Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme to Trajk Logik wrote:You are replying to an idea there is another separate from you...there is not.

Is this not what "you" are doing, Dontaskme?

Dontaskme wrote:
...Thoughts arise out of thin air. No one knows what they are or how or why they arise, but they shape every aspect of our daily life and it's reality. Only A THOUGHT has birthed what you think you are...

If you only understood thought/belief...

Dontaskme wrote: No one is thinking, thoughts arise in consciousness...which is not a thought or a thing.There's nothing outside of that arena. "trees growing themselves" and "life moving" is a movement of thought within consciousness only. Movement is just sensation which is labelled as 'movement'.

Right out the door you end up being inconsistent. "Thoughts arise in consciousness...which is not a thought or a thing." If movement is just a sensation labelled as movement, then why isn't consciousness a sensation labelled as "consciousness"? Why isn't a sensation some thing labelled as a "sensation"? In other words, by rejecting the realist notion of there being more than what we experience and that what we experience is the effect of external causes, then you end up no where. All you can say with some confidence is "Something exists.". To then go and label this thing "consciousness" or "sensations" is to expose your own biases and your emotional investment in these labels - if that is all they are. You can't go from "Something exists." to "This something is consciousness." It doesn't follow.

Trajk Logik wrote:If you are arguing that there are no things independent of your mind, then you are arguing for solipsism. You are arguing that the text on this screen isn't the result of other people with minds typing and posting on a philosophy forum. You are arguing against yourself if there isn't actually anyone behind the creation of the other posts. And if there isn't a self, then whose post is this that I'm replying to?

Dontaskme wrote: You are replying to an idea there is another separate from you...there is not. Although it does appear that life is a verb and a noun in the same moment as evidenced by me posting and your reply. But this is the work of oneness, appearing as the many.

There's just story via thought arising out of nothingness. And sensation.
Thoughts appear but can you find anyone/anything that is doing the thinking?
Can sound think?
Can thought think?
Can smell think?
Can sensation think?
Can colour/image think?
Can taste think?

Can a thought tell a story, or are there thoughts appearing, including the thought about thoughts appearing that tell a story?

This is not what you've been taught about yourself. And so you may find it confusing, even contradictory. But that's because the you that you think you are does not exist, it only appears to exist in imagined sense.

The self is not what you think it is. The self is the emptiness prior to all thought,and is that in which all thought arises and falls. Nothing is real.

Why, and how would the oneness appear as the many? How and why would a story via thought arise out of nothing?
Of course sounds, smells, etc. don't think. They are the forms thoughts take. You can only think in sounds, visuals, (and language is just sounds and visuals), smells, tastes, and tactile sensations - just as computers can only think in 1's and 0s. Thinking is simply the processing of information.
If nothing is real, then nothing exists. Obviously something exists, so something is real.

Trajk Logik wrote: Why, and how would the oneness appear as the many? How and why would a story via thought arise out of nothing?
Of course sounds, smells, etc. don't think. They are the forms thoughts take. You can only think in sounds, visuals, (and language is just sounds and visuals), smells, tastes, and tactile sensations - just as computers can only think in 1's and 0s. Thinking is simply the processing of information.
If nothing is real, then nothing exists. Obviously something exists, so something is real.

Infinity is zero.

Zero is infinity.

The infinite state is always already at, in, of, and as the zeropoint-or always already and irreducibly prior to all numbers, all quantities, all "objects", and all "difference".

The zero-point is always already at, in, of, and as the infinite state-or always already and irreducibly prior to "point of view" (or ego-"I", or separate "self"-definition) and always already and irreducibly prior to all "others".

The infinite state and the zero-point are always already and irreducibly one and the same, always already and irreducibly prior to both separate "self' (or ego-"I") and all of "not-self" (or "object", "other", and "difference").

All labels are an appearance. Consciousness is not an appearance, so can't be labeled, yet is labeled in order to point to communicate oneness / zero point. You need 1 to point to 0 ...as zero 0 cannot point to itself. That's how oneness appears as the many.

Trajk Logik wrote:If nothing is real, then nothing exists. Obviously something exists, so something is real.

Remember, and realise, that reality without words is nothing at all, even though REALITY appears to be the case, it is here/there. That's what I'm pointing to, not the literal sense in that there is NOTHING PERIOD...for how could nothingness exist, it's impossible.

When the moment in life is without a letter or a word it is non-duality. When the moment in mind is with a letter or a word it is duality = 0 &1

Dontaskme wrote:...

Why are you so seemingly addicted to saying what the answers are -- while you avoid responding to inconsistencies and reasonable questions directed to you? Is this how you maintain your source of power? Through control and avoidance? This seems like dishonesty and hiding, as well as ego. Do you not see this? Do you not think others see it?

I asked you very simple basic questions that any of us could answer: "What is the purpose of your posts?" and "Why do you post?".

I think your answers could be enlightening to consider and examine in the face of all you've said. Are you not willing to share such clarity/truth as THAT with us? Do you choose power/control over honesty/clarity?

Is that the only two possible motivations?

Dontaskme wrote: Infinity is zero.

Zero is infinity.

The infinite state is always already at, in, of, and as the zeropoint-or always already and irreducibly prior to all numbers, all quantities, all "objects", and all "difference".

The zero-point is always already at, in, of, and as the infinite state-or always already and irreducibly prior to "point of view" (or ego-"I", or separate "self"-definition) and always already and irreducibly prior to all "others".

