|
Post by Reefs on Jun 27, 2013 10:53:27 GMT -5
The question about purpose - as all other existential questions - is misconceived. Deal with it. Perhaps a paragraph explaining why you believe this to be so, rather than just telling someone they're wrong? Existential questions will disappear at one point. Other, ordinary questions, like "what time is it?" will always be with you.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 11:04:32 GMT -5
The question about purpose might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. The question about purpose - as all other existential questions - is misconceived. Deal with it. I am. Any question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 27, 2013 11:16:13 GMT -5
The question about purpose - as all other existential questions - is misconceived. Deal with it. I am. Any question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. The point is that some questions arise and some don't. And at some point, existential questions won't arise anymore, naturally. Not because they have been answered or given up on them, no, they just won't arise anymore. And when encountered, like in these discussions here, they will put a ZD-grin on your face. As long as existential questions are bugging you, you will have a very hard time cracking Zen koans.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 11:22:59 GMT -5
I am. Any question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. The point is that some questions arise and some don't. And at some point, existential questions won't arise anymore, naturally. Not because they have been answered or given up on them, no, they just won't arise anymore. And when encountered, like in these discussions here, they will put a ZD-grin on your face. As long as existential questions are bugging you, you will have a very hard time cracking Zen koans. Understood and agreed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 11:33:56 GMT -5
The question about purpose is one of those existential questions. A misconceived question. A question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. That's an interesting distinction. Based on misconceptions vs. misconceived. There is some possible overlap between the two. An assumption, when aired out and examined might be a misconception. For example, using the term vomitorium as meaning a place where people purged after feasts. This might lead to a question like: I wonder if the decline of American Empire, as evidenced by obesity, will coincide with an uptick in vomitoriums in modern architectural design? (Reality check: vomitoriums had nothing to do with purging.) The question is based on a misconception related to the meaning of vomitoriums. Of course, there's also the assumption that there is an American Empire and that obesity is an indicator of it's decline. Those could be misconceptions as well. The question could rightly be said to be misconceived because it is birthed from misconcepting parents. But assumptions may not be misconceptions and still a question is misconceived. In fact, the assumptions may be valid in one context. The charge of the question being misconceived might be because the assumptions which are seen as valid in one context are seen as invalid in another context. So when "the question is misconceived" is said, it might be really about looking at the underlying assumptions to see in what context they are valid or not. For example, "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" The underlying assumption is that there is someone who is spiritually asleep. Depending on perspective, it could be that I am asleep. Or it could be that I am awake. Or it could be that there is no one there, no "I" and thus no one asleep or awake. Also, the 'when' presupposes time. All of those founding assumptions may be valid in a relative context, and so the question makes sense. But they may be invalid in another context. The question itself is a symptom of fundamental unquestioned assumptions. Saying "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" is a misconceived question is not a contemptuous comment at all. Any contempt is projected on to that comment. A defensive reaction. It might be useful to see why this is seen as contemptuous. On the other hand, using 'the question is misconceived' could be used in a contemptuous way, like anything else. But the contempt would still not be rooted in the comment itself, it would be rooted in the intention and perspective. Perhaps there is some fatigue around discerning the intent/perspective.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 27, 2013 11:36:50 GMT -5
I am. Any question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. The point is that some questions arise and some don't. And at some point, existential questions won't arise anymore, naturally. Not because they have been answered or given up on them, no, they just won't arise anymore. And when encountered, like in these discussions here, they will put a ZD-grin on your face. As long as existential questions are bugging you, you will have a very hard time cracking Zen koans. It is important to know the difference between Who you are and the role you are here to play. As long as you live this Life there will be a role to play...a purpose here for you. Each comes into this world with God given talents and abilities. Whether president, pope, dentist or trash collector, it is your duty to do it as well as you can...to care for it, as it is proper to be a good steward of what you are given. ZD runs a contracting business and I'm sure he is super conscientious and successful in its running. From that role I am also certain he is able to bring great good into the world as well. If you do not know what your purpose is then you must find out. Search your heart, find out what it is that you do love to do, and do it.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 11:45:30 GMT -5
