The tree of knowledge

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

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

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 1:50 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:34 am Well as far as I am aware, I have absolutely no concrete evidence or proof, same thing, of any other aware sentient creature higher than what is seemingly human awareness. I see no other source of my own knowledge than it coming from absolutely nowhere.
That might mean there IS none, it's true.

But more likely, it means that you're just a human being, which means "a temporal creature of limited knowledge and experience." So there are no doubt a great many things that are outside your personal experience and mine, which nevertheless, continue to exist in spite of us.
The knowledge that there is 'A limited temporal expression of knowledge' would imply 'An Absolute all there is already available now'
And so a limited expression can be no other than a relative absolute.

To imply the possibilty of a limited temporal expression also implies that an unlimited infinite store-house (source of knowledge ) must already exist, and be always available on demand appearing as a temporal knowledge.

This implies that everything that can be known conceptually is none other than the relative absolute.

Do you see what I mean IC ?

If the temporal limited exists, then so does the absolute infinite exist simultaneously.

Any known knowledge has to be the infinite unlimited pointing always to itself as being a relative absolute. The apparent disconnect between the relative and the absolute must be an illusion. There can only be the infinite appearing as itself and to itself.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 2:57 pm Do you see what I mean IC ?
Not at all, I'm afraid.

Your opening assumptions look unnecessary to me, so the conclusion doesn't follow, so far as I can tell. You'd have to substantiate them.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 3:06 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 2:57 pm Do you see what I mean IC ?
Not at all, I'm afraid.

Your opening assumptions look unnecessary to me, so the conclusion doesn't follow, so far as I can tell. You'd have to substantiate them.
Ok, forget about it all. If you don't understand then there is nothing else I can say, or can do to put it any differently that wouldn't be just the same point made albeit in a differently put way.

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

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 6:20 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 4:39 pm Well, I'm not sure they are the words of God.
Fair enough. But Jesus said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

So apparently, Jesus Himself thought we are all capable of choosing to hear and understand the word of God. But equally apparently, not everybody chooses to "have the ears" for what He says.
If you mean the word of God to mean the word of Knowledge, then obviously everybody is going to hear what Knowledge dictates to them automatically. If the word of Knowledge informs the every body that putting a hand in a fire is going to be painful, then obviously that information is informing a not so good consequence, and what will become known to every body will be known via a reflexive instantaneous cause and effect action in the moment. Knowledge can only be known in the instantaneous moment by the only knowing there is which is a consciousness aware it is aware of information. Knowledge is a useful tool that a self-aware organism uses to warn other self-aware organisms of the cause and effect consquences of an action before the action happens again. It's how evolution evolves to greater and greater complexities.

This is all just what's happening. There is no higher self informing a lower self like some re-connection process going on between two things - which is what religion seems to suggest.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:11 pm ... everybody is going to hear what Knowledge dictates to them automatically.
Well, some people are going to choose not to "hear" at all. And others only "listen" to what they want to believe, so they don't "hear" anything but the sound of their own thinking. And those are the people you're talking about, clearly.

But why be them?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:33 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:11 pm ... everybody is going to hear what Knowledge dictates to them automatically.
Well, some people are going to choose not to "hear" at all. And others only "listen" to what they want to believe, so they don't "hear" anything but the sound of their own thinking. And those are the people you're talking about, clearly.

But why be them?
Knowledge informs a character, which is an awareness of thought. Without a character to be aware of I am nothing. The seer is inseparable from what it is looking at.


REality that is infinite cannot be divided. Especially by a silly fable known as a god/man disconnect. It's a simple fact.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:47 pm Knowledge informs a character...
There would be neither "character" nor "knowledge" in a universe that was not rational.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:49 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:47 pm Knowledge informs a character...
There would be neither "character" nor "knowledge" in a universe that was not rational.
Except for the PAIN problem.

Nothing universally rational about a creator creating sentient beings knowing they will be subject to suffering and pain, canibilism and torture, all just to die in the end...so yeah, lets talk about rationalism.

There is here only a universe of chaos, make a mess, clean up the mess, rinse and repeat. It's disgusting.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:55 pm Except for the PAIN problem.
In an irrational universe, there would be no such thing as pain, either. There would be no classifications for sensations. Indeed, all sensations (assuming there were intelligent creatures existing at all) would be utterly inarticulable.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:08 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:55 pm Except for the PAIN problem.
In an irrational universe, there would be no such thing as pain, either. There would be no classifications for sensations. Indeed, all sensations (assuming there were intelligent creatures existing at all) would be utterly inarticulable.
And that is what's known as the only good and value the universe has to offer.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:11 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:08 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:55 pm Except for the PAIN problem.
In an irrational universe, there would be no such thing as pain, either. There would be no classifications for sensations. Indeed, all sensations (assuming there were intelligent creatures existing at all) would be utterly inarticulable.
And that is what's known as the only good and value the universe has to offer.
?????
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 8:15 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:11 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:08 pm
In an irrational universe, there would be no such thing as pain, either. There would be no classifications for sensations. Indeed, all sensations (assuming there were intelligent creatures existing at all) would be utterly inarticulable.
And that is what's known as the only good and value the universe has to offer.
?????
The universe and it's contents is basically a meaningless, purposeless chaotic place, that just happens to be, for no particual reason other than it just IS - No rational intellectual thinking primate human being was around to witness it's beginning. . or around to know why or how or from where or from what or when or anything at all zilch yada nothing...

Now, conscious consciousness developed somewhere along the way, and just so happened to emerge as being a valuable and advantageous survival tool for the self-aware organism to be able to navigate through it's environment successfully and more efficiently, it was a means of making sense of what is and always was this EVER mysterious not-knowing universe.


