Queen

General chit-chat

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:32 am The trouble with rationalising things down to their components (light, spirit, atoms and subatomic particles, etc) is that it ignores emergence.

Just as one cannot understand art by breaking down a painting to its component molecules to analyse, one cannot successfully break down any life forms in such a way. It's not about the stuff itself but the configuration of the stuff.
It's not a big deal Greta, Scientists are breaking reality down linguistically all the time.So are Mathematician's and Biologists.

Nondualists go a step further, they tread beyond the normal boundary of what's socially accepted, and no one seems to like it. And who can blame them?

.

Emergence is just an idea like everything else. No one knows anything, it's all made-up using language, there is nothing known about reality outside of language. People it seems, seem to miss the obviousness of the elephant in the living room.


.

BTW, A_uk...I did not get my stuff from Tony Parsons, I just like watching him, he's hilarious.

I already knew my nondual stuff myself, have known from around the age of 7. It came natural to me.


.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Queen

Post by Greta »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:40 am
Greta wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:32 am The trouble with rationalising things down to their components (light, spirit, atoms and subatomic particles, etc) is that it ignores emergence.

Just as one cannot understand art by breaking down a painting to its component molecules to analyse, one cannot successfully break down any life forms in such a way. It's not about the stuff itself but the configuration of the stuff.
It's not a big deal Greta, Scientists are breaking reality down linguistically all the time.So are Mathematician's and Biologists.

Nondualists go a step further, they tread beyond the normal boundary of what's socially accepted, and no one seems to like it. And who can blame them?

Emergence is just an idea like everything else. No one knows anything, it's all made-up using language, there is nothing known about reality outside of language. People it seems, seem to miss the obviousness of the elephant in the living room.
Emergence does refer to something real, just not something fundamental. I get non dualism - that in some sense everything is part of one thing. What I don't get is dismissing all the particulars. It's not just language - things really are happening on some level.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:07 am Emergence does refer to something real, just not something fundamental. I get non dualism - that in some sense everything is part of one thing. What I don't get is dismissing all the particulars. It's not just language - things really are happening on some level.
Thank you, and I really get you Greta, I like your intelligent replies. Yes, things are really happening, but not to a single thing. No thing is making any of this happen. How does no thing know anything at all..it knows via concept, that's all, think about that? what can be known that is not a concept?

What I don't get is why there is the assumption that all the particulars are being dismissed?...that's not what nonduality is saying, if you have listened to nondual speakers long enough, you will understand that nonduality simply points to the zero point source of all manifestation that is only known via language. And that the zero point in and of itself is void of any language or knowledge of itself. Basically it is saying that reality is a fictional story and does NOT deny it's REAL existence, but simply points to it's illusory nature...Life is not happening to a you, the you is already the happening. The you cannot then reverse engineer itself by knowing how the you is manifesting, the you is already happening right now, there is no time machine to reverse you into knowing how you are happening... the knowing is always in this immediate moment. It is already manifesting as all things in one go, all at once right now the only place there is.

This doesn't make sense to the mind because the minds job is to cut reality up into parts, including the idea there is an individual self to whom life is happening to and for..but this mind creation of itself existing separately, is not what is actually happening.

.

.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Queen

Post by Greta »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:54 am... nonduality simply points to the zero point source of all manifestation that is only known via language. And that the zero point in and of itself is void of any language or knowledge of itself.
Isn't that more or less Kant's noumena? The thing in itself that can only be known somewhat abstractly?
Dontaskme wrote:Basically it is saying that reality is a fictional story and does NOT deny it's REAL existence, but simply points to it's illusory nature...
The yogis say this, and maybe when we die there is a broader realisation that we were paddling in a small pool, but then again, that is one of many possible perspectives. For instance, the entire story of life has essentially been the surface at the very top of the Earth's crust re-forming itself.

Then again, the pool doesn't seem so small if you look at the Earth's surrounds - we appear to be a central hub of awareness in at least the immediate region of our galaxy. A big fish in a small pool, from that angle.
Dontaskme wrote:Life is not happening to a you, the you is already the happening. The you cannot then reverse engineer itself by knowing how the you is manifesting, the you is already happening right now, there is no time machine to reverse you into knowing how you are happening... the knowing is always in this immediate moment. It is already manifesting as all things in one go, all at once right now the only place there is.

