Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 5:37 am I prefer nameless but then what can the mind do with nothing?

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
The named is the mother of ten thousand things.

AlexW wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:56 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 23, 2019 5:37 am I prefer nameless but then what can the mind do with nothing?

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
The named is the mother of ten thousand things.

The mystical and liberal varieties of the great world religions hold that to be true. Spinoza too.

It's odd how Yin seems to be closer than Yang to the nameless.

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:39 am It's odd how Yin seems to be closer than Yang to the nameless.

Is it? Can you please elaborate?

To me, yin/yang describes the concept of dualism - it describes how seemingly opposite forces are actually dependent on each other (light cant be without dark, good not without bad etc etc).
The nameless is pure being, pure AM, pure concept-less knowing, whereas the named is the "I am" - the "I am" is the root concept from which all other concepts spring - thus the reference to mother, but it would equally be ok to state: The named is the father of ten thousand things.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:30 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:39 am It's odd how Yin seems to be closer than Yang to the nameless.

Is it? Can you please elaborate?

To me, yin/yang describes the concept of dualism - it describes how seemingly opposite forces are actually dependent on each other (light cant be without dark, good not without bad etc etc).
The nameless is pure being, pure AM, pure concept-less knowing, whereas the named is the "I am" - the "I am" is the root concept from which all other concepts spring - thus the reference to mother, but it would equally be ok to state: The named is the father of ten thousand things.

Making stuff happen is Yang, so Yin is the quiescent one of the two. It's just a feeling I have that the nameless more resembles Yin than Yang. The masculine gender archetype is one of decisions and action while the feminine gender archetype is more yielding.

Differently from Taoism, Theism posits the eternal masculine which impregnates the eternal feminine so that the eternal feminine becomes differentiated into the myriad things or events; this is written about in Genesis where the spirit of God moves over the waters.

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:58 pm Making stuff happen is Yang, so Yin is the quiescent one of the two. It's just a feeling I have that the nameless more resembles Yin than Yang. The masculine gender archetype is one of decisions and action while the feminine gender archetype is more yielding.

Differently from Taoism, Theism posits the eternal masculine which impregnates the eternal feminine so that the eternal feminine becomes differentiated into the myriad things or events; this is written about in Genesis where the spirit of God moves over the waters.

Interesting, thank you!

I think that all distinction, archetypes, even God (as it is spoken about in the Bible etc.) have their place in the named, in the "I am".
For example: The encounter of the burning bush (Exodus 3:14) where God answers Moses: "I am that I am" - referring to him/her-self as "I am" - as the "mother/father of the ten thousand things" (= as the creator/beginning of the world of concepts).

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 10:35 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:58 pm Making stuff happen is Yang, so Yin is the quiescent one of the two. It's just a feeling I have that the nameless more resembles Yin than Yang. The masculine gender archetype is one of decisions and action while the feminine gender archetype is more yielding.

Differently from Taoism, Theism posits the eternal masculine which impregnates the eternal feminine so that the eternal feminine becomes differentiated into the myriad things or events; this is written about in Genesis where the spirit of God moves over the waters.

Interesting, thank you!

I think that all distinction, archetypes, even God (as it is spoken about in the Bible etc.) have their place in the named, in the "I am".
For example: The encounter of the burning bush (Exodus 3:14) where God answers Moses: "I am that I am" - referring to him/her-self as "I am" - as the "mother/father of the ten thousand things" (= as the creator/beginning of the world of concepts).

I agree. It's so nice when people speak the same language!

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:30 pm I agree. It's so nice when people speak the same language!

Yes, it is!
Guess that’s why certain groups stick together, mathematicians can only talk to mathematicians, religious group X doesn’t understand group Y, and on and on it goes... misunderstandings are unavoidable and lead to arguments, sometimes even to war.
If we all understood each other the world would be a very different place.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:30 pm

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 10:35 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:58 pm Making stuff happen is Yang, so Yin is the quiescent one of the two. It's just a feeling I have that the nameless more resembles Yin than Yang. The masculine gender archetype is one of decisions and action while the feminine gender archetype is more yielding.

Differently from Taoism, Theism posits the eternal masculine which impregnates the eternal feminine so that the eternal feminine becomes differentiated into the myriad things or events; this is written about in Genesis where the spirit of God moves over the waters.

Interesting, thank you!

I think that all distinction, archetypes, even God (as it is spoken about in the Bible etc.) have their place in the named, in the "I am".
For example: The encounter of the burning bush (Exodus 3:14) where God answers Moses: "I am that I am" - referring to him/her-self as "I am" - as the "mother/father of the ten thousand things" (= as the creator/beginning of the world of concepts).

I agree. It's so nice when people speak the same language!

Don’t you mean it’s nice when people speak your language.

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:54 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:30 pm

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Mar 28, 2019 10:35 pm
Interesting, thank you!

I think that all distinction, archetypes, even God (as it is spoken about in the Bible etc.) have their place in the named, in the "I am".
For example: The encounter of the burning bush (Exodus 3:14) where God answers Moses: "I am that I am" - referring to him/her-self as "I am" - as the "mother/father of the ten thousand things" (= as the creator/beginning of the world of concepts).

I agree. It's so nice when people speak the same language!

Don’t you mean it’s nice when people speak your language.

.

Yes. One has to try not to be biased and think in terms of us and them.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 11:23 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:54 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:30 pm
I agree. It's so nice when people speak the same language!

Don’t you mean it’s nice when people speak your language.

.

Yes. One has to try not to be biased and think in terms of us and them.

There is no actual bias in terms of us and them.. except what thought dictates. Thought also being the creation of space in which the concepts are artificially superimposed upon it's no self..or to put another way have their imagined existence.

.