A question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. That's an interesting distinction. Based on misconceptions vs. misconceived. There is some possible overlap between the two. An assumption, when aired out and examined might be a misconception. For example, using the term vomitorium as meaning a place where people purged after feasts. This might lead to a question like: I wonder if the decline of American Empire, as evidenced by obesity, will coincide with an uptick in vomitoriums in modern architectural design? (Reality check: vomitoriums had nothing to do with purging.) The question is based on a misconception related to the meaning of vomitoriums. Of course, there's also the assumption that there is an American Empire and that obesity is an indicator of it's decline. Those could be misconceptions as well. The question could rightly be said to be misconceived because it is birthed from misconcepting parents. But assumptions may not be misconceptions and still a question is misconceived. In fact, the assumptions may be valid in one context. The charge of the question being misconceived might be because the assumptions which are seen as valid in one context are seen as invalid in another context. So when "the question is misconceived" is said, it might be really about looking at the underlying assumptions to see in what context they are valid or not. For example, "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" The underlying assumption is that there is someone who is spiritually asleep. Depending on perspective, it could be that I am asleep. Or it could be that I am awake. Or it could be that there is no one there, no "I" and thus no one asleep or awake. Also, the 'when' presupposes time. All of those founding assumptions may be valid in a relative context, and so the question makes sense. But they may be invalid in another context. The question itself is a symptom of fundamental unquestioned assumptions. Saying "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" is a misconceived question is not a contemptuous comment at all. Any contempt is projected on to that comment. A defensive reaction. It might be useful to see why this is seen as contemptuous. On the other hand, using 'the question is misconceived' could be used in a contemptuous way, like anything else. But the contempt would still not be rooted in the comment itself, it would be rooted in the intention and perspective. Perhaps there is some fatigue around discerning the intent/perspective. Hmmm. Lotta words, there. Big explanation. But, the bottom line is that there is no such as a misconceived question.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 27, 2013 11:52:42 GMT -5
Perhaps a paragraph explaining why you believe this to be so, rather than just telling someone they're wrong? Existential questions will disappear at one point. Other, ordinary questions, like "what time is it?" will always be with you. That doesn't explain why the question is misconceived.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 27, 2013 11:54:02 GMT -5
I am. Any question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. The point is that some questions arise and some don't. And at some point, existential questions won't arise anymore, naturally. Not because they have been answered or given up on them, no, they just won't arise anymore. And when encountered, like in these discussions here, they will put a ZD-grin on your face. As long as existential questions are bugging you, you will have a very hard time cracking Zen koans. Nor does that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 12:08:28 GMT -5
That's an interesting distinction. Based on misconceptions vs. misconceived. There is some possible overlap between the two. An assumption, when aired out and examined might be a misconception. For example, using the term vomitorium as meaning a place where people purged after feasts. This might lead to a question like: I wonder if the decline of American Empire, as evidenced by obesity, will coincide with an uptick in vomitoriums in modern architectural design? (Reality check: vomitoriums had nothing to do with purging.) The question is based on a misconception related to the meaning of vomitoriums. Of course, there's also the assumption that there is an American Empire and that obesity is an indicator of it's decline. Those could be misconceptions as well. The question could rightly be said to be misconceived because it is birthed from misconcepting parents. But assumptions may not be misconceptions and still a question is misconceived. In fact, the assumptions may be valid in one context. The charge of the question being misconceived might be because the assumptions which are seen as valid in one context are seen as invalid in another context. So when "the question is misconceived" is said, it might be really about looking at the underlying assumptions to see in what context they are valid or not. For example, "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" The underlying assumption is that there is someone who is spiritually asleep. Depending on perspective, it could be that I am asleep. Or it could be that I am awake. Or it could be that there is no one there, no "I" and thus no one asleep or awake. Also, the 'when' presupposes time. All of those founding assumptions may be valid in a relative context, and so the question makes sense. But they may be invalid in another context. The question itself is a symptom of fundamental unquestioned assumptions. Saying "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" is a misconceived question is not a contemptuous comment at all. Any contempt is projected on to that comment. A defensive reaction. It might be useful to see why this is seen as contemptuous. On the other hand, using 'the question is misconceived' could be used in a contemptuous way, like anything else. But the contempt would still not be rooted in the comment itself, it would be rooted in the intention and perspective. Perhaps there is some fatigue around discerning the intent/perspective. Hmmm. Lotta words, there. Big explanation. But, the bottom line is that there is no such as a misconceived question. Is there reasoning for the bottom line, or is it just an assertion? edit: or is it an expressionofmindinformedbyrealization?
