Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Lacewing » Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm

Averroes wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:42 am
...
I apologize for not responding to your thoughtful comments directly. This is what feels appropriate for me to say right now. I do appreciate what you've brought to light.

Essentially, I think anything can be used for any purpose, good or bad. And any human is capable of just about anything. Humans have (to varying degrees) fears and needs and delusions, and they can distort and create as much as needed to serve that. Many essentially brainwash themselves in various ways... and pass it on to others.

I have never been inclined to follow other people... nor religions of any kind. Being forced to grow up in the Christian church, I went through the motions as kids must do, yet kept feeling that it did not make sense. Humans were doing it for themselves. From my perspective then and now, we do not need to follow any particular steps nor stories, and in fact, those things intoxicate us. We see them as our "answer"... as some sort of ultimate truth... as salvation... whatever. And all of that is based on the belief that we are NOT ALREADY good enough as we are... that we must somehow fix/better ourselves TO BE WHAT MAN THINKS IS RIGHT.

To my way of thinking... man's creations are made-up... ALL OF THEM. Some are beautiful and sweet. Many are demented and controlling. Having a sense of humor helps me deal with living in a manmade world. I cannot take it seriously. I am not interested in any of man's creations if they are telling me that I am not good enough as I was born to be. I do not think there is some imperative for man to be or reach some level of consciousness that MAN imagines is necessary. WE'RE NOT GOING ANYWHERE! There is no destination. There is no ultimate judge. Basically, all that matters in this moment is what we're doing in this moment. What I've seen from my perspective is that I can be fully complete and vibrant, and full of love and joy and vision in this moment... and I can manifest from that. Or I can feel empty and lost, and have fear and worry, and manifest from that... which I've done too. I make my own choices... and those determine the experience I have REGARDLESS OF ALL ELSE.

No one can tell me what I'm "supposed" to do in some spiritually ultimate way. They can only offer suggestions on what I might find useful for expanding or clarifying my experience... and inspire me in how that ripples in so many directions. Most people and religions, however, are extremely bogged down in their ideas of claiming how things are or need to be, and what humans need to be -- and that's messed up from the very beginning of concept (from my perspective).

Why don't we START from the idea that all is spiritually FINE as it is... and then think of ways to enhance that... rather than "fix it". Something so simple as the way we FRAME our ideas, sets up everything that comes after.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2465
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:01 am

Lacewing,

Hee.. hee .. typical..

If you give a malignant virus the slightest opportunity it will naturally attempt to dig into your system to destroy the host, which is glaring as below.

Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:43 pm
Your post, Averroes, inspired me to respond in this way.
I take this as a compliment. Thank you. I think that you have a pronounced artistic disposition. Is there any truth to this or it’s just an impression that I am having?
Averroes wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:42 am
Thank you for sharing your experiences with me. I am not into sufism myself but I do like to listen to the recitation of the Holy Quran a lot. It has a calming and an appeasing effect on my soul, mind and body. Whenever I go to the Holy Quran, I always get satisfaction and great joy.

May I ask you if you have ever listened to a recitation of the Holy Quran in Arabic? If not, may I in turn share some of my experiences with you?

If you would kindly allow me, I would like to propose to you to listen to a recitation of the Holy Quran in a clean place, i.e. not in the bathroom or restroom, and tell me how you felt if you feel like sharing the experience with me.

If you agree, then here are some short recitations of the Holy Quran from professional reciters that I have chosen:

1. Al-Fatiha (chapter 1): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6r47L-8uf8
2. At-Teen(chapter 95): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK88FsJ3xQM
3. Al-'Asr (chapter 103): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5iElBopeyA
4. Al-Feel(chapter 105): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfBECWykm2o
5. Al-Baqara (chapter 2 verse 255) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaNdjbGN-Fg

If you will want to listen to some more, there are many other YouTube videos that I can direct to.

__________________________

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2465
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:27 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:54 pm
Averroes wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:42 am
And this is the essence of Buddhism! They talk of self control, yet they are themselves incapable of controlling themselves.
No, that is not what Buddhism is. No person (thing) is a Buddha. There is only Buddha.

