What’s The Most Important Question, and Why?

[Dubious]

I don’t avoid hard questions I welcome them.

That's a contradiction which doesn't even have a door!

Simone Wrote:

"When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door."

True to a diminished extent. If a contradiction is indeed impossible to resolve the reason may be that all attempted "resolutions" lead only to absurdities with its door at the edge of a cliff...of which you already offered more than legally authorized by the rational in all of your posts!

If that were the case attempting to resolve an absurdity by a lie would itself amount to a contradiction impossible to resolve.

I'd love to hear Simone's reply and not in the least interested in yours being the usual circular BS.

[Nick_A]

I don’t avoid hard questions I welcome them.

That's a contradiction which doesn't even have a door!

Simone Wrote:

"When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door."

True to a diminished extent. If a contradiction is indeed impossible to resolve the reason may be that all attempted "resolutions" lead only to absurdities with its door at the edge of a cliff...of which you already offered more than legally authorized by the rational in all of your posts!

If that were the case attempting to resolve an absurdity by a lie would itself amount to a contradiction impossible to resolve.

I'd love to hear Simone's reply and not in the least interested in yours being the usual circular BS.

Those like you and Greta are so caught up in dualistic reason that the triune mind is an absurdity to you. Simone provides a contradiction:

Whatever debases the intelligence degrades the entire human being. Simone Weil

The role of the intelligence - that part of us which affirms and denies and formulates opinions is merely to submit. Simone Weil

It is absurd for dualistic reason yet obvious for the triune mind. Since the triune mind has become absent on the forum due to ridicule, I began the Dualistic Mind thread. Its purpose for the many lurkers open to the distinction is to provide some introductory information which can be pursued. That way those like you and Greta can remain in your eternal battles over good and bad by means of dualistic reason and enjoy your condemnations but at the same time leaving avenues open for those open to triune reasoning which is an essential but vanishing part of modern philosophy.

[-1-]

We seem to disagree on the purpose of philosophy. You seem to believe its purpose is a means for justifying the dualistic mind by arguing details.

That can't be it. I don't know what dualistic mind is. Therefore it is absurd to suppose I think philosophy is a means for justifying the dualistic mind.

[Nick_A]

We seem to disagree on the purpose of philosophy. You seem to believe its purpose is a means for justifying the dualistic mind by arguing details.

That can't be it. I don't know what dualistic mind is. Therefore it is absurd to suppose I think philosophy is a means for justifying the dualistic mind.

Do you believe the purpose of philosophy is to argue opinions to determine right and wrong? If you do, that is the workings of the dualistic mind.

[Dubious]

Those like you and Greta…

How many times have you said “Those like you” when responding to an argument you can’t counter? Do you realize that those who constantly repeat themselves have what is called an OCD disorder?

Whatever debases the intelligence degrades the entire human being. Simone Weil

Indeed and the reason why someone like her would not welcome you into the fold being a prime example of that debasement.

It is absurd for dualistic reason yet obvious for the triune mind.

One thinks with the mind one has which seemed sufficient for all three of your favorite gurus...Simone, Plato and Einstein.

You have an outstanding talent in making bullshit look intellectual. Have you ever read the essay On Bullshit by Harry G. Frankfurt? You can download it for free; in your case highly recommended.

I also noticed there is no comment on what my post was really all about, i.e., Simone's...

"When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door."

Instead you come back with a load of garbage on dualistic and triune minds completely out of context, no relation whatever on my comments of her assertion. If my statement is false and hers is true, you as her disciple, should have the means to disprove it.

You and IC have a lot in common but especially this; whenever other arguments are ignored which happens every time, it’s an indication that there’s a shortage of fuel in both your pious arsenals to counter them. Simply evading these inconveniences is the easiest way out of a potential quandary for you guys...or simply replying for the sake of reply, purposely detouring from a core argument hoping no one notices. You're both so transparent!

Having quoted her ceaselessly and so familiar with her philosophy it’s natural to think you would have defended her pronouncement against my slanderous critique. But you haven’t, instead camouflaging what is beyond your means to defend - or perhaps you just don't have the verbal power - with miscellaneous other bullshit beginning with “Those like you and Greta”, again going circular which is all you’ve ever done.

[Greta]

I personally thought my answer of "What's Going On?" was hardly deserving of being lumped into some allegedly deleterious "you and Greta" gestalt conglomeration. Dubious's "...if there actually is one and why it hasn't been discovered yet" was similarly not worthy of such a smackdown.

