|
Post by Beingist on Aug 22, 2013 16:23:25 GMT -5
In my impersonal experience, these here critters are sharp as a tack. pfft. Engineers were in third grade on that one. Besides, crows make squirrels look like imbeciles:
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 22, 2013 16:59:32 GMT -5
pfft. Engineers were in third grade on that one. Besides, crows make squirrels look like imbeciles: That really is surprising. I know some humans that couldn't figure that out. Hehe.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Aug 22, 2013 17:14:14 GMT -5
In my impersonal experience, these here critters are sharp as a tack. But incredibly indecisive, not to mention frantic. They're the cokeheads of the animal kingdom.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2013 17:18:15 GMT -5
That really is surprising. I know some humans that couldn't figure that out. Hehe. I disagree with the 'engineer' that the crow completed a "three step chess move", the bird didn't take the first stick with the intention of using it as a tool to retrieve the longer stick. It simply improvised after the first stick proved inadequate for the task, so it was a 'two-mover' when all was said and done. ;-) as an aside, Kasparov (the greatest living chess player) was recently stumped by a 'five move' chess problem.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Aug 22, 2013 17:20:58 GMT -5
pfft. Engineers were in third grade on that one. Besides, crows make squirrels look like imbeciles: That really is surprising. I know some humans that couldn't figure that out. Hehe. Heck, I don't think *I* would have been able to figure that one out. A bear would have just demolished the food container.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Aug 22, 2013 17:50:27 GMT -5
So the pointer is actually some kind of strategy to manipulate feleings? No. I don't mind your explanation, but since, as you say, the normal mode is for us to comprehend pointers only through mind or whatever you need to qualify your pointers and show how to interpret them as you intend them to be interpreted. Before you do that you're not entitled to complaining about us not "getting it". If I tell you to look out at the world around you, you don't need to think about it. In the same way, If I tell you to look at the world within you, you don't need to think about it. That's really all the background anyone needs to 'interpret' a pointer. Whatever the particular pointer is, just look and see if it's true or not. Another way of saying it could be that there is obviously an intelligence that gives rise to the movement of logical thought one typically assigns as their intelligence. In the absence of logical thought, you are just as intelligent as you ever were. This is why complete morons can just as easily if not more easily look and see what's being pointed to. You must recognize what your actual intelligence is and then you will know what to look actually means.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 22, 2013 21:43:20 GMT -5
But incredibly indecisive, not to mention frantic. They're the cokeheads of the animal kingdom. Hehe. I think it might be all the nuts.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 22, 2013 21:47:17 GMT -5
That really is surprising. I know some humans that couldn't figure that out. Hehe. Heck, I don't think *I* would have been able to figure that one out. A bear would have just demolished the food container. True, but then that would have been the simplest solution to the problem for the bear.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 22, 2013 21:55:57 GMT -5
So the pointer is actually some kind of strategy to manipulate feleings? No. I don't mind your explanation, but since, as you say, the normal mode is for us to comprehend pointers only through mind or whatever you need to qualify your pointers and show how to interpret them as you intend them to be interpreted. Before you do that you're not entitled to complaining about us not "getting it". If I tell you to look out at the world around you, you don't need to think about it. In the same way, If I tell you to look at the world within you, you don't need to think about it. That's really all the background anyone needs to 'interpret' a pointer. Whatever the particular pointer is, just look and see if it's true or not. Another way of saying it could be that there is obviously an intelligence that gives rise to the movement of logical thought one typically assigns as their intelligence. In the absence of logical thought, you are just as intelligent as you ever were. This is why complete morons can just as easily if not more easily look and see what's being pointed to. You must recognize what your actual intelligence is and then you will know what to look actually means. Nice pointer.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 22, 2013 22:08:18 GMT -5
No. If I tell you to look out at the world around you, you don't need to think about it. In the same way, If I tell you to look at the world within you, you don't need to think about it. That's really all the background anyone needs to 'interpret' a pointer. Whatever the particular pointer is, just look and see if it's true or not. Another way of saying it could be that there is obviously an intelligence that gives rise to the movement of logical thought one typically assigns as their intelligence. In the absence of logical thought, you are just as intelligent as you ever were. This is why complete morons can just as easily if not more easily look and see what's being pointed to. You must recognize what your actual intelligence is and then you will know what to look actually means. Nice pointer. Yeah, gosh. That actually rezzed with me. kuhl