No ''thing'' is a Buddha, because EVERYTHING and NOTHING is already Buddha Nature...Nature is just happening all by itself spontaneously. Nature is infinite. Infinity is where things happen that don't.

The one that claims to be a Buddha is ego, it doesn't exist, it is an artificial contruct of the mind. A fictional character within the illusory dream of separation. Infinity is indivisable so there is nothing controlling anything, there's just what's happening to no one uncontrollably.

An artificial construct cannot control anything...no more than it can control being born or dying.

This “Sat Chit Ananda” is not for sale, beware of the man selling sand on a beach.
There is Buddha in one perspective and there is no Buddha in another perspective.

Note Lin Chi's famous quote;

"If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him"

In this case, Buddha also implies Buddha Nature as well or whatever attributes or perspective one assigns to 'Buddha'.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6808
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Dontaskme » Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:06 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:27 am

"If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him"
You cannot kill that which does not exist...Only that which ''apparently'' exists.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2465
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:31 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:06 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:27 am

"If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him"
You cannot kill that which does not exist...Only that which ''apparently'' exists.
You missed the point.

What the quote imply is,
deal with and detach from any reification of anything from an illusory 'unknown'.

ALL humans has an existential crisis and it is active in the majority.
The common theists will reify a God to deal with that existential crisis.

Buddhism recognize even the most intelligent, wise, sophisticated of men will likely reify some thing from the illusory 'unknown'.

Thus this extreme caution,
even if one meet the Buddha [the most respected thing for any Buddhist] one has to kill the Buddha. Of course this is only an analogy to some critical principle.
This critical principle imply one can be caught in a reification of something, and even if it is highly favorable one must understand and inhibit such a reification through various fool proof means.
Why because what is reified is only an illusion.


In your case you are caught in reification process that result in your expressing the existence of ONENESS, THAT, The Absolute, and the likes.
According to the quote above, in such a situation a Buddhist must 'kill' i.e. prevent the 'clinging' to such a thing as developed through various spiritual practices.

You may claim that ONENESS cannot be known, cling to, blah blah blah, but your acts and posting of your views are sure signs and evidences you are clinging to it with much zeal, fervor and aggression that you are not aware of.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6808
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Dontaskme » Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:31 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:31 am

You may claim that ONENESS cannot be known, cling to, blah blah blah, but your acts and posting of your views are sure signs and evidences you are clinging to it with much zeal, fervor and aggression that you are not aware of.

No one can know ONENESS.

You are ONENESS, that's how you are known.


That which is KNOWN CANNOT KNOW.

Knowing is one with the knowing which is consciousness the only knowing there is.


Knowing is this unseen unknown ..knowing and seeing. There is no thing outside of this immediate NOW -(K-NOW-LEDGE)..the razors ledge of creation.


.

Averroes
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:48 pm

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Averroes » Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:46 am

Lacewing wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm
I apologize for not responding to your thoughtful comments directly. This is what feels appropriate for me to say right now. I do appreciate what you've brought to light.
Thank you for these kind words. If you have benefited from what I have brought to light then do warn others against the dangers of what Mimi Durand and June Campbel have testified to us, so that other Western women do not fall into the perversion of Buddhism. I have other materials, in which you might also be interested, on the violence in Buddhism from Oxford scholars on the subject. Maybe later in a next post so as not to crowd this post with too much information.

There is no need for you to apologize to me, there is no harm done, don’t worry. I think you have artistic dispositions and I get along very well with artists. I do much appreciate their company. As they are creative people, one does not have time to get bored with them! And I also understand that to “let it all flow out” is how some artists work! I kind of like that idea a lot, so I have no problem with your freestyle approach. In fact, I enjoy it! As you might have guessed I am a Muslim, and art, in general, is something I like much but particularly Islamic art is something I find dazzling. I wrote a post on Islamic art last year on the forum, maybe you might want to have a look: viewtopic.php?p=326486#p326486


