|
Post by laughter on Jun 10, 2013 12:42:10 GMT -5
You mean, you're NOT the infamous church licker?! Aw, man. And, here, I'd gone and told all my friends that I knew that guy! Dear Dude/Dudette, Seems like you've got some egg on your face now. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize There is no shame in trusting your friends!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 10, 2013 12:44:29 GMT -5
I have no interest and inclination to stand idiocy gladly on the forum at the moment. Probably best for both of us if you talk to people that don't think you are an idiot. Dear Dude/Dudette, Shocker! Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jun 10, 2013 12:47:08 GMT -5
To say anything about "the ineffable" other than it is "the ineffable" is nonsense. I can't claim to have never spoken nonsense. By definition that's true, but its not what I am asking/wondering....what I am wondering/asking is if you believe there IS an 'ineffable' beyond the realm of ideas (and to be clear, I am not saying I believe there isn't). Yanno, this is kind of interesting wedged between the word-origin conversation. You could actually ask, is there anything sacred beyond the realm of ideas? - since ineffable means too sacred/great for words to express. What would be your answer to that, Andrew? Where does 'sacredness' fit in for you? (Couldn't resist butting in for the coincidence. Hope you don't mind.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 12:50:26 GMT -5
Whatever it means to you, Max. 'Sacred' also comes from the Latin, sacrum, which means, well, sacred. For me, it means something that's worshipped, devoted to, or even attached to (like the proverbial 'sacred cow'). But, my Catholic friends certainly don't like that definition. If the meaning of sacred is something which is revered, then religion, respect for the sacred, seems a little redundant, eh? sacred in wikipedia: I can get down with sacred meaning "whole, uninjured, sound, healthy, entire, complete." The spatial sense -- referring to the area around a temple or sanctum -- seems most likely to be the meaning that our common use of religion is based. Something related to churchiness or mosquiness, etc. So what if Religio actually meant, meticulous respect for perfection ... ?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 10, 2013 12:51:07 GMT -5
To say anything about "the ineffable" other than it is "the ineffable" is nonsense. I can't claim to have never spoken nonsense. By definition that's true, but its not what I am asking/wondering....what I am wondering/asking is if you believe there IS an 'ineffable' beyond the realm of ideas (and to be clear, I am not saying I believe there isn't). "the ineffable" <saying_too_much> puts us on notice. End of story. </saying_too_much> The realm of ideas is an idea about ideas, and thereby self-referential. Just a sort of special effect, similar to the illusion of personhood.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 10, 2013 12:54:58 GMT -5
By definition that's true, but its not what I am asking/wondering....what I am wondering/asking is if you believe there IS an 'ineffable' beyond the realm of ideas (and to be clear, I am not saying I believe there isn't). Yanno, this is kind of interesting wedged between the word-origin conversation. You could actually ask, is there anything sacred beyond the realm of ideas? - since ineffable means too sacred/great for words to express. What would be your answer to that, Andrew? Where does 'sacredness' fit in for you? (Couldn't resist butting in for the coincidence. Hope you don't mind.) I take the word "ineffable" to have a different meaning quinn. I take it to mean "beyond expression with words". Yes, this embodies a self-referential paradox similar to "no thought is true". I've said this before: there is not more than one paradox.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 12:55:54 GMT -5
If the meaning of sacred is something which is revered, then religion, respect for the sacred, seems a little redundant, eh? sacred in wikipedia: I can get down with sacred meaning "whole, uninjured, sound, healthy, entire, complete." The spatial sense -- referring to the area around a temple or sanctum -- seems most likely to be the meaning that our common use of religion is based. Something related to churchiness or mosquiness, etc. So what if Religio actually meant, meticulous respect for perfection ... ? I might find myself gettin some religion!