"What's going on?" is the first question that comes to any growing mind - the fundamental question from which all others arise. "What happens after death?" is a big one, and ultimately related to that fundamental question.

Such competitions - "the most this, the most that" - don't much matter, though, because the most important questions depend on where individuals are up to in trying to work out what's happening in their reality and what aspects matter most to them and others (and this will often vary considerably throughout life as well).

[-1-]

Do you believe the purpose of philosophy is to argue opinions to determine right and wrong? If you do, that is the workings of the dualistic mind.

Freakin' far out, man.

[Nick_A]

Do you believe the purpose of philosophy is to argue opinions to determine right and wrong? If you do, that is the workings of the dualistic mind.

Freakin' far out, man.

Sometimes common sense is better than drugs

[Nick_A]

Dubious

How many times have you said “Those like you” when responding to an argument you can’t counter? Do you realize that those who constantly repeat themselves have what is called an OCD disorder?

What I mean by “those like you and Greta” is that you both introduce a heavy negative emotional element that inhibits the purpose of philosophy.

I also noticed there is no comment on what my post was really all about, i.e., Simone's...

"When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door."

Instead you come back with a load of garbage on dualistic and triune minds completely out of context, no relation whatever on my comments of her assertion. If my statement is false and hers is true, you as her disciple, should have the means to disprove it.

You have come to a conclusion contaminated with negative emotions and accusations. This is normal for the dualistic mindset but does nothing for the intent of philosophy and the value obtained by contemplating a contradiction with an open mind.

"When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door."

Finally getting past the complaints, how can we appreciate the apparent contradiction? It is explained in the beginning of Simone Weil's:

Draft for a Statement of Human Obligation
Profession of Faith

There is a reality outside the world, that is to say, outside space and time, outside man's mental universe, outside any sphere whatsoever that is accessible to human faculties.

Corresponding to this reality, at the centre of the human heart, is the longing for an absolute good, a longing which is always there and is never appeased by any object in this world.

Another terrestrial manifestation of this reality lies in the absurd and insoluble contradictions which are always the terminus of human thought when it moves exclusively in this world.

We are dual natured. The higher part of our collective essence is attracted to objective values and our lower parts which have been corrupted due to the cause of the human condition have acquired habits in opposition to our normal higher human nature. We are a living contradiction. The problem becomes how to reconcile it.

The dualistic mind does so through lies and imagination. The triune mind open to the conscious third force of reconciliation experiences a quality of attention which can open the door to conscious contemplation and the experience of higher consciousness which unifies both natures so they can function as a whole in a manner worthy of the name Man.

[-1-]

Do you believe the purpose of philosophy is to argue opinions to determine right and wrong? If you do, that is the workings of the dualistic mind.

Freakin' far out, man.

Sometimes common sense is better than drugs

What you call dualistic mind, and how you described its action is PRECISELY what Socrates practiced. Word-for-word.

Yet you reject dualistic mind and its actions.

Socrates had a dualistic mind and you worship him.

So you worship those whom you reject.

Can you show me the common sense in the above?

[-1-]

Draft for a Statement of Human Obligation
Profession of Faith

There is a reality outside the world, that is to say, outside space and time, outside man's mental universe, outside any sphere whatsoever that is accessible to human faculties.

Corresponding to this reality, at the centre of the human heart, is the longing for an absolute good, a longing which is always there and is never appeased by any object in this world.

Another terrestrial manifestation of this reality lies in the absurd and insoluble contradictions which are always the terminus of human thought when it moves exclusively in this world.

This is pretty neat. Your outside reality is outside of any means of detection by humans. Yet there are terrestrial manifestations of this outside reality.

How do you know what this outside reality has, is, what its components and characteristics are? The outside reality is completely inaccessible and undetectable by you, by Socreates, by Simon Weil. How do you suppose to teach this existence of outside reality when there is no connection to it at all?

How do you know that "longing for an absolute good" and "contradictions that are always the terminus of human thought" are the manifestations of this third, outside reality?

DID YOU KNOW that in THIS world, in THIS KNOWABLE reality the same things -- longing for absolute goodness and the existence of contradictions -- are perfectly well explained, using nothing but common sense?

[Nick_A]

Freakin' far out, man.

Sometimes common sense is better than drugs

What you call dualistic mind, and how you described its action is PRECISELY what Socrates practiced. Word-for-word.

Yet you reject dualistic mind and its actions.

Socrates had a dualistic mind and you worship him.