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 12:20:15 GMT -5
Hmmm. Lotta words, there. Big explanation. But, the bottom line is that there is no such as a misconceived question. Is there reasoning for the bottom line, or is it just an assertion? edit: or is it an expressionofmindinformedbyrealization? Neti-neti. Though, indeed, questions can be based on misconceptions, there is no such thing as a misconceived question. It's just a question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 12:23:32 GMT -5
Is there reasoning for the bottom line, or is it just an assertion? edit: or is it an expressionofmindinformedbyrealization? Neti-neti. Though, indeed, questions can be based on misconceptions, there is no such thing as a misconceived question. It's just a question. Ah, so you object to using adjectives to describe a question. I see.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jun 27, 2013 12:28:27 GMT -5
Neti-neti. Though, indeed, questions can be based on misconceptions, there is no such thing as a misconceived question. It's just a question. Ah, so you object to using adjectives to describe a question. I see. Just the adjective 'misconceived'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2013 12:30:10 GMT -5
Ah, so you object to using adjectives to describe a question. I see. Just the adjective 'misconceived'. Can you imagine a case where the adjective 'misconceived' can be used? I.E. not necessarily a question. edit: The father of the baby and the mother of the baby both thought they were practicing safe sex when they rubbed potato skins on their foreheads and buried the potatoes in the garden on the night of a full moon. The baby was misconceived.
|
|
|
Post by vacant on Jun 27, 2013 12:36:51 GMT -5
A question might be based on a misconception, but no question is misconceived. That's an interesting distinction. Based on misconceptions vs. misconceived. There is some possible overlap between the two. An assumption, when aired out and examined might be a misconception. For example, using the term vomitorium as meaning a place where people purged after feasts. This might lead to a question like: I wonder if the decline of American Empire, as evidenced by obesity, will coincide with an uptick in vomitoriums in modern architectural design? (Reality check: vomitoriums had nothing to do with purging.) The question is based on a misconception related to the meaning of vomitoriums. Of course, there's also the assumption that there is an American Empire and that obesity is an indicator of it's decline. Those could be misconceptions as well. The question could rightly be said to be misconceived because it is birthed from misconcepting parents. But assumptions may not be misconceptions and still a question is misconceived. In fact, the assumptions may be valid in one context. The charge of the question being misconceived might be because the assumptions which are seen as valid in one context are seen as invalid in another context. So when "the question is misconceived" is said, it might be really about looking at the underlying assumptions to see in what context they are valid or not. For example, "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" The underlying assumption is that there is someone who is spiritually asleep. Depending on perspective, it could be that I am asleep. Or it could be that I am awake. Or it could be that there is no one there, no "I" and thus no one asleep or awake. Also, the 'when' presupposes time. All of those founding assumptions may be valid in a relative context, and so the question makes sense. But they may be invalid in another context. The question itself is a symptom of fundamental unquestioned assumptions. Saying "When am I going to spiritually awaken?" is a misconceived question is not a contemptuous comment at all. Any contempt is projected on to that comment. A defensive reaction. It might be useful to see why this is seen as contemptuous. On the other hand, using 'the question is misconceived' could be used in a contemptuous way, like anything else. But the contempt would still not be rooted in the comment itself, it would be rooted in the intention and perspective. Perhaps there is some fatigue around discerning the intent/perspective. Great comment, Max, and perfectly clear. I was just going to ask Beingist in what way he saw a significant difference between a misconceived question and a question based on misconception. Your short essay puts paid to that. I also think that Reef's use of the term "misconceived question" is fair and wholly acceptable if he sees that the assumptions the question is based on are misconceived, I certainly read it as such. Accusing him of contempt would only be another assumption, misconceived or not.
|
|