The infinite state and the zero-point are always already and irreducibly one and the same, always already and irreducibly prior to both separate "self' (or ego-"I") and all of "not-self" (or "object", "other", and "difference").

More gibberish. Successful communication requires that you use terms and phrases in a way that other will understand them, not just you. So in order to successfully communicate, you must first come to the understanding that there are other minds loaded with different information than your mind, and that you have to use symbols to refer to things in a way that the listener or reader understands, not just how you "understand" them, or else you end up communicating nothing. You end up talking to yourself.

Dontaskme wrote:All labels are an appearance. Consciousness is not an appearance, so can't be labeled, yet is labeled in order to point to communicate oneness / zero point. You need 1 to point to 0 ...as zero 0 cannot point to itself. That's how oneness appears as the many.

Actually all labels are just colored shapes (scribbles) and sounds (spoken words). We use these colored shapes and sounds to refer to other colored shapes, sounds, smells, feelings, etc. In order to do this you must first have an understanding that sensations, like colored shapes, refer to other things - like the presence of your mother. After you have acquired that understanding, then you can understand an extra layer of meaning - of colored shapes referring to other colored shapes - like the string of symbols, "Mom" refers to your mom, while the visual of your mom refers to the objective existence of your mom. If you don't get to that last part first (understanding that the visual of your mom refers to the objective existence of your mom) then you will never be able to understand what language is, or is used for.

Dontaskme wrote:Remember, and realise, that reality without words is nothing at all, even though REALITY appears to be the case, it is here/there. That's what I'm pointing to, not the literal sense in that there is NOTHING PERIOD...for how could nothingness exist, it's impossible.

When the moment in life is without a letter or a word it is non-duality. When the moment in mind is with a letter or a word it is duality = 0 &1

You were the one that said "...story via thought arises out of nothing." So you are being inconsistent again. If nothingness is impossible, then story via thought could not arise from it.

As I have already shown, words are just other visuals and audibles. In order to learn a language you must first have non-word experiences - experiences of visuals, sounds, etc. in order to see and hear words. Obviously, reality can exist without words.

Trajk Logik wrote: You were the one that said "...story via thought arises out of nothing." So you are being inconsistent again. If nothingness is impossible, then story via thought could not arise from it.

As I have already shown, words are just other visuals and audibles. In order to learn a language you must first have non-word experiences - experiences of visuals, sounds, etc. in order to see and hear words. Obviously, reality can exist without words.

Somethingness ( Known) IS in relation to Nothingness (Unknown) - these two concepts are in the same moment of THIS conception...the idea something is meaningless without it's counterpart nothing... no counterpart, no whole.

That which is known is illusory.

The unknown is unknowable.

= Zero

Dontaskme wrote:

Trajk Logik wrote: You were the one that said "...story via thought arises out of nothing." So you are being inconsistent again. If nothingness is impossible, then story via thought could not arise from it.

As I have already shown, words are just other visuals and audibles. In order to learn a language you must first have non-word experiences - experiences of visuals, sounds, etc. in order to see and hear words. Obviously, reality can exist without words.

Somethingness ( Known) IS in relation to Nothingness (Unknown) - these two concepts are in the same moment of THIS conception...the idea something is meaningless without it's counterpart nothing... no counterpart, no whole.

That which is known is illusory.

The unknown is unknowable.

= Zero

Take away something, and what are you left with? Nothing. Now, you are correct to an extent. Nothingness cannot directly be known, simply because when you lack consciousness, you cannot observe the nothingness you are, precisely because you aren't.

Dalek Prime wrote:Take away something, and what are you left with? Nothing. Now, you are correct to an extent. Nothingness cannot directly be known, simply because when you lack consciousness, you cannot observe the nothingness you are, precisely because you aren't.

Hi Dalek Prime,

This makes a lot of sense to me.

Best Regards,
Your Construct

Dalek Prime wrote: Take away something, and what are you left with? Nothing. Now, you are correct to an extent. Nothingness cannot directly be known, simply because when you lack consciousness, you cannot observe the nothingness you are, precisely because you aren't.

Nothing can be taken away/subtracted or added to all that is. (Infinity) All that IS is everything&nothing in the same place..here now nowhere.

Dontaskme wrote:
Nothing can be taken away/subtracted or added to all that is. (Infinity) All that IS is everything&nothing in the same place..here now nowhere.

Hi Dontaskme,

This is utter nonesense.

Best Regards,
Harbal

Your Construct wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:Take away something, and what are you left with? Nothing. Now, you are correct to an extent. Nothingness cannot directly be known, simply because when you lack consciousness, you cannot observe the nothingness you are, precisely because you aren't.

Hi Dalek Prime,

This makes a lot of sense to me.

Best Regards,
Your Construct

I hope so lol! Thank you.

Harbal wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:
Nothing can be taken away/subtracted or added to all that is. (Infinity) All that IS is everything&nothing in the same place..here now nowhere.

Hi Dontaskme,

This is utter nonesense.

Best Regards,
Harbal

Harbal 's correct.

Lacewing wrote:
I asked you very simple basic questions that any of us could answer: "What is the purpose of your posts?" and "Why do you post?".

The What and Why appears/happens for no reason, other than that's what's happening. No one is making anything happen. The thought that says ''I am making this happen'' is also what's appearing / happening to no one.

What is it that tries to intervene with the present experience, here and now?

Can anything do it?