Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 12:50:43 GMT -5
Image is Image, When you come, I am perceiving the image of Andrew, when I laffy comes, I am perceiving the image of laffy. But you know the image because of your knowledge. You perceive Andrew because you know of his qualities and properties Child doesn't conceive of any such qualities but still it perceives. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 13:03:57 GMT -5
No, I don't understand the problem. We both are talking about Tenka. Even after we try to explain to him more than 100 times, he again and again come back to the same place and understood nothing. Not only me , even Enigma knows that even if he explains Tenka is not going to understand anything but raising same kind of questions again and again. So he writes his reply with single line. i case you hadnt noticed, he does that very very often, often just non-remarks, or inside jokes with the other mega post counter. i think it would be good against ego-inflation if the counter switched automatically back to zero after 1000 posts. I no longer follow your discussions. I have decided that you have some kind of experience that is not average, maybe even spiritual, but your interpretation is very wrong. I explained this before.What you call logic is selective interpretation and has a lot of holes in it.There are other expanations possible for you experiences. When i adress that i get a confused smiley as response. We should try to understand you, but you make no effort to understand us.I can not entertain that kind of communication. I bear you no ill will, if you give other people the right to be themselves and live and express who they are, (like gay or lesbian persons).They did not make themselves,and it is hard enough for them to be who they are,without others trying to harass,mock,exclude, threaten and even kill them.Religion plays a big role in that bad attitude, btw. I understand that from your culture it may be hard to understand, but you are an intelligent person.You´ll figure it out. I say this here, now, a bit off topic, cause i wont be talking to you on your favorite topic anymore. be well.  Observe me very closely, whenever I interact with a person, I try very hard to make them understand, but only when they continue to show ignorance, I have left with no way because I know my own futility of addressing anything to them. I believe I am logically very strong, perhaps I am wrong But I believe myself that way. So I believe my interpretation towards my experience can't go wrong. I don't dislike Gay people or Lesbian people. Many here including Peter believes that I dislike them. Please believe me, I talked that way only to attack Alfio since he attacked me. I don't dislike them because it's not something they have chosen for themselves. I know their inner feeling are inherent by nature. Many religious people tend to mistake in this place that they act by their own will but it's not true. I know very well that they have been created that way, but one thing is, I really scared about them in the past but my logic never fail to grasp the truth about them even though I scared about them. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 22, 2016 13:04:08 GMT -5
But you know the image because of your knowledge. You perceive Andrew because you know of his qualities and properties Child doesn't conceive of any such qualities but still it perceives. The child does, it just doesn't do it verbally or conceptually. It is still knowing one thing in relation to other things. It knows its mum has food and dad does not lol (that's just an example). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 13:05:40 GMT -5
Child doesn't conceive of any such qualities but still it perceives. The child does, it just doesn't do it verbally or conceptually. It is still knowing one thing in relation to other things. It knows its mum has food and dad does not lol (that's just an example).lol lol ! |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 22, 2016 13:38:00 GMT -5
His point was that the presence of brain waves makes the dream physical. Much like you, he thinks about everything too much. Thinking doesn't help one expand the boundary of the known, but thinking is necessary to communicate certain things to other people, so clarity of thought is important in communication. But even in dealing with others you sometimes need to take them to the edge of a cliff, but that can't be done in this internet forum. Here we don't have much else besides words. The idea that brain waves makes the dream physical avoids the point that it's all happening in the mind (or brain if you prefer). |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 22, 2016 13:45:04 GMT -5
Correct. Thinking doesn't help one expand the boundary of the known, but thinking is necessary to communicate certain things to other people, so clarity of thought is important in communication. But even in dealing with others you sometimes need to take them to the edge of a cliff, but that can't be done in this internet forum. Here we don't have much else besides words. The idea that brain waves makes the dream physical avoids the point that it's all happening in the mind (or brain if you prefer). You can say that when you don't think brains exist in the first place? |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 22, 2016 13:46:19 GMT -5
If there was an objective physical world it would be interpreted in various ways by the subject(s) observing it. All dreams are seamless. One can't prove that a dream is a dream by examining the dream. This is slightly not true. Usage of reality creation will surely bring the objective outer world into the question. People movement in and out in our life surely force us to believe that we are dreaming. "In your dreams". |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 22, 2016 13:47:14 GMT -5
You see the original but it is not exterior. 99.999% of the time there is a one-to-one correspondence between what occurs exteriorly and our actions-and-what-we-sense. If there is no exterior world then why would Consciousness give the appearance of there being one? Once again, Consciousness is not a person. The question is misconceived. I don't know how I did any of that. All those things happen in Consciousness. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 22, 2016 13:49:34 GMT -5
I presume you are googling German history...and will see I was closer to truth that you. (Hitler was head of the Nazi party, which came to power in a National election, March 1933, with a coalition of the other mentioned party). I am not googling anything, I follows the writings of Tim'O Neil, he has the excellent knowledge in history of Jews,Romans and many. So one of his writings he has written this. OK, then you don't care what the truth is? |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 22, 2016 13:51:41 GMT -5