Following Aequitas Veritas’ post suggesting that I might be bothering you, if that be indeed your sentiment, may I, in turn, suggest to you if indeed our social exchange is bothering you to please inform me immediately and I will stop right away. There is absolutely no problem on my side, so do not worry.
I take this opportunity to also advise you not to pay too much attention to the bad manners of Aequitas Veritas. He is not very intelligent and he is also uneducated. In fact, when one gets to know him better, his stupidity and ignorance become evident! Sometimes he makes me laugh with his stupidity, but then I have to correct him and that is not very funny because making a donkey understand is a not-so-easy task, and I know what I am talking about!! And because of his stupidity and ignorance, I think he has an inferiority complex with respect to us who are evidently more intelligent than him. Interesting it is to note that Siddhartha himself, who was judged not apt to be an intellectual by his own people, probably had an inferiority complex with respect to the intellectuals of his time. And later when he had some followers he even called for the killing of these real intellectuals. The intellectuals of his time were called the Brahmins and Siddhartha himself was a mere soldier (Kshatriya) and later, maybe due to experiencing serious psychological trauma, he was degraded to being merely a lazy parasitic beggar or a bum. It is reported in a Buddhist scripture that the so-called “Buddha” said to Bodhisattva Kasyapa:
  • O good man! A person who kills an icchantika does not suffer from the karmic returns due to the killings of the three kinds named above. O good man! All those Brahmins are of the class of the icchantika. For example, such actions as digging the ground, mowing the grass, felling trees, cutting up corpses, ill-speaking, and lashing do not call forth karmic returns. Killing an icchantika comes within the same category. No karmic results ensue. Why not? Because no Brahmins and no five laws to begin with faith, etc. are involved here [Maybe: no Brahmins are concerned with the "five roots" of faith, vigour, mindfulness, concentration, and Wisdom]. For this reason, killing [of this kind] does not carry one off to hell. [Nirvana Sutra]
An “icchantika” in Buddhism refers to incorrigible human beings lacking the requisites for achieving “enlightenment”.

He was really not cool this Buddha! Killing someone just because he is smarter is not cool at all. This is psychopathic behavior! This psychopath (i.e. the Buddha) also said in that same scripture:
  • In just the same way, the Bodhisattva-mahasattva acts likewise for reasons of protecting Wonderful Dharma. Should beings slander Mahayana, he applies kindly lashings, in order to cure them. Or he may take life in order that what obtained in the past could be mended, thus seeing to it that the law [Dharma] could be accorded with. The Bodhisattva always thinks: "How might I best make beings aspire to faith? I shall always act as is best fitted to the occasion."[Nirvana Sutra]
“Mahayana” here means the religion. In fact, it is translated as “the Greater (Maha) Vehicle/way (yana),” so, here it just means the way of the Bodhisattva. So in the quoted Sutra above, the Buddha is ordering to kill those who talk badly about the way of the Bodhisattva! Now, you should also take into consideration that Aequitas Veritas has taken the vow of the Bodhisattva according to himself!! So, now that I am getting into the business of telling the truth about his stupid and obnoxious religion here and elsewhere, and actually quite enjoying it then I should have good reasons to be concerned for my life and the more so as he is really stupid! No need for you to worry though, just don’t get close to him or stare at him in the eyes, and you will be fine! If you get too close to him or arouse his anger by staring at him in the eyes, then his stupidity will get into your system and you will be contaminated! And if that happens to you then you are just doomed! There is no cure yet for that level of stupidity, except maybe euthanasia or suicide...but well let's hope we don’t have to resort to those extreme measures!

______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm
Essentially, I think anything can be used for any purpose, good or bad. And any human is capable of just about anything. Humans have (to varying degrees) fears and needs and delusions, and they can distort and create as much as needed to serve that. Many essentially brainwash themselves in various ways... and pass it on to others.
I tend to agree with the gist of this comment of yours. And I think this is where your previous intelligent advice of being prudent/watchful acquires all its meaning. I think one must take the time and objectively assess, to the best of one’s ability, all the different options that are presented to us. It is true that there are many delusional people who have been brainwashed and as a result have become intoxicated with an ocean of psychological diseases. But these people cannot hide their condition, so here, I think, it would be over-reacting were we to shun all points of views because of some delusional and distorted perspectives. The intelligent and wise is clearly distinguished from the stupid and ignorant. Don’t you agree? And the beautiful and wholesome clearly stands out from the abhorrent and harmful. So the equation is much simplified as it just reduces to us avoiding the toxic people and ideas, and to rather chose and surround ourselves with points of views and people who nourish us into actualizing the wholesome and blossom the beautiful in us. I believe that each of us has the ability to distinguish the beneficial from the harmful. Don’t you agree?