So you worship those whom you reject.

Can you show me the common sense in the above?

I can't do it here but if you are interested look in on the Dualistic Mind thread and read how it is explained and also Plato's relativity of reason along with Einstein equating the intuitive source of science and art I can at least provide my understanding.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=24867

[Nick_A]

Draft for a Statement of Human Obligation
Profession of Faith

There is a reality outside the world, that is to say, outside space and time, outside man's mental universe, outside any sphere whatsoever that is accessible to human faculties.

Corresponding to this reality, at the centre of the human heart, is the longing for an absolute good, a longing which is always there and is never appeased by any object in this world.

Another terrestrial manifestation of this reality lies in the absurd and insoluble contradictions which are always the terminus of human thought when it moves exclusively in this world.

This is pretty neat. Your outside reality is outside of any means of detection by humans. Yet there are terrestrial manifestations of this outside reality.

How do you know what this outside reality has, is, what its components and characteristics are? The outside reality is completely inaccessible and undetectable by you, by Socreates, by Simon Weil. How do you suppose to teach this existence of outside reality when there is no connection to it at all?

How do you know that "longing for an absolute good" and "contradictions that are always the terminus of human thought" are the manifestations of this third, outside reality?

DID YOU KNOW that in THIS world, in THIS KNOWABLE reality the same things -- longing for absolute goodness and the existence of contradictions -- are perfectly well explained, using nothing but common sense?

You ask how I know. I don't know. I am drawn to develop my intuition.

“Knowledge has three degrees – opinion, science, illumination. The means or instrument of the first is sense; of the second, dialectic; of the third, intuition.”
— Plotinus

Plato in his analogy of the divided line describes describes the realm of knowledge above the line and beyond the realm of the visible world. Why believe it? Some have the need to psychologically take the next step beyond the dialectic in pursuit of the experience of meaning so as to become able to know.

[Dubious]

What I mean by “those like you and Greta” is that you both introduce a heavy negative emotional element that inhibits the purpose of philosophy.

You are not practicing philosophy, you're preaching dogma which doesn't allow for debate. Disagree with any of your fixed assertions and the first line of any reply you make is "Those like you", You're not receptive to, etc., negating the merits of other views without debate. You simply demerit those as "not applicable", that being your version of philosophy. What it really amounts to is sermonizing as spoken by your book; ergo, all your quotes. In terms of philosophy, it renders anything you say worthless.

Philosophy in any class means debating different conclusions and not their immediate dismissal because they go against your granitized preconceptions. Whenever it's difficult to attack an argument you instead attack the maker of the argument while avoiding any mention of it.

It's the kind of hypocrisy theism has had time to perfect for over 2000 years. Obviously, it still has its practitioners.

The dualistic mind does so through lies and imagination. The triune mind open to the conscious third force of reconciliation experiences a quality of attention which can open the door to conscious contemplation and the experience of higher consciousness which unifies both natures so they can function as a whole in a manner worthy of the name Man.

How bloody noble and sanctimonious! Any idea when you'll experience the triune mind and forgo the usual lies, negations and misrepresentations you've been practicing in the meantime?

[Greta]

The dualistic mind does so through lies and imagination. The triune mind open to the conscious third force of reconciliation experiences a quality of attention which can open the door to conscious contemplation and the experience of higher consciousness which unifies both natures so they can function as a whole in a manner worthy of the name Man.

How bloody noble and sanctimonious! Any idea when you'll experience the triune mind and forgo the usual lies, negations and misrepresentations you've been practicing in the meantime?

My impression is that he justifies his regular stream of untruths and false witnessing on the basis that, as "secularists", we are not fully human and thus unworthy of truth, which he would see us as incapable of appreciating.

Thus, the role of the "higher mind" such as Nick's today is apparently to destroy secularists and secularism and restore rightful theocratic rule. He does not believe this is possible with the system as it is and thus his battle continues until the much-awaited Apocalypse, which will finally usher in God's dominion over the Earth. Thus he is in favour of anything that destroys people, systems and ecosystems - such as his preferred politician.

When unhooked from the mythology, the apocalypse prophesy of Revelations can be thought about in interesting ways, given what most experts are predicting with the environment and AI. Maybe the ancients intuited a threshold time in the future when both natural and human systems would break down. Perhaps then, as predicted, the Earth really will be ruled by a new type of entity, one that is above human bias, corruption, cruelty, and dishonesty, that is just, true and virtually immortal?

... AI