This doesn't make sense to the mind because the minds job is to cut reality up into parts, including the idea there is an individual self to whom life is happening to and for..but this mind creation of itself existing separately, is not what is actually happening.
In other words, reality just jolly well is :)
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 10:54 am In other words, reality just jolly well is :)

All sciences were born out of knowledge. They are just assumptive entities seeking to explain nature when in fact nature needs no explaining but just acceptance that it is as it is.

.

The Body is our true and only existence - we are indeed just a biological function. Knowledge is of the mind, it's all garbage, it seeks only for pleasure and reward,a what's in it for me, it's selfish to the core. But the body is not interested in all that garbage, all mental activity is a false superimposed reality upon what is already functioning alone by itself ..the body is taking care of itself by itself, it doesn't seek to explain itself or what to know itself.

.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Queen

Post by Arising_uk »

Dontaskme wrote:But I never said that, you did, it seems you are determined to twist everything I say back to it all being about yourself and your own beleifs and ideas, completely missing the whole point of what I am talking about, but I don't care, say what you want, that's all I'm doing. ...
What you said was that if one could own one's feelings then everyone would choose to be happy all the time, all I said was you might and then gave my preference of what to do with one's feelings. The rest of the stuff you say is what I'm trying to point out to you is what is confusing about what you say as you use loads of 'I's' when according to you there is no 'I' so why do you keep doing this? It appears inconsistent with your metaphysic.
Everybody does same. And yes, I make-it all up, where else am I going to get knowledge from?? ...someone else?....and if someone else, then where did they get it from, and why would I believe their knowledge over my own understanding about reality? my reality is here right now, not in some dead or living persons idea about reality...what am I supposed to check in with the list of people you gave me before I am allowed to say anything myself, wow, who made them authority on what is the right way to think?...people can think for them self you know, they don't have to check in with others just to see if they are matching up with an ideal or something or other...yeah, great, lets not be creative and think for ourselves, lets just hang on to dead ideas and not think of any thing different. ...
There you go again? Still, the point of knowing what others have said is that it can save you from reinventing the wheel all the time as whilst it is true that one's thoughts are unique to one it's not true that they are original, as such a lot of what you say is exactly dead ideas in poorer clothes.
Like I've already explained, which you seem to have ignored or just not understood, sometimes upset feelings arise, sometimes feelings of having fun arise. There is nothing tossy about that. But it seems that because I said I was upset... you then apparently think it throws out all my theory about nonduality...but by thinking that, all that means is that you have no understanding of what nonduality is pointing to. ...
Again, according to you there is nothing to point at? And whilst I sort of agree that feelings arise the tossy part was to do with a metaphysic that says there is nothing getting upset but you still get upset?
All you seem to be interested in is twisting everything I write about to make me look like I am the one not understanding reality ....
And yet you tell us all that we are not understanding it? For all I know you could be correct about this 'reality' you chat about but what I am doing is pointing out that your words do not reflect what you say. Personally I'm with Kant in these matters and there is no 'knowing' about the noumena other than inferring there must be one.
Just so you know, if you are going to be like that, then your opinions are worthless to me, because I've heard your type all before, and the truth is the world is not ready to hear nonduality, but it has to start somewhere and it's only going to get more popular. ...
There you go again? All touchy that someone is questioning your thoughts. The world has heard this stuff for hundreds of years and in the West it's been popular on and off since the late C18th when Eastern thought started making inroads, it has it's own tradition in Philosophy, Idealism and Monism it's been called.
And I'm never going to give up talking about it. ...
Who asked you to?
If you don't understand what's being said...then go away....go to a thread where you do understand the subject. ...
Like many you appear to want a world where you hear no other view than agreement with your own, why are you on a philosophy site? I understand what you say, I don't agree with much of it but my conversation with you is about how you do not appear to walk your talk.
I myself have never gone into a thread where I do not know what's being discussed, take the Mathematics threads for example...I do not go in there twisting all the posters ideas about and making their ideas look stupid...I stay well clear of what I don't grasp, and that's what you need to do, stay away if you don't understand. If you want to learn something different then I can help you see, but don't come around with ridicule, it's pathetic, and I've been there so many times with people like you. ...
I, I, I, you, you, you?

