|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2013 23:32:11 GMT -5
Yes, but you haven't, which is why I asked. Last time we discussed this, the entire universe was inherently selfish. Given this, you can imagine my surprise at the idea that you think this selfishness can be transcended. If trees don't experience, then how can they be selfishly trying to better their experience, as you once claimed? Okay, not sure where Q enters into the discussion, but if that's his claim (wherever, whenever, or whyever he said as much), I'm likely to agree with him. Enigma's folly is to believe that he knows what it's like to 'be' a tree... You going to believe him when he says that critters don't need to solve critter problems?! What I said is: "Critters don't need to transcend what they have not turned into a problem." Squirrels don't sit around moaning about the ugliness of life and lamenting the cruelty of it all. If you're wondering how I could possibly know this, they told me all about it in our squirrel satsangs.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2013 23:33:13 GMT -5
Enigma's folly is to believe that he knows what it's like to 'be' a tree... You going to believe him when he says that critters don't need to solve critter problems?! I'm to the point where I hardly believe anything he says. You got to that point all by yourself, Mr Bear.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 13, 2013 23:35:22 GMT -5
I'm to the point where I hardly believe anything he says. Yes, it's not just what Enigma say's that's a belief, it's the whole world and everything in it... Gnaw, that's just your belief.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 14, 2013 4:15:41 GMT -5
Squirrels don't sit around moaning about the ugliness of life and lamenting the cruelty of it all. If you're wondering how I could possibly know this, they told me all about it in our squirrel satsangs. It's a lack, not a virtue. They have yet to discover the dimension of their own creatureliness. And once they do they have to deal with it same as we have to. Before this their understanding of existence is incomplete and they have not yet fully arrived in life, i.e. they are fully immersed into their natural environment of appearances. They are just stupid animals. We have nothing to learn from them and they have no wisdom to share with us because they have not carried out the reflective process within which we are engaged.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2013 4:29:50 GMT -5
Squirrels don't sit around moaning about the ugliness of life and lamenting the cruelty of it all. If you're wondering how I could possibly know this, they told me all about it in our squirrel satsangs. It's a lack, not a virtue. They have yet to discover the dimension of their own creatureliness. And once they do they have to deal with it same as we have to. Before this their understanding of existence is incomplete and they have not yet fully arrived in life, i.e. they are fully immersed into their natural environment of appearances. They are just stupid animals. We have nothing to learn from them and they have no wisdom to share with us because they have not carried out the reflective process within which we are engaged. How do you know?
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 14, 2013 4:35:17 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2013 8:51:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 14, 2013 8:59:39 GMT -5
I think it's common sense. At least they haven't yet given us reason to believe otherwise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2013 9:05:45 GMT -5
I think it's common sense. At least they haven't yet given us reason to believe otherwise. In the absence of evidence either way, isn't it better to accept that you don't and can't know rather than to form an idea out of whole cloth? At a minimum its a more honest approach huh? Not knowing is better than clinging to a falsity ;-)
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 14, 2013 9:15:49 GMT -5
I think it's common sense. At least they haven't yet given us reason to believe otherwise. In the absence of evidence either way, isn't it better to except that you don't and can't know rather than to form an idea out of whole cloth? At a minimum its a more honest approach huh? Not knowing is better than clinging to a falsity ;-) Of course we have evidence. And it's good enough to support my speculation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2013 9:30:19 GMT -5
In the absence of evidence either way, isn't it better to except that you don't and can't know rather than to form an idea out of whole cloth? At a minimum its a more honest approach huh? Not knowing is better than clinging to a falsity ;-) Of course we have evidence. And it's good enough to support my speculation. Really? What evidence, or concrete proof can you offer that the following statement is accurate?: "They have yet to discover the dimension of their own creatureliness. "
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2013 9:33:08 GMT -5
In the absence of evidence either way, isn't it better to except that you don't and can't know rather than to form an idea out of whole cloth? At a minimum its a more honest approach huh? Not knowing is better than clinging to a falsity ;-) Of course we have evidence. And it's good enough to support my speculation. Haha, not to split hairs, but you did not present the previously quoted statement as a speculation, you presented it as a statement of fact. but even as a speculation, what hard evidence can you offer to support your speculation? Unless you are an animal mind reader, what can you offer other than anecdotal evidence?
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 14, 2013 9:45:25 GMT -5
Of course we have evidence. And it's good enough to support my speculation. Really? What evidence, or concrete proof can you offer that the following statement is accurate?: "They have yet to discover the dimension of their own creatureliness. " Most of them have no skills of symbolic reasoning, they don't write, they can't form thoughts complex enough to have any idea about our problems, much less any wisdom about how to solve them. It's already celebrated like a miracle when they can build some embarrassingly basic tools to save their life. Heck, most of them can't even pass the mirror test. Looking at animals for wisdom is just stupid new age nonsense, same as idealizing children, like Bobby does. They have nothing to teach us, they are idiots.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 14, 2013 9:48:55 GMT -5
Of course we have evidence. And it's good enough to support my speculation. Haha, not to split hairs, but you did not present the previously quoted statement as a speculation, you presented it as a statement of fact. No, it is splitting hairs, áss hairs actually.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 14, 2013 9:53:22 GMT -5
Really? What evidence, or concrete proof can you offer that the following statement is accurate?: "They have yet to discover the dimension of their own creatureliness. " Most of them have no skills of symbolic reasoning, they don't write, they can't form thoughts complex enough to have any idea about our problems, much less any wisdom about how to solve them. It's already celebrated like a miracle when they can build some embarrassingly basic tools to save their life. Heck, most of them can't even pass the mirror test. Looking at animals for wisdom is just stupid new age nonsense, same as idealizing children, like Bobby does. They have nothing to teach us, they are idiots. I can't be sure why it is you have such an extreme and intense opinion - I don't know what purpose it serves to feel that way about animals. Many of them can be incredibly important to us by way of companionship.
|
|