|
Post by enigma on Jun 27, 2013 2:17:01 GMT -5
Like I said, look at it or don't. I'm not going to play the mirror game with you. H enigma, Fair enough but is not surprising that you are asked about yourself when getting personal with others. amit No, it's not surprising at all. At this point, do you feel i have adequately learned the lesson you started this thread to teach?
|
|
|
Post by amit on Jun 27, 2013 2:24:05 GMT -5
H enigma, Fair enough but is not surprising that you are asked about yourself when getting personal with others. amit No, it's not surprising at all. At this point, do you feel i have adequately learned the lesson you started this thread to teach? Hi enigma, Your response contains the assumption that my intention was to teach. What is it that you think you know about me that results in that assumption? amit
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 27, 2013 3:46:03 GMT -5
No, it's not surprising at all. At this point, do you feel i have adequately learned the lesson you started this thread to teach? Hi enigma, Your response contains the assumption that my intention was to teach. What is it that you think you know about me that results in that assumption? amit I know that you have refused all attempts to engage you on a personal level. I know that you do not approve of the personal approach in this venue. I know that you believe I approach others with unconscious motivations and projections. I know that you started a thread with the intention of encouraging those who engage the personal approach to reveal their own personal dynamics, effectively reflecting back the process to them. I further speculate that you suspected these people would resist the intrusion much the same way you have, and therefore might learn something that you suppose they did not know before, perhaps even altering their behavior. So again, do you feel i have adequately learned the lesson you started this thread to teach? If not, we can continue the lesson.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 27, 2013 4:03:22 GMT -5
Greetings.. Hi enigma, Your response contains the assumption that my intention was to teach. What is it that you think you know about me that results in that assumption? amit I know that you have refused all attempts to engage you on a personal level. I know that you do not approve of the personal approach in this venue. I know that you believe I approach others with unconscious motivations and projections. I know that you started a thread with the intention of encouraging those who engage the personal approach to reveal their own personal dynamics, effectively reflecting back the process to them. I further speculate that you suspected these people would resist the intrusion much the same way you have, and therefore might learn something that you suppose they did not know before, perhaps even altering their behavior. So again, do you feel i have adequately learned the lesson you started this thread to teach? If not, we can continue the lesson. Those are speculations, beliefs, and imaginative conjuring.. you assume far more than is evident, and assume your beliefs are evidence.. let go of the need to be the messiah, perhaps you might find less resistance.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jun 27, 2013 5:54:11 GMT -5
I'll rephrase: Thanks for your input, Quinn. It sounds like there might be something there for me to listen to. Care to elaborate? Or is it not important? Here it is again-- Haha! Sorry, Beingist - I read "don't know what in the world you're talking about" as "not enough of a common ground to be able to communicate". Plus I was crashing from too much coffee earlier. What I was saying is this: What you called a 'mind hook' from Enigma was, in actuality, a mind-stopper (in a good way). That's what I meant by it getting real quiet internally. And, even more importantly, it's not a mind-stopper by enforced silence or manipulated silence. There's no trickiness. It's a stopper because it addresses where the question came from. What you and I were doing in that conversation, and in our minds, was divvying up the Whole into the parts. Not a problem, and absolutely necessary for conversing. So one one side is ISness and the other is appearances. Or actuality and reality. Fine to talk about it that way. What were were then doing is trying to reconcile those parts see how they relate. How is a toilet God? But they don't need to relate, because the only place they were separate to being with was in our minds.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 7:31:27 GMT -5
How are you supposed to drop mindplay, when the whole board is full of it? (Present addressee excluded). Then literally speaking, there would be a need to drop the 'whole board'. Yeah? Yes, I suppose. Are you suggesting that silence drop from the board?
