Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 10:54 am
I don't believe I do. I think I can only believe there's a tree in my garden and that I have a garden to begin with. Isn't that good enough? Do you think I will jump from what I believe to be a cliff just because I don't actually know it's a cliff? I think not.
Being able to objectify reality is obviously not a bad thing, humans are able to perform this feat and it gave us a certain advantage over other species - so great, no reason to condemn it.
But it is equally important to understand where these things/objects originate from, to see that they are not something that is truly separate from the whole and is, as such, ultimately, not other then I.
If this mental understanding turns into living knowledge, and if this would be possible for the majority of humanity then this planet would be a very different place... and I am not talking about people jumping off cliffs because they think that the abyss is also my self, no, I am simply talking about natural functioning.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 10:54 am
As far as I can tell all your claims here are indeed thoughts...
Sure, all claims are thoughts.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 10:54 am
I don't believe that I take the tree in my garden to be a thing separate from the tree in the garden of my neighbour just because I would somehow have been trained as a child to see things as separate objects.
I think this is instead most likely the result of what all brains do even before any sort of formal training could possibly take place.
I find that when observing very young children/babies it seems very much like they live in a non-objective world... but this is just my observation.
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 10:54 am
We're bound to see the world through an abstract and simplified representation, including time itself.
Depends what "we" stands for. If we is the mind/thought/the ego-self then yes, the ego is bound to abstraction/conceptualisation (as it is itself a concept).
Consciousness on the other hand is not bound at all. It sees the world as it is - as its very self.
People tend to see the world from the perspective of the ego - but what they actually overlook is that also this perspective is nothing but an arising in consciousness and that the ego itself is not more than an idea (just like all other objects/things are simply ideas arising in consciousness) - but again, this doesn't mean that we will physically function differently (of course the bus will still run you over if you are not careful).
"Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water."
Speakpigeon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 10:54 am
I think we know your model couldn't possibly work. Mine may be wrong but I don't think we could possibly infer that from facts we know today.
You believe in a certain model/map and thus you see things from the perspective of this map - I, as well, see things from a certain perspective, and as we use similar maps we are able to communicate - but I also know that this perspective is only an interpretation, not ultimate reality, and that life happens in reality, not in the map. Many people live primarily in the map... mistaking it for life... Maps are good, life is
better.