I'm apologise that you hear this as ridicule as it is not meant to be.
Understanding nondual literature does not turn us into robots...feelings still arise, and there is no problem either, what ever happens happens, your the one who seems to have a problem with it not me. For me there is no problem but for you, you seem to want it to be a problem.
Not really, you're free to believe what you like, just as I'm free to comment upon it. However because I like Philosophy I do have a slight problem with claims that ignore what has been said in Philosophy upon a philosophy forum. I also find cobbled up modern 'western' versions of 'eastern' philosophy slightly annoying as they tend to take out the hard bits, i.e. the techniques, and offer up a 'cure-all' pill for all metaphysical ailments.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:36 pmAgain, according to you there is nothing to point at? And whilst I sort of agree that feelings arise the tossy part was to do with a metaphysic that says there is nothing getting upset but you still get upset?
You obviously don't understand the concept of oneness, never mind.

There is no you getting upset. Upset is an idea, like everything else.

Where is upset?

Can you find upset?

What is upset?

Who is the you that is upset, can you find you?


.

Try finding the you in a non-linguistic fashion and see what you come up with ... :shock:

.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Queen

Post by Greta »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:20 pmThe Body is our true and only existence - we are indeed just a biological function. Knowledge is of the mind, it's all garbage, it seeks only for pleasure and reward,a what's in it for me, it's selfish to the core. But the body is not interested in all that garbage, all mental activity is a false superimposed reality upon what is already functioning alone by itself ..the body is taking care of itself by itself, it doesn't seek to explain itself or what to know itself.
The mind is very far from "garbage". I have seen this contempt for prosaic reality on philosophy forums for years. Basically, reality does not measure up to our ideals. I consider this view short sighted, time-locked, as though nothing much will change after this phase of humanity.

The emergence of humanity's abstract awareness is very recent. Like an infant, the minds that exist today hint at what could be, but they remain frustratingly limited. I will reserve judgement here for about a billion years when minds have had time to evolve into whatever minds evolve into. Until then, we are left holding the baby :)
Last edited by Greta on Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Queen

Post by Greta »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:52 pmThere is no you getting upset. Upset is an idea, like everything else.

Where is upset?

Can you find upset?

What is upset?

Who is the you that is upset, can you find you?
Uh uh, DAM, that's a cheap philosopher's parlour trick, eg. brain surgeons never found a mind so the mind does not exist.

Upset is actually what you were - and later admonished yourself for being so - about the prospect of Bonny Prince Charlie finally having a crack at kinging after all this time :)

You heard about Liz wanting to retire and, as a result, there was increased activity in some of your neurons for a time, whose agitation shivered down your body like a flapping eel in a net. So upset is a particular type of agitation within a chordate's body, along with anger, arousal, nervousness, restlessness etc and could readily be found and visualised by mapping the activity of the nervous system.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Queen

Post by Arising_uk »

Dontaskme wrote:You obviously don't understand the concept of oneness, never mind. ...
'You'?

I do understand it and just think it make-believe about the noumena.
There is no you getting upset. Upset is an idea, like everything else. ...
Then why did you get upset?
Where is upset?
In the endocrine system.
Can you find upset?
If you pay attention, yes.
What is upset?
An emotion or feeling.
Who is the you that is upset, can you find you?
Look down, see those feet? Touch them, see those hands? Hug yourself, feel that body?
Try finding the you in a non-linguistic fashion and see what you come up with ... :shock:
A selfie.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pm
Dontaskme wrote:You obviously don't understand the concept of oneness, never mind. ...
'You'?
You is a concept born of language, language is born of sound heard as concept. A concept is an auditory illusion of sound. What is sound? Where is sound?...concepts, all concepts. All illusions, appearances of no thing... just like a rainbow, there and not there.What is the exact location of a rainbow?
This is a dream dreamt by no thing.
Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pmI do understand it and just think it make-believe about the noumena.
Yes, it's all made-up via language, born of sound.
Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pmThen why did you get upset?
There's an energy that creates the illusion of a someone getting upset, there is no someone, there's just the illusion there is. I am feeling upset, I am feeling sad, I am feeling happy...all illusory sensations of the body, the body does not know it's upset or sad or happy, these are ideas born of language which is born of sound... appearing to be something, but when mind tries to find that something, it can't.

Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pm
Where is upset?
In the endocrine system.
Couldn't have been known without language which is sound heard as words, and auditory illusion.

