|
|
Post by silver on Sept 9, 2014 13:02:38 GMT -5
If living breathing creatures are given senses then there must be stuff to sense. We are making an impact on one another here, and in the 'audience', and by the time any of us gets the right answer (if there is one), we'll all be dead, our solid parts anyway. Plus we're all given such a passionate push to live and keep on living, I'd say that's pretty impossible to ignore. When you sense something in a nightly dream, is there really something there to sense or is it just an assumption you make when dreaming? I think most people know the diff between being awake and sensing/smelling spaghetti cooking on the stove and some weird stuff that goes on in our sleep. I don't think anyone interprets dreams at night as 'real' and they know that dreams may be symbolic or just nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 9, 2014 13:15:32 GMT -5
That's what's meant by "objective reality", and at the core of it is an assumption so deeply ingrained as to be essentially unconscious, which is that of the assumption of material realism. To question this assumption flies in the face of commonsense, but I can assure you, that this assumption is flawed. If living breathing creatures are given senses then there must be stuff to sense. We are making an impact on one another here, and in the 'audience', and by the time any of us gets the right answer (if there is one), we'll all be dead, our solid parts anyway. Plus we're all given such a passionate push to live and keep on living, I'd say that's pretty impossible to ignore. Do you perceive a contradiction in what you wrote and what you responded to? |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Sept 9, 2014 13:45:24 GMT -5
If living breathing creatures are given senses then there must be stuff to sense. We are making an impact on one another here, and in the 'audience', and by the time any of us gets the right answer (if there is one), we'll all be dead, our solid parts anyway. Plus we're all given such a passionate push to live and keep on living, I'd say that's pretty impossible to ignore. Do you perceive a contradiction in what you wrote and what you responded to? Well, no because you didn't ask a question, you told me something, that I don't know is true or 'actual' or just your particular fantasy. I just don't know what, if anything you may have been asking or trying to elicit. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 9, 2014 14:43:14 GMT -5
When you sense something in a nightly dream, is there really something there to sense or is it just an assumption you make when dreaming? I think most people know the diff between being awake and sensing/smelling spaghetti cooking on the stove and some weird stuff that goes on in our sleep. I don't think anyone interprets dreams at night as 'real' and they know that dreams may be symbolic or just nonsense. Peeps interpret night dreams as real when in the dream. They may conclude that if they are sensing, 'there must be stuff to sense'. And yet there is no stuff, and it's just an erroneous conclusion. How do you know you're not dreaming now, in perhaps a different way than in your nightly dreams? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 9, 2014 17:48:48 GMT -5
It could be that. I considered the contrivance before and wondered if it was the conditioning, and it could be that. Then I also sat for a minute and considered the nature of 'I'. Yes the self-reference is a big old abstraction that can be done without, but in another way, the 'I' is incredibly...'natural', in the sense that if speaking occurs, then there is always going to be an 'I' involved. So I'm not sure if its the conditioning that makes it sound contrived, or if its the sense of avoiding what is natural that creates the sense of contrivance. What seems natural is what we've been conditioned to see as natural. Yes, but its not just that I don't think. Due to the nature of linguistic communication, my guess is that it might require more effort to not use 'I' than to just use it. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 9, 2014 18:15:37 GMT -5
What seems natural is what we've been conditioned to see as natural. Yes, but its not just that I don't think. Due to the nature of linguistic communication, my guess is that it might require more effort to not use 'I' than to just use it. Sure, there are practical reasons for using personal pronouns. We were talking about what it seems contrived not to use them. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 9, 2014 18:39:56 GMT -5
Yes, but its not just that I don't think. Due to the nature of linguistic communication, my guess is that it might require more effort to not use 'I' than to just use it. Sure, there are practical reasons for using personal pronouns. We were talking about what it seems contrived not to use them. For the reason that it can be impractical, so we have to go out of our way a bit to not use them which then comes across a bit contrived. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 9, 2014 20:33:59 GMT -5
Sure, there are practical reasons for using personal pronouns. We were talking about what it seems contrived not to use them. For the reason that it can be impractical, so we have to go out of our way a bit to not use them which then comes across a bit contrived. O, ok |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Sept 9, 2014 20:49:33 GMT -5
I think most people know the diff between being awake and sensing/smelling spaghetti cooking on the stove and some weird stuff that goes on in our sleep. I don't think anyone interprets dreams at night as 'real' and they know that dreams may be symbolic or just nonsense. Peeps interpret night dreams as real when in the dream. They may conclude that if they are sensing, 'there must be stuff to sense'. And yet there is no stuff, and it's just an erroneous conclusion. How do you know you're not dreaming now, in perhaps a different way than in your nightly dreams? Well, I suppose if I am dreaming now, I was born into it. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Sept 9, 2014 21:22:02 GMT -5
I don't know what a dog knows.. we, as people with the capacity to understand and to imagine, have the same experiences, but different interpretations.. the experiences are actual, the interpretations are mindplay..After I wrote that it occurred to me that it might have been more prudent to say that 'it seems that a dog knows'. So, fair point. Pretty sure I get what you mean by the bolded bit, nevertheless, it could be said that the variety of contrasting experiences are 'not-actual' and the abiding isness within all experiences is 'actual'. 