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Aug 23, 2013 3:21:43 GMT -5
I must have left my frustration in another room, then. As for the rest, just because a person is interested in something most other people don't seem to be interested in does not mean that they don't live normal lives where they wake up in the morning, eat breakfast, go to work, pay bills, socialize, or whatever else. Does that mean I wouldn't like a mansion, a motorcycle, or even a new computer? Of course not. Those things just don't fit into my budget, and that's life. What would you consider a normal life to be? No, i'm not talking about mansions and motorcycles. I'm talking about chump normal and zen normal. All you have is the chump normal, but you want it to be zen normal. If you really thought that your life is normal then you wouldn't log into the interwebs and tell all about it to strangers from all over the world. This becomes more accentuated when you boast with your "normal" life being in the same context as the supposedly normal lifes of people like Bobby and The Great Enlightened Zen Master Seung Sahn. In truth your life is of course totally and embarrassingly normal, there is nothing to talk about at all. And yet you do talk about it. Why? Obviously because you're not actually okay with it, you want it to be a special normal, the zen normal, not the stupid chump normal of pitiful creatures who work all day and watch Fox news in the evening and are totally immersed in ignorance. The problem is that you know the truth (that your life is chump normal) and you don't actually believe that your life is the special zen normal and so you log into the interwebs and you tell a story about it, you're looking for other people to believe your story so that you are relieved from the impossible duty of having to believe it yourself. Because you know the truth you can't believe your story yourself and that's why you need other people to believe it for you. That's the only reason why you're telling us about your normal life. This is what I've been saying from the start. Yes, I am aware of the fact that any specialness I perceive in my life is 100% imagined. Maybe I do want something special to happen in my life, but that doesn't mean I'm incapable of understanding and accepting that what I want and what is the case are not the same thing. I was telling whoever it was about my normal life because I was trying to illustrate that I'm the last person anyone should ask about anything. I'm not any farther ahead than anyone else, and I have whole lot less life experiences to draw from than most other people.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 23, 2013 4:39:49 GMT -5
This is what I've been saying from the start. Yes, I am aware of the fact that any specialness I perceive in my life is 100% imagined. Maybe I do want something special to happen in my life, but that doesn't mean I'm incapable of understanding and accepting that what I want and what is the case are not the same thing. I was telling whoever it was about my normal life because I was trying to illustrate that I'm the last person anyone should ask about anything. I'm not any farther ahead than anyone else, and I have whole lot less life experiences to draw from than most other people. Stick to the facts. You came to this thread offering advice that nobody asked for. You came to this thread and wrote: "Just do whatever you do, and then do whatever you're doing next. Don't worry about what you're going to do next or what you did before while you're doing what you're doing now." Then comes Bobby and implicates Seung Sahn and you reply: "I was thinking the same thing when I wrote it, haha. I almost straight up quoted him." Stop lying to me or fúck off.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Aug 23, 2013 4:41:54 GMT -5
If I tell you to look out at the world around you, you don't need to think about it. In the same way, If I tell you to look at the world within you, you don't need to think about it. That's really all the background anyone needs to 'interpret' a pointer. There is no "world" inside me. The only relevant "inside" I am aware of is the dimension where there are a couple of feelings and thoughts and that's it. To look at those feelings to determine whether a pointer is true or not is retarded because the feelings are not interested in forming accurate representations of anything. Not true. Without actually articulated thought I can't think nearly as well as I can with. I know because I've tried. Yeah, I have no idea in what sense your pointer could make any sense. I'm not an idiot, this means that if I don't know what you're talking about then it means that either you're simply wrong or your explanation sucks.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Aug 23, 2013 7:45:25 GMT -5
It's an old story, but often applicable on this forum. A psychology professor was walking across campus toward class one morning when a student walking in the opposite direction spoke to him and said, "Good morning." The professor stared at her with a quizzical look on his face, and thought to himself, "I wonder what she meant by that."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2013 7:53:44 GMT -5
It's an old story, but often applicable on this forum. A psychology professor was walking across campus toward class one morning when a student walking in the opposite direction spoke to him and said, "Good morning." The professor stared at her with a quizzical look on his face, and thought to himself, "I wonder what she meant by that." my partner cant stand psychologists.... it great to see her with them.
|
|