|
Post by topology on Aug 14, 2013 18:34:54 GMT -5
It's a hypnotic suggestion in hopes that what is in control will take the suggestion and get inspired to shift the attention to take a look at what is being pointed at. So, he IS NLP'ing! Either that or it's a total joke Are you using language to communicate and interact? Then you're engaged in Neuro Linguistic Programming whether you're aware of it or not. Your whole conception of the world is built out of the fabric of language.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 14, 2013 18:39:15 GMT -5
If no one has control, then how does one 'not play games'; 'realize'; see 'what in blazes is going on'; and all the other things you provide imperatives that they do? I'm asking this, because you imply control (or volition, if that's the term you prefer to use) when you say, 'stop playing games', etc. It's a hypnotic suggestion in hopes that what is in control will take the suggestion and get inspired to shift the attention to take a look at what is being pointed at. Hyp... notic? You mean he's a ....
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 14, 2013 18:40:27 GMT -5
So, he IS NLP'ing! Either that or it's a total joke Are you using language to communicate and interact? Then you're engaged in Neuro Linguistic Programming whether you're aware of it or not. Your whole conception of the world is built out of the fabric of language. You mean we're all ...
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 14, 2013 18:47:31 GMT -5
Control requires volition. Since volition is an illusion, so is control. I've never said anyone has control. I've said the opposite many times. If no one has control, then how does one 'not play games'; 'realize'; see 'what in blazes is going on'; and all the other things you provide imperatives that they do? I'm asking this, because you imply control (or volition, if that's the term you prefer to use) when you say, 'stop playing games', etc. They're just pointers. One might hear it and be inspired to do it, or not.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 14, 2013 18:49:43 GMT -5
If no one has control, then how does one 'not play games'; 'realize'; see 'what in blazes is going on'; and all the other things you provide imperatives that they do? I'm asking this, because you imply control (or volition, if that's the term you prefer to use) when you say, 'stop playing games', etc. They're just pointers. One might hear it and be inspired to do it, or not. Fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 14, 2013 18:52:29 GMT -5
It's a hypnotic suggestion in hopes that what is in control will take the suggestion and get inspired to shift the attention to take a look at what is being pointed at. So, he IS NLP'ing! Either that or it's a total joke
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 14, 2013 20:56:38 GMT -5
Are you using language to communicate and interact? Then you're engaged in Neuro Linguistic Programming whether you're aware of it or not. Your whole conception of the world is built out of the fabric of language. You mean we're all ... N-o!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 14, 2013 21:11:46 GMT -5
......to speak of self with a small 's', I call that 'person' and 'the person' is comprised of, Self (with a capital), body, conditioning/story, individuated unique perspective...... The degree to which the conditioning & story can be seen through and falls away is the degree to which the Self (capital S) is realized in day to day, moment to moment experience. As I see it, there's really no separating self from Self. So if we pull them apart conceptually for a moment, what would you say this Self really is? Why, obviously, it is a mutley snicker.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 14, 2013 21:19:47 GMT -5
Within subjectivity (having a subjective experience) there can be objectivity about what is happening with the mind, emotions, body, etc. Im going to express the limitations of Enigma's focus. Figuring out what's going on with someone else is not always clear, and language use varies some from person to person, but there can be reliable indicators about the mental state of another person through the language they are compelled to use. Mental states can be difficult, and I'm pretty careful about saying something that I don't see clearly, and I'll wait until it IS clear, if ever. Even so, that's where I'm likely to preface a comment with 'As I see it', or something similar. However, mostly I point out obvious misperceptions precisely because they ARE obvious. They often relate to me, and they often refer to previous posts.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 14, 2013 22:38:01 GMT -5
Volition is about choice, about (free) will. Schopenhauer said: "Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills" Sure. But, then, this is where the debate starts about there being a choice, but no chooser. So, is there volition, or not? (This is a rhetorical question, not to answer, please). Otherwise, I'm not getting into volition, again, if that's okay with you. I'm talking about control. Am I serious about what, exactly? E talks a lot about the need to do certain things like 'realizing' and 'noticing' etc. All's I'm sayin' is that it is errant to assume that one has control over that. He seems to want to take that, and talk about volition, but I'm still talking about control. If he wants to answer the question about control, great. If he wants to leapfrog to 'volition', then he fails in his communication skills. Volition and control go hand in hand. It rather seems you are deliberately playing dumb and looking for reasons to prolong your grudge against Enigma. Not saying that there's anything wrong with that...
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 14, 2013 22:41:17 GMT -5
Sure. But, then, this is where the debate starts about there being a choice, but no chooser. So, is there volition, or not? (This is a rhetorical question, not to answer, please). Otherwise, I'm not getting into volition, again, if that's okay with you. I'm talking about control. Am I serious about what, exactly? E talks a lot about the need to do certain things like 'realizing' and 'noticing' etc. All's I'm sayin' is that it is errant to assume that one has control over that. He seems to want to take that, and talk about volition, but I'm still talking about control. If he wants to answer the question about control, great. If he wants to leapfrog to 'volition', then he fails in his communication skills. Control requires volition. Since volition is an illusion, so is control. I've never said anyone has control. I've said the opposite many times. No-brainer.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 14, 2013 22:46:14 GMT -5
Control requires volition. Since volition is an illusion, so is control. I've never said anyone has control. I've said the opposite many times. If no one has control, then how does one 'not play games'; 'realize'; see 'what in blazes is going on'; and all the other things you provide imperatives that they do? I'm asking this, because you imply control (or volition, if that's the term you prefer to use) when you say, 'stop playing games', etc. Realization is a happening, not a doing. It's not the personal that realizes, it's the impersonal that realizes. Which means your questions are ... wait for it... misconceived.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 14, 2013 22:48:42 GMT -5
If no one has control, then how does one 'not play games'; 'realize'; see 'what in blazes is going on'; and all the other things you provide imperatives that they do? I'm asking this, because you imply control (or volition, if that's the term you prefer to use) when you say, 'stop playing games', etc. They're just pointers. One might hear it and be inspired to do it, or not. Yup. No guaranteed recipe and such. Ripeness is the 'tigger' that gets things done! Unfortunately, ripeness can't be on your personal to-do-list.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 14, 2013 23:50:31 GMT -5
Sure. But, then, this is where the debate starts about there being a choice, but no chooser. So, is there volition, or not? (This is a rhetorical question, not to answer, please). Otherwise, I'm not getting into volition, again, if that's okay with you. I'm talking about control. Am I serious about what, exactly? E talks a lot about the need to do certain things like 'realizing' and 'noticing' etc. All's I'm sayin' is that it is errant to assume that one has control over that. He seems to want to take that, and talk about volition, but I'm still talking about control. If he wants to answer the question about control, great. If he wants to leapfrog to 'volition', then he fails in his communication skills. Volition and control go hand in hand. It rather seems you are deliberately playing dumb and looking for reasons to prolong your grudge against Enigma. Not saying that there's anything wrong with that... I believe that's the case too, not only by making control and volition entirely separate issues, but by refusing to challenge his conclusions that I'm contradicting myself. Why would he want to hold onto his 'grudge'?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 14, 2013 23:52:59 GMT -5
Control requires volition. Since volition is an illusion, so is control. I've never said anyone has control. I've said the opposite many times. No-brainer. One would 'think' so, but maybe thinking is the problem.
|
|