'Isness' isn't a word I tend to use, but I'm trying to offer an example that illustrates the point that what is 'actual' means different things to different people. Personally, I like the statement 'Love is all that is Real' but I understand that that wouldn't work for you....and its not something that I would insist on in every conversation. Will you look for where your description relies on ideas and imagery for its meaning, compared to an actual experience? Where you prefer the reference to 'Love', i see the 'word' love as unnecessary.. i can, you can, anyone can describe what they mean when they use the word 'love', and it is the 'many' nuanced individualized attempts to describe the experience called 'love' that adds meaning and understanding to the collective idea of 'love'.. those 'many' descriptions stand on their own merit, and have no need of a consensus 'word' that reduces the rich depth of personal experiences to an overused shorthand 'word' of convenience.. To say, "Love is all that is Real" is dependent on the mind's holding a particular set of values to be true.. there is liberation when the mind is freed from ideas like 'love', oneness, awareness (as stuff things are made of), duality/nonduality, etc.. umbrella words used as meaningless shorthand in place of organic interaction and interconnectedness.. umbrella words buffer people from engaging each other in sincere interactions to understand their experiences, umbrella wordsmiths create illusions that distract people from discovering who/what they actually are.. Convincing people that the word 'Love' has mystical meaning is useful in inspiring them to say things like "Love is all that is Real", rather than explore what 'it' is that IS 'real'.. philosophical discussions about how to best describe the experiences, misses the opportunity to share the experiences in favor of word-lawyering.. What exists after the experiencer has exhausted all efforts to disprove its existence?.. a more likely description of the actuality than the descriptions that did not survive all efforts to disprove the actuality.. A still mind's awareness is not distracted by ideas and wordsmiths.. it is still, alert, and present, the experiencer is engaged with the existence it is experiencing through the vehicle of its awareness, the ability to be informed by its experiences.. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Sept 9, 2014 21:37:37 GMT -5
[quote author=" enigma" source="/post/208748/thread" timesta mp="1410312839"] For the reason that it can be impractical, so we have to go out of our way a bit to not use them which then comes across a bit contrived. O, ok[/quote] There are quite a few languages that regularly don't use pronouns. In such cases the interlocutors develop a sense for who is who and what is what based on the context. High context cultures often fall into this category. The conversation would likely need to focus on conditioning. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 9, 2014 22:06:07 GMT -5
For the reason that it can be impractical, so we have to go out of our way a bit to not use them which then comes across a bit contrived. O, ok There are quite a few languages that regularly don't use pronouns. In such cases the interlocutors develop a sense for who is who and what is what based on the context. High context cultures often fall into this category. The conversation would likely need to focus on conditioning. The ready inference from a quick scan of this is that to the Japanese, English speakers likely sound like a bunch of egotists! Especially when we mangle their language!  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 9, 2014 22:17:04 GMT -5
When pronoun dropped from sentence sound like fortune cookie! |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Sept 9, 2014 22:22:11 GMT -5
Oh, OK. So, you're ultimate aim on the message board is to just one up! Noted. Is it that important to you? It aint about one upping. If I had to put into words, my aim is to play the part of devil's advocate..a voice of challenge....of providing the reminder not to get too attached to ANY idea as truth, even if that idea appears to be the catalyst to a very beneficial state of being...to keep going in terms of the seeing through of stories and ideas....to refrain from resting too long in one concrete 'truth' , in case you take up permanent residence there. And yes, if one is still 'lost in the dream' unaware of the fact that he is being governed by belief and attachment to a set identity and storyline, then the pointing is important. But surely there are many (most I'd say) here who are beyond being fully unconscious and immersed in the story of 'me' , and yet, the pointing still goes on and on as though it's still a very, very important thing to see. part of my message is that; That sense of importance is something important to look at.  In doing so, 'further' happens. The sense of importance gets released and a new kind of experience flows in. It's certainly not a 'problem' in the sense that I lose sleep over it or anything, but If freedom is valued, getting stuck in one place, in one perspective could be said to be somewhat problematic. The problem, if it can be called that, dissolves when one sees that they are holding to a specific vantage point out of need, and calling it the one and only 'truth.' Would you say you have a problem with what I'm presenting? A- I think you underestimate the power of delusion. It's infectious and makes people say and do funny/stupid/crazy shait. B- You appear to be worried about something and want to make things better. Perhaps somewhere in your unconscious there's a bit of desire to be seen as something special. Truth is just fine, and the characters in the dream, regardless of how they are perceived, are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. C- I love YOU. There's no choice. But I am not talking about figgles; I am talking to what I AM behind every curtain of every mind. I speak daily with minds from every corner of our planet, and only on occasion do I get the sense that there is someone willing, someone with the potential (much less ready) to make a run for it. So no, in the context presently playing out (based on what i have read and sensed from your words) i don't agree with your 'chosen' role of fighting the good fight. It inevitably supports delusion. In fact, I would say that you have been pulled into the dream just enough to believe you control or influence 'other people's' destinies. It is from that point of assumed identity that you seem to typically react. But yes, the show must go on. It is simply Beautiful. It is already free and transrationally creative. Dig that. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Sept 9, 2014 22:33:42 GMT -5
There are quite a few languages that regularly don't use pronouns. In such cases the interlocutors develop a sense for who is who and what is what based on the context. High context cultures often fall into this category. The conversation would likely need to focus on conditioning. The ready inference from a quick scan of this is that to the Japanese, English speakers likely sound like a bunch of egotists! Especially when we mangle their language! Precisely! When I studied Japanese, I had an amazing amount of difficulty keeping up with the participants and objectsmin a given context. Over the time of about 20 years living in Asia, my level of intuitive grasp (and appreciation for metaphors/parables/analogies) seems to have increased. Unfortunately, when writing professioanl papers, I tend to have to really turn on the hyper-analysis to make sure I'm not assuming too much from the reader. Actually, I somehow think that, with as objective and precise English can be (and beautifully so), some speakers of other languages think we're boring gits. That is, the precision can leave very little for interpretation, almost drowning out the joy of conversation. I can see it that way, but I have also lived the pains of a world swimming in ambiguity as well. Makes me fookin' eyes go crossed sometimes!  |
|
In doing so, 'further' happens. The sense of importance gets released and a new kind of experience flows in. 