99.999% of the time there is a one-to-one correspondence between what occurs exteriorly and our actions-and-what-we-sense. If there is no exterior world then why would Consciousness give the appearance of there being one? Once again, Consciousness is not a person. The question is misconceived. I don't know how I did any of that. All those things happen in Consciousness. If individuations don't come from Consciousness, then where do they come from? Or at what point does Consciousness become individuation? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 13:52:00 GMT -5
This is slightly not true. Usage of reality creation will surely bring the objective outer world into the question. People movement in and out in our life surely force us to believe that we are dreaming. "In your dreams". What in my dreams? The context is about reality. We can know we are dreaming even now. When I say we are dreaming,I am saying we are perceiving and perception is being created by us. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 22, 2016 13:53:49 GMT -5
Yes, but I was addressing why I surmise he says appearances don't have brains. Appearance is mere image. Image can't have anything within itself. Thank you Gopal, you have made my day. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 22, 2016 13:55:49 GMT -5
What in my dreams? The context is about reality. We can know we are dreaming even now. When I say we are dreaming,I am saying we are perceiving and perception is being created by us. I put it in quotes as it is a saying. Here, when someone maintains something is the truth, and you know it's not, you say "In your dreams", meaning, it's only true in your dreams, meaning, it's not true. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 22, 2016 14:00:15 GMT -5
in the consciousness-appearances model that's true, but at that point I think the conversation was in the physical context. I might be wrong, you seem to be a couple of days behind so...I am not sure. No, E is admitting there is only One context, discussing a physical context is a concession (on his part), he just admitted he considers there to be no exterior world. No exterior world, brains don't exist, then we can only discuss imaginary/illusory brains. I never said there is only one context. Discussing the physical context is not a concession for me, though I see little point in explaining that you will hurt yourself if you walk in front of a moving bus, or how babies are made or what happens when a tree falls on you, so I don't respond with 'Hmmmm, yes, good point. well said'. Those are dumb Dufus points meant to dismiss the larger context. Have you forgotten that I'm the one who spoke endlessly about context and worked feverishly to try to keep folks from hop, skipping, jumping and mixing contexts? Do you notice that I still do that? Do you notice that L and I still joke about the need for me to post my ultimate treatise on context? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2016 14:02:18 GMT -5
i case you hadnt noticed, he does that very very often, often just non-remarks, or inside jokes with the other mega post counter. i think it would be good against ego-inflation if the counter switched automatically back to zero after 1000 posts. I no longer follow your discussions. I have decided that you have some kind of experience that is not average, maybe even spiritual, but your interpretation is very wrong. I explained this before.What you call logic is selective interpretation and has a lot of holes in it.There are other expanations possible for you experiences. When i adress that i get a confused smiley as response. We should try to understand you, but you make no effort to understand us.I can not entertain that kind of communication. I bear you no ill will, if you give other people the right to be themselves and live and express who they are, (like gay or lesbian persons).They did not make themselves,and it is hard enough for them to be who they are,without others trying to harass,mock,exclude, threaten and even kill them.Religion plays a big role in that bad attitude, btw. I understand that from your culture it may be hard to understand, but you are an intelligent person.You´ll figure it out. I say this here, now, a bit off topic, cause i wont be talking to you on your favorite topic anymore. be well. Observe me very closely, whenever I interact with a person, I try very hard to make them understand, but only when they continue to show ignorance, I have left with no way because I know my own futility of addressing anything to them. I believe I am logically very strong, perhaps I am wrong But I believe myself that way. So I believe my interpretation towards my experience can't go wrong. I don't dislike Gay people or Lesbian people. Many here including Peter believes that I dislike them. Please believe me, I talked that way only to attack Alfio since he attacked me. I don't dislike them because it's not something they have chosen for themselves. I know their inner feeling are inherent by nature. Many religious people tend to mistake in this place that they act by their own will but it's not true. I know very well that they have been created that way, but one thing is, I really scared about them in the past but my logic never fail to grasp the truth about them even though I scared about them. , Gopal, is the essence of what i am saying. And how you do not understand what i just wrote to you, it is exemplary and illustrative why you can not get results here.YOU make NO effort to understand the other person.Your only wish is, that they understand you. It does not work that way.They try, (i know i did- ) but you do not understand or even try to understand them. That is my problem here with you.You tell others they are ignorant,(which i find rude) but they have just as much right to be just as rude to you, because you are just as ignorant when they try to explain their insight to you. For the rest of your reply,thanks for the honesty, i respect it. When i was much younger, i was 18 or so, one of my friends told me he was (is?) gay. Since i knew him a while already and liked him as a friend, i noticed it made no difference to me. In my culture (Holland, then) it was already much accepted, education had been good about gay and lesbians. So i did not care when he went public with his being gay. He kept the same friends, and nothing changed, for me anyway. I can understand that in India this is going to take one or two generations more to get to that point. What others will say when you are seen with a gay person may be of influence.In Holland, and even here in Portugal (very catholic country before) nobody cares. But, i tell you, if you befriend a gay person, who can be discreet, you will have a friend for life, just for being there. No need to be scared. They dont bite, and wont try do funny things with you, if they have half a brain... And, a some men still are scared and homophobic here, but that is often because they have not acknowledged their own gay-ness.Self hatred, which finds agressive expression toward others. Be well. |
|