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 12:57:29 GMT -5
By definition that's true, but its not what I am asking/wondering....what I am wondering/asking is if you believe there IS an 'ineffable' beyond the realm of ideas (and to be clear, I am not saying I believe there isn't). Yanno, this is kind of interesting wedged between the word-origin conversation. You could actually ask, is there anything sacred beyond the realm of ideas? - since ineffable means too sacred/great for words to express. What would be your answer to that, Andrew? Where does 'sacredness' fit in for you? (Couldn't resist butting in for the coincidence. Hope you don't mind.) My instinctive answer is that there is something sacred beyond the realm of ideas and which does include the realm of ideas. But for me its a matter of faith rather than a matter of conclusion or even realization.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 12:58:50 GMT -5
So what if Religio actually meant, meticulous respect for perfection ... ? I might find myself gettin some religion! youtu.be/DW0CQlZSAmM
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 10, 2013 12:59:44 GMT -5
<mas?> this is not a rose </mas?> Correct. It's actually an image of a rose. yes, and there's no conudrulfoundingly complexifying confusilation about that ... the "mas?" question was obviously tounge-in-cheek
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 10, 2013 13:01:43 GMT -5
Correct. It's actually an image of a rose. yes, and there's no conudrulfoundingly complexifying confusilation about that ... the "mas?" question was obviously tounge-in-cheek Laffey, nothing you say is obvious, to me. Nothing.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 10, 2013 13:03:22 GMT -5
By definition that's true, but its not what I am asking/wondering....what I am wondering/asking is if you believe there IS an 'ineffable' beyond the realm of ideas (and to be clear, I am not saying I believe there isn't). "the ineffable" <saying_too_much> puts us on notice. End of story. </saying_too_much> The realm of ideas is an idea about ideas, and thereby self-referential. Just a sort of special effect, similar to the illusion of personhood. The illusion of personhood.....now thats another can of worms! I agree the realm of ideas is an idea about ideas, but unless I am misunderstanding you, I still don't think you are answering the question I'm asking you. I'm asking you if you believe there is a 'that which cannot be named'? That is sometimes referred to as the ineffable or the indescribable? Do you believe there is something that can only be indirectly pointed to that is not within the realm of ideas?(and I'm not saying I believe there isn't).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 13:06:25 GMT -5
I might find myself gettin some religion! Excellent ineffable definition of the sacred here folks.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 10, 2013 13:15:11 GMT -5
"the ineffable" <saying_too_much> puts us on notice. End of story. </saying_too_much> The realm of ideas is an idea about ideas, and thereby self-referential. Just a sort of special effect, similar to the illusion of personhood. The illusion of personhood.....now thats another can of worms! I agree the realm of ideas is an idea about ideas, but unless I am misunderstanding you, I still don't think you are answering the question I'm asking you. I'm asking you if you believe there is a 'that which cannot be named'? That is sometimes referred to as the ineffable or the indescribable? Do you believe there is something that can only be indirectly pointed to that is not within the realm of ideas?(and I'm not saying I believe there isn't). As I implied with my first answer: Is it possible that you also believe that there IS an 'ultimate' or 'ineffable' beyond the realm of ideas? Edit: And to be clear, I'm not saying that I believe there isn't! To say anything about "the ineffable" other than it is "the ineffable" is nonsense. I can't claim to have never spoken nonsense. the problem lies with the question. <nonesense> to state a belief or a disbelief in or about "the ineffable" is more nonsense </nonsense> "the ineffable" is ineffable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 13:24:30 GMT -5
please elaborate on that bolded sentence what is your interpretation of 'not-knowing'? Dear Dude/Dudette, What do you want me to elaborate on that? It's about truthin', of course, not if Tzu's guitar was actually stolen or not or if Laozi did actually write the Daodejing or not. About that kind of stuff we might actually bang heads, hehe. Provide a little more background about 'not-knowing', please. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize I don't know what 'not knowing' is .. lol but one thing, I seem to know, from countless hours spent weeding my garden, is that if you don't remove every bit of the root, a new iteration of the same weed will resurface ... maybe some of these type direct observations, seen with a still mind, explain 'how things work', as said by "as above, so below"
|
|