Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2013 21:52:43 GMT -5
Okay, and what is the "goal" of self honesty, what is the "result".Also, what is a genuine occurrence? clear (as in unobstructed) self knowledge ... and not knowledge as in any new information is there a benefit to self knowledge? if so, what is it, and does it lead to anything?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 12, 2013 21:55:50 GMT -5
clear (as in unobstructed) self knowledge ... and not knowledge as in any new information is there a benefit to self knowledge? if so, what is it, and does it lead to anything? benefit? not really no ... perhaps it can seem that way, but no. it leads to an absence of self-deception
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2013 22:12:52 GMT -5
is there a benefit to self knowledge? if so, what is it, and does it lead to anything? benefit? not really no ... perhaps it can seem that way, but no. it leads to an absence of self-deception What kind of self deception?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 12, 2013 22:19:43 GMT -5
benefit? not really no ... perhaps it can seem that way, but no. it leads to an absence of self-deception What kind of self deception? any and all I'm not implying that you are engaging in self-deception btw. Ignoring death back when I took myself to be the body would be an example. Here's the TMT version -- is it possible that I'm deceiving myself if I'm convinced that there's nothing that I'm deceiving myself about?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2013 0:12:27 GMT -5
Seems like there is a lot of emphasis on Realization. The biggies for me have been: "The comic absurdity of meaningless perfect existence." "The openness of 'Not Knowing'" and "The loss of the foundation of Selfhood or 'I' ". These Realizations use to be important to me. But now they seem secondary to Subjectivity Seems to me that the "goal" or whatever of this path, or our existence, is not realization, but to be absorbed in the totality of our being instead of the body/mind perspective....i.e. the entire ocean and not just the wave in its various aspects. What do you see as the most _________ of this path? Realization, or releasing the objectivity of body/mind centeredness into an absolute subjectivity and why? What is your opinion or experience of Absolute Subjectivity, and how does it relate to Realization? The 'goal' is the realization of absolute subjectivity, so the question seems to be misconceived.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 2:04:00 GMT -5
What kind of self deception? any and all I'm not implying that you are engaging in self-deception btw. Ignoring death back when I took myself to be the body would be an example. Here's the TMT version -- is it possible that I'm deceiving myself if I'm convinced that there's nothing that I'm deceiving myself about? Sorry my friend, but the whole pre-occupation with deceiving oneself or not deceiving oneself or not deceiving oneself about self deceit seems like a big silly hubbabaloo unless your absorbed in an identified localized self. How is ignoring death back when you took yourself to be a body self deception? Isn't it more like not paying attention to an imaginary event related to an imaginary idea of self?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Aug 13, 2013 4:53:33 GMT -5
Greetings..
There's a lot of selfs hiding in this rabbit hole, out-selfing each other with their wisdom-thinking..
Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 5:20:37 GMT -5
Greetings.. There's a lot of selfs hiding in this rabbit hole, out-selfing each other with their wisdom-thinking.. Be well.. you in the bad boys room?
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 13, 2013 5:40:49 GMT -5
yes, everything you said is true, but its one perspective based on where your attention is focussed...shift your attention and your truth shifts too. It is simply not possible to live from the perspective that I've described, we need to retreat into illusion, otherwise we go insane. The obscene truth is that it is contingent, particular and above all wrong and evil, and not even an intended evil, it is a stupid and material evil, without anyone being responsible for it. In opposition to it we try to construct the exact opposite: a pretty, universal and necessary kind of truth. Don't get me wrong. I fully support good experiences, regardless of how real or fake they are, I fully support that we create a dogma in which we do not have to face life in its obscene materiality. Otherwise we simply wouldn't function. Life is finite, so what we hold as truth doesn't matter, because nothing will judge us after our death, the only thing that matters is that we have an enjoyable life. My point is simply that when we are engaged in philosophy then we should be as honest as possible otherwise we cease to be philosophers. I'm not saying that your states are imagined. Your story about "absolute consciousness" is imagined.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 6:25:58 GMT -5
But in any case, I think there is almost a fear of being "plain spoken" here because there is so much word lawyering and a sense of right and wrong approach that pervades here. yes, I would imagine there could be many fears about writing here. but the writings are only words. the fears have to do with the author. fears of sounding crazy, or like a fool, or un-enlightened (lol), or a host of other things. or maybe the author has desires which aren't being fulfilled, the desire for open honest discussion comes to mind, or the desire not to have ones words get run through the psychoanalyst or lawyers office, hehe like this for example. in your head, your written expressions are getting undue push-back from the peanut gallery, and apparently the author (you) is getting fed up with it. (which is a form of insanity, don't ya think?) btw Top is the only TAT wack job (hehe) that I know of (although I assume there are others.) Earnest went to a retreat last year I think, and he found it to be helpful I believe. I only get the newsletter. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 13, 2013 8:44:45 GMT -5
