence to support the claim, then.. when challenged, the claimant appeals to self-proclaimed authority, stipulating that the challenger doesn't 'get it' because the challenger hasn't had the same experience.. actually, it's likely that the challenger has had the same experience and simply interpreted it differently.. I remain hopeful that there is opportunity to explore the interpretations, rather than arguing about beliefs.. toward that end, i suggest dropping beliefs, even for a short interval, just so we can more closely discuss the experience itself.. then we can examine the interpretation, not as attachments but as how they actually relate to the experience itself.. Be well.. The ones that can be demonstrated have a future appointment with the sh!t can as well. Well.. rather than make a fixed prediction like that, i'll continue to keep looking and paying attention.. but. so far, it can be demonstrated, with 100% accuracy, that the human body fails and ceases to animate the intentions of the previous occupant.. there is rumor of an exception, but we're back to beliefs at that point.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on Jul 4, 2013 16:14:15 GMT -5
Greetings.. Surely you give peeps enough credit to recognize the apparent control that you keep pointing out, without you needing to point it out at all. Everyone understands that when they choose to do something, and then do it, this looks like control. 7 billion people understand this, so there's no need for you to keep pointing it out. Have you ever wondered if folks are really talking about something that is not so obvious? Have you ever wondered.... without wondering through the lens of your beliefs? Oh, hey there!, nice of you to drop by.. Oh yeah, it IS control, not just an appearance or 'looks like'.. Be well.. Although not any means of certainty, a good indication of someone repeating beliefs is the inflexibility with the language they use. In your case its especially ironic as you carry around your briefcase of beliefs about everyone elses beliefs. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 4, 2013 17:04:52 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Have you ever wondered.... without wondering through the lens of your beliefs? Oh, hey there!, nice of you to drop by.. Oh yeah, it IS control, not just an appearance or 'looks like'.. Be well.. Although not any means of certainty, a good indication of someone repeating beliefs is the inflexibility with the language they use. In your case its especially ironic as you carry around your briefcase of beliefs about everyone elses beliefs. Hey.. nice to see ya.. how's it going this Independence Day, gonna watch fireworks tonight? Ahh, language.. a fabulous tool for expressing and communicating what it is that we understand.. but no, by my own stated understanding of 'belief', i am not 'attached' to other people's beliefs, actually i am hopeful that all beliefs can be set aside for an interval sufficient to actually see/experience what is really happening.. are you interested in that possibility? Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 4, 2013 21:36:01 GMT -5
Greetings.. Can you explain what you mean by Enigma runs away? He's still talking to you, so who/what is running away from what? Yes, i can.. but, i'm not going to.. you've been present for the numerous attempts to get E involved in a direct discussion, and he makes excuses, usually at my expense, as to why he believes it's not worth it.. what does he run away from? it's plainly stated above, see bolded text.. did you read the post with clarity, or with an agenda?..Be well.. Did you write it with clarity, or with an agenda? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 4, 2013 21:59:21 GMT -5
Greetings.. (-- mounts_parallel_bars --) For a choice to embody actual control the expected outcome would have to be a certainty with no possibility of interference from any unexpected factor external to the parameters of the choice. Every intersection you drive through could be the portal for a distracted driver to blindside you. Put another way, there is no certainty in this world and if you think otherwise it is because you've deceived yourself. (-- dismounts --) Your stipulation is flawed.. there need only be a reasonable expectation that the choice will have the intended result.. that life is uncertain is not cause for denial of choice, choice is the mechanism used to preserve physical, mental, and spiritual harmony within that uncertainty.. <-- trips over Bill's gym bag --> Be well.. I agree that choice does not require certainty of outcome to be validated as free choice. What it does require is volition in what is chosen, and there is none. A robot can be programmed to make a choice, but this activity in no way implies that it could have chosen otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 4, 2013 22:08:35 GMT -5
Greetings.. I have seen him disengage with you. But it's speculation as to his reason for disengaging. You ask about other people's agenda, but you clearly have one when you engage Enigma. Is your agenda to understand him or make him wrong or something else? My agenda is to openly, honestly, and directly explore what is actually happening with him.. when i and or others are trying to explore what is actually happening, he and other similarly aligned members interject their opinions without the willingness to openly and honestly explore their own understandings.. E seems to lead that group, and so it's easier to discuss with one than a group of personalities intent on converting people's understandings to align with their's, which they avoid examining in the openness of clarity.. seriously, i'm very interested in exploring what is actually happening, without attachment to beliefs.. the first priority is understanding the nature of 'belief'.. Be well.. In the process of 'interjecting my opinion', I automatically open myself to an exploration of my understandings. That's how conversation works. Those understandings are not in any way kept hidden. I speculate that it only appears that way to you because you assume hidden agendas and purposeful manipulation and inherent contradictions, and you don't see me fessing up to them. It's just free for all fantasy in Tzuville. Often, there is not the inclination to engage said fantasy. |
|
