|
|
Post by Transcix on May 19, 2014 13:21:59 GMT -5
The existence of ego is not either/or.. "ego" is a mere label.. one doesn't have 'ego' per se, rather one has tendencies and aspects some of which may be defined as more or less egocentric in nature than others.. if you're going to proclaim to know the root of assumption, you should specify what tendencies or aspects specifically you're referring to rather than using the ambiguous term 'ego'.. lest you yourself make a grand assumption..
|
|
|
|
Desire
May 14, 2014 18:36:35 GMT -5
Post by Transcix on May 14, 2014 18:36:35 GMT -5
Does intention lead to desire, or does desire lead intention? A better question: A Man came from a grassy knoll, and fired a shot to the skull of a man named Jacob, who was killed, how did that killing affect Jacob's essential nature of the sniper and the Jacob? Another question: A flower blooms with a blemish on two petals, the blemish is on opposites sides of the flower, which half of the flower is perfect, and which is not? One more question: Two kids are laughing at a joke, the first child pokes the second in the eye, the second child gives the first a hug...they both laugh and laugh....what is the punchline of the joke? I really have no idea what you mean to say.. |
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 12, 2014 14:09:30 GMT -5
If life is anything that you can get away with, then it stands to reason that you should try to push the envelope.. don't refrain from indulgence because of some moral imperative you hold as opinion.. the line between indulgence and over-indulgence is one of the deepest truths.. the OP asked a question about feeling good, I'm saying it's not about feeling good, sure try to feel as good as you can all the time, but always of more fundamental importance is how you're feeling good and / or what you're feeling good about.. people tend to see how they 'feel' in a given situation and thereby discern how the situation fits into their system of value judgments, if it's a 'good' situation, a 'healthy' situation, an 'unhealthy' situation, etc.. then they get into another situation and see how they feel.. but basing your discernment of the character of the situation you're in based on how it makes you feel is a pivotal error.. what's important is the manner and mechanism by which your feeling changes from one thing to another, what it is not in the external situations but rather in your internal makeup which causes change in your perspective and what that change means not in terms of externalities but in terms of a self-referential context of internal experience.. you aren't xing adrift on a sea of change so it's imperative to fully discern how *you* change *yourself*..
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 12, 2014 13:10:30 GMT -5
I don't know who you are referring to. There is zd (Zen Dancer) and E (enigma), but an EZ doesn't come to mind. What do you want to philosophically debate? sdp Hmmm, that would explain why I couldn't locate him in the member database. |
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 11, 2014 18:56:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 11, 2014 18:51:53 GMT -5
I'm new to this forum so I don't know who this EZ is but I've heard his named referenced many times as him being somehow untouchable in the area of philosophical debate. A challenge in this regard may be a nice break to my boredom..
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 11, 2014 18:46:03 GMT -5
By definition, a priori logic in fact, a painting cannot exist without a painter. ISness cannot imply some sort of autopilot mode if it denies the realities of free choice. In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, in the expert's mind there are few. What would you want with a 'free mind'?--to always be able to choose among an infinite number of choices as if the future before you were some blank canvas divorced from the character and dispositions of the being acting on it? You cannot fully say that "still mind" is pure "ISness" without first fully investigating and digesting the concept of freedom of will. If, in hypothetical analogy, a computer of unlimited computational capacity could calculate every single thing you would ever do, would you feel that this is somehow any infringement on your "freedom of will"? Are you trying to annihilate the framework you come from, or synthesize with it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 11, 2014 18:22:27 GMT -5
Do you find it offensive when another person presumes to know about you and relates to you from that presumption? I'm using your word. I would use the word annoying or frustrating. Everybody presumes to know about everybody else and relates to them at least to an extent from that perspective; true 100% clear communication is impossible. As ugly as it may be at times, what's far more ugly to me is when people avoid speaking their mind, cowering in the notion of "how things are done" and what is "proper" or not to say. If someone doesn't find it ugly how others presume to know about them and relate to them from that perspective, I say you haven't been nearly bold enough, come out from under than ugly rock you're hiding under and engage in the conversations all around you; or feel free to retreat into solitude, I myself barely maintain the volition to remain in the thick of society and look quite forward to the demise of my mortal coil, however don't assume others see you more kindly just because you refrain from getting in their way. The world is ugly, there's no two ways about it.. the solution is to yourself be beautiful, not for the world but for yourself! If you accidentally step on ants as you exit the house and you cry about it afterwards, I laugh about your crying. To truly love someone is to set them free, the weight of the world doesn't rest on anyone's shoulders. True "good" is far closer to neutrality than holier-than-thou religions would have you believe. Compassion for all isn't the result of some moral imperative, it's merely practical as the alternative would in negative emotions expose you to so much more ugliness and bitterness, however it's pivotal to fully understand the "all" in compassion to all, to understand how little most people are, how seeing the best in people generally implies that people are barely existent, mere embryos if not outright spermatozoa. |
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 11, 2014 18:11:30 GMT -5
Is that a phallic reference?