But in any case, I think there is almost a fear of being "plain spoken" here because there is so much word lawyering and a sense of right and wrong approach that pervades here. yes, I would imagine there could be many fears about writing here. but the writings are only words. the fears have to do with the author. fears of sounding crazy, or like a fool, or un-enlightened (lol), or a host of other things. or maybe the author has desires which aren't being fulfilled, the desire for open honest discussion comes to mind, or the desire not to have ones words get run through the psychoanalyst or lawyers office, hehe like this for example. in your head, your written expressions are getting undue push-back from the peanut gallery, and apparently the author (you) is getting fed up with it. (which is a form of insanity, don't ya think?) btw Top is the only TAT wack job (hehe) that I know of (although I assume there are others.) Earnest went to a retreat last year I think, and he found it to be helpful I believe. I only get the newsletter. ;-) I split ways with TAT a while ago and shouldn't be used as a representative of TAT. I'd likely not get on the approved speaker's list. Steve does come across rather defensive of his POV. When someone went to visit FMW and was making fun of his philosophy and perspective, he was asked by his groupies why he didn't defend his philosophy. His reply was that the truth doesn't need to be defended.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2013 9:17:25 GMT -5
yes, I would imagine there could be many fears about writing here. but the writings are only words. the fears have to do with the author. fears of sounding crazy, or like a fool, or un-enlightened (lol), or a host of other things. or maybe the author has desires which aren't being fulfilled, the desire for open honest discussion comes to mind, or the desire not to have ones words get run through the psychoanalyst or lawyers office, hehe like this for example. in your head, your written expressions are getting undue push-back from the peanut gallery, and apparently the author (you) is getting fed up with it. (which is a form of insanity, don't ya think?) btw Top is the only TAT wack job (hehe) that I know of (although I assume there are others.) Earnest went to a retreat last year I think, and he found it to be helpful I believe. I only get the newsletter. ;-) I split ways with TAT a while ago and shouldn't be used as a representative of TAT. I'd likely not get on the approved speaker's list. Steve does come across rather defensive of his POV. When someone went to visit FMW and was making fun of his philosophy and perspective, he was asked by his groupies why he didn't defend his philosophy. His reply was that the truth doesn't need to be defended. FMW? Futher Mucker's Winery?
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 13, 2013 9:58:56 GMT -5
I split ways with TAT a while ago and shouldn't be used as a representative of TAT. I'd likely not get on the approved speaker's list. Steve does come across rather defensive of his POV. When someone went to visit FMW and was making fun of his philosophy and perspective, he was asked by his groupies why he didn't defend his philosophy. His reply was that the truth doesn't need to be defended. FMW? Futher Mucker's Winery? www.franklinmerrell-wolff.com/
|
|
|
Post by serpentqueen on Aug 13, 2013 10:36:02 GMT -5
Don't fool yourself. A relative truth is not a truth at all. There is only one truth and it's the truth of life in its contingent and obscene materiality. That we are this ugly creatures with these frail and disgusting bodies with internal organs, full of urine, feces and bacteria, all this slime, fat, bones, blood. And a nature that feeds on itself in unimaginable cruelty, all the diseases, decaying bodies. This is the trauma of man, that he is thrown into this pure contingency, without rhyme or reason. This truth is just a brutal fact, because it has no reason from which it follows, that's why it is impossible to accept, that the truth of life is this disgusting filth. It's easy to accept life if you're watching it from the perspective of some kind of imagined absolute subjectivity. But to fully accept life in its obscene materiality is impossible, you have to keep this reality away and maintain whatever illusion, otherwise this inhuman truth will destroy you. Have you ever imagined what it would be like if we never got ill and never died? If we lived forever and ever and ever?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2013 10:55:36 GMT -5
any and all I'm not implying that you are engaging in self-deception btw. Ignoring death back when I took myself to be the body would be an example. Here's the TMT version -- is it possible that I'm deceiving myself if I'm convinced that there's nothing that I'm deceiving myself about? Sorry my friend, but the whole pre-occupation with deceiving oneself or not deceiving oneself or not deceiving oneself about self deceit seems like a big silly hubbabaloo unless your absorbed in an identified localized self. How is ignoring death back when you took yourself to be a body self deception? Isn't it more like not paying attention to an imaginary event related to an imaginary idea of self? Almost everybody is 'absorbed in an identified localized self', which is what it means to 'take yourself to be a body'. Given that identification, of course ignoring death is self deception.
|
|