So if you want to add some value and meaning via your own self bais superficial story about it .. then it'll just be your personal articulated script, and will not make any difference to anything within the grand scheme of things, for nothing wins the race, everything dies.

There is nothing good or bad, wrong or right - these are just human concepts, a story told by a fool signifying nothing.
Sentient creatures experience only two things, pleasure and pain. So conceptually speaking the only way life within the universe is to be known to have any value at all, is when pain is absent from the feeling sensing sentient creature. Sentient creatures spend their entire existence trying desperately to survive what they are programmed to do by the nature of their dna molecules, that just happen to have no other desire than to keep on replicating more of themselves into this futile struggle of a pitiful existence - these sentient creatures then have to spend their entire existence trying to avoid the torture and threats and pain that come with just trying to survive, all for no reason or purpose, and so the only value that does exist within the universe, is the cessation of all that fear and pain, when the relief from it's cessation brings a welcome satisfaction to the organism.

In other words, according to the human story of conceptual meaning, bad sensations are really bad, there is nothing good about having to endure bad situations. It's grotesque to be a sentient creature. What's intelligent and rational and valuable about this relentless fear, suffering and pain, all for just a moment of pleasure, and it's ok because it's all worth that fleeting moment of pleasure...sounds more like that's the work of a sadistic satanist...just my opinion.


.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 11:34 am The universe and it's contents is basically a meaningless, purposeless chaotic place,
Were that so, you could not even frame the above statement to affirm it.
Now, conscious consciousness developed somewhere along the way,

"Developed"? In a "nothing," and among "nobody"? :shock:
for nothing wins the race, everything dies.
Well, if I believed you, I would have to say that there's no "race," and no "things" to "die."
There is nothing good or bad, wrong or right - these are just human concepts, a story told by a fool signifying nothing.
Macbeth thought that. But then, he was a corrupt dictator at the end of a futile run of power grabbing, and about to die friendless. So of course he would say that.
In other words, according to the human story
But you say there are no "humans," and hence, no "story."
...there is nothing good about having to endure bad situations. It's grotesque to be a sentient creature.
So now you're saying there are "sentient creatures," and they have to "endure situations" -- and you say these situations are "bad." But you still insist there are no "creatures," no multiple "sentient" beings, and no actual "situations," because there's no reality. And you say there's no morality either, but you still want us to understand that these non-existent situations are "bad"? :shock:

Do you see why I cannot make sense of your view? You're actually speaking two different ways. And were you speaking consistently, we might do some thinking about what you believe or think. But so long as you complain about the nature of a reality you insist can't exist, and then take refuge in irrationality whenever the questions get challenging, I fear that we're not going forward at all.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 2:18 pm
Do you see why I cannot make sense of your view?
Well, you have stated previously that you do not believe the nondual view of reality.

I do believe the nondual nature of reality, so of course you and I are going to have different views that will not make sense to each other.

I do not worry about my belief in the nondual nature of reality being challenged by anyone, simply because I know it is the absolute truth. Pretty much I'm assuming it is the same for you as a believer in God and his word, and Jesus and all that stuff.

And so just as you are certain and comfortable with your own faith - so am I

When I am speaking on this forum I am coming from the nondual dualistic dream perspective. So it's going to sound like nonsense double speak, but that's just unavoidable.

I still stand by my own belief that life for sentient creatures is a cruel and dangerous and futile fight/struggle for absolutely no reason, or purpose - it's all for nothing. And hopefully one day, this self-aware universe will suddenly realise it's not actually worth it, and pull the plug. If something has started all this - then that something can end it.

You can believe what ever you want about reality, you can think it's amazing, beautiful, and lovely - but not all of us are going to feel like that, some of us are going to think the complete opposite, I personally do not think this is a fun game to play for any sentient creature because if just one creature has to suffer - that to me is too many, when they suffer, so do I

It's just not good enough. You can keep your God IC...but it's not for me.

I've seen way too much in my time on earth, to know for certain, that I never want to play this game ever again.

And if God does exist, then it is God that is seeing it too, because I am his child, so my Father must already have known what was in store for me. And yet he just allows it all to happen, he allows children to be born, knowing what could happen to them, it's actually quite sick.


.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:19 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Tue Mar 09, 2021 2:18 pm
Do you see why I cannot make sense of your view?
Well, you have stated previously that you do not believe the nondual view of reality.
It's not that, D. It's that I can't see any way it can be rendered coherent. It's not that I choose not to believe it; it's that it's incapable of being coherently believed at all.
I know it is the absolute truth.

And yet, you deny the existence of absolute truth. So what does that say?
...it's going to sound like nonsense double speak, but that's just unavoidable.
I see. I believe you: it seems it's "unavoidable" to me, too.
I still stand by my own belief that life for sentient creatures is a cruel and dangerous and futile fight/struggle for absolutely no reason, or purpose
I would be able to understand this claim, and to take it seriously, if you said you believed that "life" actually exists. But what you seem to be saying is that in some "dream" you're having, you don't like how it's going. And I don't know how seriously to take such a claim...why would it matter, in a "dream"?

If you want to say reality exists -- that there are multiple, real creatures that suffer here -- I can believe you, and we could talk about why that might be and what it might mean. But if you say there are no multiple such creatures, and that this is all a "dream," then I can't make sense of your objection, and don't know how to "fix" a dream -- who would? :shock:
I personally do not think this is a fun game to play for any sentient creature because if just one creature has to suffer - that to me is too many, when they suffer, so do I
As I say, I would totally get this objection if you believed there were "sentient creatures" who actually "suffered." But you say that there is only your own consciousness, which is dreaming.

Consequently, I can't see what your objection is: tell your consciousness not to "dream" that, I guess. :?
Post Reply