Can you find upset?
Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pmIf you pay attention, yes.
Can you find the one paying attention, who is the perceiver...? it's no good just saying ''you'' this is just a concept again? an illusion of sound.

Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pmAn emotion or feeling.
This is just swapping one illusion for another.

Who is the you that is upset, can you find you?
Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pmLook down, see those feet? Touch them, see those hands? Hug yourself, feel that body?
More CON_cepts.
Try finding the you in a non-linguistic fashion and see what you come up with ... :shock:
Arising_uk wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:44 pmA selfie.
There's nothing in there either.

.


You cannot point to you using you. And that's who you ARE.

You are that which cannot be known. So the mind superimposes a knowledge over the unknown 'what is' and believes it is that.

.

.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:37 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 1:52 pmThere is no you getting upset. Upset is an idea, like everything else.

Where is upset?

Can you find upset?

What is upset?

Who is the you that is upset, can you find you?
Uh uh, DAM, that's a cheap philosopher's parlour trick, eg. brain surgeons never found a mind so the mind does not exist.

Upset is actually what you were - and later admonished yourself for being so - about the prospect of Bonny Prince Charlie finally having a crack at kinging after all this time :)

You heard about Liz wanting to retire and, as a result, there was increased activity in some of your neurons for a time, whose agitation shivered down your body like a flapping eel in a net. So upset is a particular type of agitation within a chordate's body, along with anger, arousal, nervousness, restlessness etc and could readily be found and visualised by mapping the activity of the nervous system.
I am the imagination of myself.

Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination. - Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

Greta wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:25 pm The mind is very far from "garbage". I have seen this contempt for prosaic reality on philosophy forums for years. Basically, reality does not measure up to our ideals. I consider this view short sighted, time-locked, as though nothing much will change after this phase of humanity.
There is no problem as long as one is to remember exactly who is minding the mind. The slave or the master?
Last edited by Dontaskme on Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Queen

Post by Dontaskme »

..

My thoughts are streaming faster than I can type them..so typing keeps making error...
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Queen

Post by Arising_uk »

Dontaskme wrote:You is a concept born of language, ...
Depends what you mean? Whilst it is true that the 'me' that is the voice in my head is such a thing the me that is body which sees, hears, feels, smells, tastes is not.
language is born of sound heard as concept. ...
And the concept comes from where?
A concept is an auditory illusion of sound. ...
Not it's not, a concept can be thought without sound.

When the wolves are around and you and a squirrel run for the same tree what are you running to?
What is sound? Where is sound?...concepts, all concepts. All illusions, appearances of no thing... just like a rainbow, there and not there.What is the exact location of a rainbow? ...
You're right, there is a noumena, you're wrong if you use illusion it's called phenomena.

The exact location of a rainbow is in the droplets passing through the light in front of a rain cloud.
This is a dream dreamt by no thing.
Make-believe.
Yes, it's all made-up via language, born of sound. ...
You ignore the other senses and your memory.
There's an energy that creates the illusion of a someone getting upset, there is no someone, there's just the illusion there is. ...
If it is an illusion then why are you upsest?
I am feeling upset, I am feeling sad, I am feeling happy...all illusory sensations of the body, the body does not know it's upset or sad or happy, these are ideas born of language which is born of sound... appearing to be something, but when mind tries to find that something, it can't. ...
The body absolutely knows when it is happy, upset, sad, etc, that is what feelings are for.
Couldn't have been known without language which is sound heard as words, and auditory illusion.
It is absolutely known, they are called feelings.
Can you find the one paying attention, who is the perceiver...? it's no good just saying ''you'' this is just a concept again? an illusion of sound. ...
Why would I want to 'find the one'? I am the one.
This is just swapping one illusion for another. ...
I'm beginning to understand why you get upset about things.
More CON_cepts. ...
There's nothing abstract about such things?
There's nothing in there either.
? Why would there have to be something 'in there'? It's there at the end of your nose.
You cannot point to you using you. And that's who you ARE. ...
I don't have to point to myself, I am myself and that myself is this body with senses in an external world.
You are that which cannot be known. ...
And yet you appear to say that there is nothing to be known, make your mind up.
So the mind superimposes a knowledge over the unknown 'what is' and believes it is that.
Er!? So you know you are a mind?

What is this yearning to have an unknown 'you'? When 'I am' is the truth.
Post Reply