"Ceci nes't pas une pipe." -- J. R. Bob Dobbs
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 11, 2014 18:07:27 GMT -5
If you want to chase a high then chase a high. Sure meditation can give you a high. What's important is achieving a modality of being that's (eternally) sustainable and not getting distracted from it by the lure of highs.. once you're operating within that modality of being then feel free to indulge as much as you'd like, although you obviously will so that's not saying much.
Do I want short-term gain and long-term pain, or short-term pain and long-term gain? And I'll add, in terms of short-term pain, challenge need be actually arduous rather than a stimulating battle only to the extent one fails to realize the right answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 11, 2014 17:57:21 GMT -5
1. What is Desire?
Desire is wanting something to complete one's self, as opposed to one's self already being complete in the first place.
2. What is the relationship of desire with mind?
Mind negotiates the perspective of who and what one is, to what extent the process of one's being is complete or incomplete, and how the process of one's complete being manifests.
3. Where does desire originate?
Desire originates from an innate predisposition of volition towards living, a natural bi-product of sentience.
4. What is the effect of desire?
The effect of desire is that one either desires various things that are mutually overlapping or outright mutually exclusive, resulting in inner and outer conflict and confusion, or that one properly aligns desire with intent in a single-pointed fashion so as to engage reality in a realistic way where one negotiates one's emotions, values and circumstances so as to end up seeking knowledge and understanding rather than blissful ignorance.
5. What is the effect of desire-less-ness?
It's impossible to be free of desire, however once properly aligned desire becomes merely an either/or equation fixed in the "on" as opposed to "off" position in perfect alignment with one's intention; "perfection" in this regard implies impeccability whereby one constantly seeks full recapitulation of one's past so as to fully learn and gain from one's "mistakes". It has nothing to do with exclusively "being" for a painting by necessity requires a painter, when one's self is complete it remains a process the manifestation of which must be navigated in conventional circumstances, although if one lives ever peacefully in some remote temple it's easy to believe exclusively "being" is all there is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 6, 2014 14:20:28 GMT -5
Forgive me if this isn't the right forum to post this in, but I seek in earnest feedback to what I'm writing for my book. I haven't yet published my book by any means, the book is only as long as it's posted here (although it's far longer in my head), so I'm not trying to promote myself. Here's what I've got so far, please do feel free to pick away! onechapter.pdf (210.34 KB) |
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 6, 2014 13:44:44 GMT -5
As Marshall McLuhan said of art, so to is life, it's ANYTHING...
...that you can get away with!
Necessity is the mother of invention, there is no other dictator. What to do with your freedom?..
OK I can't make the font size finally correct but you get the point
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 6, 2014 13:40:59 GMT -5
We DO control our movements, but not explicitly only implicitly, in terms of desire and intent. We absolutely control what we DON'T do, a constant process by elimination and of deconstruction.. in the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, in the expert's mind there are few.. You obviously COULD control your every twitch for a set period of time if you set your mind to it but for all intents and purposes such would have absolutely no benefit other than admittedly providing confirmation to yourself that you are indeed the captain of your own ship.
|
|
|
|
Post by Transcix on May 6, 2014 12:27:02 GMT -5
I maintain that, dry as it is, my humor is better than yours.  |
|