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 7:33:51 GMT -5
I'll rephrase: Thanks for your input, Quinn. It sounds like there might be something there for me to listen to. Care to elaborate? Or is it not important? Here it is again-- Haha! Sorry, Beingist - I read "don't know what in the world you're talking about" as "not enough of a common ground to be able to communicate". Plus I was crashing from too much coffee earlier. What I was saying is this: What you called a 'mind hook' from Enigma was, in actuality, a mind-stopper (in a good way). That's what I meant by it getting real quiet internally. And, even more importantly, it's not a mind-stopper by enforced silence or manipulated silence. There's no trickiness. It's a stopper because it addresses where the question came from. What you and I were doing in that conversation, and in our minds, was divvying up the Whole into the parts. Not a problem, and absolutely necessary for conversing. So one one side is ISness and the other is appearances. Or actuality and reality. Fine to talk about it that way. What were were then doing is trying to reconcile those parts see how they relate. How is a toilet God? But they don't need to relate, because the only place they were separate to being with was in our minds. Might have to read this a couple times for it to sink in, but thanks, Quinn.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 27, 2013 9:25:27 GMT -5
Greetings.. I know that you have refused all attempts to engage you on a personal level. I know that you do not approve of the personal approach in this venue. I know that you believe I approach others with unconscious motivations and projections. I know that you started a thread with the intention of encouraging those who engage the personal approach to reveal their own personal dynamics, effectively reflecting back the process to them. I further speculate that you suspected these people would resist the intrusion much the same way you have, and therefore might learn something that you suppose they did not know before, perhaps even altering their behavior. So again, do you feel i have adequately learned the lesson you started this thread to teach? If not, we can continue the lesson. Those are speculations, beliefs, and imaginative conjuring.. you assume far more than is evident, and assume your beliefs are evidence.. let go of the need to be the messiah, perhaps you might find less resistance.. Be well.. It's only speculation where I said it was. Read the thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 12:48:00 GMT -5
Then literally speaking, there would be a need to drop the 'whole board'. Yeah? Yes, I suppose. Are you suggesting that silence drop from the board? No.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 12:48:45 GMT -5
Haha! Sorry, Beingist - I read "don't know what in the world you're talking about" as "not enough of a common ground to be able to communicate". Plus I was crashing from too much coffee earlier. What I was saying is this: What you called a 'mind hook' from Enigma was, in actuality, a mind-stopper (in a good way). That's what I meant by it getting real quiet internally. And, even more importantly, it's not a mind-stopper by enforced silence or manipulated silence. There's no trickiness. It's a stopper because it addresses where the question came from. What you and I were doing in that conversation, and in our minds, was divvying up the Whole into the parts. Not a problem, and absolutely necessary for conversing. So one one side is ISness and the other is appearances. Or actuality and reality. Fine to talk about it that way. What were were then doing is trying to reconcile those parts see how they relate. How is a toilet God? But they don't need to relate, because the only place they were separate to being with was in our minds. Might have to read this a couple times for it to sink in, but thanks, Quinn. How many times have you read it now?
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 13:06:39 GMT -5
Might have to read this a couple times for it to sink in, but thanks, Quinn. How many times have you read it now? Twice. Working on a third. I think this is important, but uses terminology and phrasing that befuddle me a little (remember, I tend to think literally ). Apologies for any inconvenience.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 13:13:52 GMT -5
How many times have you read it now? Twice. Working on a third. I think this is important, but uses terminology and phrasing that befuddle me a little (remember, I tend to think literally ). Apologies for any inconvenience. What does literally mean? Thinking that I'm inconvenienced doesn't sound literal, could you explain how that's happening?
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 13:18:36 GMT -5
Twice. Working on a third. I think this is important, but uses terminology and phrasing that befuddle me a little (remember, I tend to think literally ). Apologies for any inconvenience. What does literally mean? Thinking that I'm inconvenienced doesn't sound literal, could you explain how that's happening? Why else would you ask? Otherwise, Adverbliterally (not comparable) 1.(speech act) word for word; not figuratively; not as an idiom or metaphor
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 13:25:12 GMT -5
What does literally mean? Thinking that I'm inconvenienced doesn't sound literal, could you explain how that's happening? Why else would you ask? Otherwise, Adverbliterally (not comparable) 1.(speech act) word for word; not figuratively; not as an idiom or metaphor In your own words please. Not from the dictionary.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 13:48:19 GMT -5
Why else would you ask? Otherwise, Adverbliterally (not comparable) 1.(speech act) word for word; not figuratively; not as an idiom or metaphor In your own words please. Not from the dictionary. It means that I have some difficulty understanding metaphorical stuff (though analogies work well for me, because my thinking is also visually-oriented), innuendo, subliminal suggestion, etc. I've gotten a lot better than I used to be. Currently, I'm processing Quinn's "It's a stopper because it addresses where the question came from". Which actually works for me, because a hook acts as a "stopper" (as in what causes a fish to stop swimming in the ocean). I get that all communication comes from mind, but right now, I don't understand what that's got to do with a toilet being God. I haven't reached a question, yet, because I simply don't have one. I'm just processing.
|
|