______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm
I have never been inclined to follow other people... nor religions of any kind. Being forced to grow up in the Christian church, I went through the motions as kids must do, yet kept feeling that it did not make sense. Humans were doing it for themselves. From my perspective then and now, we do not need to follow any particular steps nor stories, and in fact, those things intoxicate us. We see them as our "answer"... as some sort of ultimate truth... as salvation... whatever. And all of that is based on the belief that we are NOT ALREADY good enough as we are... that we must somehow fix/better ourselves TO BE WHAT MAN THINKS IS RIGHT.

I relate to your story. I was raised in the Christian tradition too; went to Christian school, said my Christian prayers each morning etc… And like you too, I was much intellectually dissatisfied from a very young age with the fundamental doctrines and practices of Christianity and the likes. But of course, since at that time I knew no better, I thought for a long time the problem was with me! I still remember when I was about 4 to 6 years old, I really hated the worship of the idols of people in my surroundings. I remember that I would go to the idols and say to them in a menacing tone: “If you are God, why do you remain here all day? Don’t you have better things to do?” And then I would gather some saliva in my mouth with an intention to spit in their direction! Once my mother overheard my little monologue and gently scolded me! But as you might be guessing, I was not to drop the case so easily! I would wait and when she was not watching, I would continue my mocking enterprise. Nothing made sense before I came to Islam. I even studied some Buddhism and practiced some Buddhist meditation for some time, and that was even worse. Buddhism is a dead end and completely tasteless and foolish. But eventually I started studying Islam, and the light came back into my life. Everything made sense again. I realized that all along I was right from the very beginning of my life, and it was my surrounding that was sick and intoxicated with nonsense. And indeed, for the time before I found Islam, I too got intoxicated due to the environment I was raised in. So, you are right, we are not born in a state of “in need to be fixed,” but we were born already good as we were and it is our environment that intoxicated us that needs to be fixed. There are many many former Christians who share a similar story. For example check out the story of Abdulrahman Sykes here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKg0EB_ckRk

In Islam, every child is born pure with no sin whatsoever. In Islam, there is NO concept of the “original sin” which every child “inherits.” And thus a baby is NOT in need of being spiritually “fixed” in Islam. In Islam, the belief is that every child is born a Muslim, pure and free of any sin whatsoever. As we are at it, I find it quite appropriate to mention that it is indeed very interesting to witness the reactions of small children and babies to the recitation of the Holy Quran. There are many YouTube videos where such experiments have been conducted. Were you to show an interest in the subject too, then please allow me to propose to you to view those that I have chosen below:

1. Reaction of a fetus (5 min): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gUxJKARWUs
2. Reaction of babies (3 min): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4slRE3V2y9s
3. Reaction of a little American girl to the Muslim call to prayer (3min): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYGKR7fk_vk

So, as I already told you, listening to the recitation of the Holy Quran also has a very beneficial effect on me. And if it has the same effect on you, then whenever you feel sad or not in a good mood, you can listen to the recitations of Quran in a clean place and observe it’s effect on you.

__________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm
Having a sense of humor helps me deal with living in a manmade world.
I like humor too and I like to crack a joke every so often! Moreover, with Aequitas Veritas around there is plenty of inspiration to come up with some funny lines! These jokes, of course, he will not be able to understand as he is too stupid; so it’s fine, no harm done!! And absolutely no doubt that helps a lot in the world we are actually living in! :-)

_________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm
I am not interested in any of man's creations if they are telling me that I am not good enough as I was born to be.
In fact, I am telling you the exact contrary! I am telling you that you were already good when you were born! :)

_________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 6:06 pm
I make my own choices... and those determine the experience I have REGARDLESS OF ALL ELSE.
I totally agree with that statement of yours. Recently, I was in a discussion with someone on the forum, and I told him that it is up to us to make the right decisions in order to bring positive changes in our lives.
It is really a pleasure to discuss with you. The difference is so striking compared to discussing with someone like Aequitas Veritas. Jokes apart, the later is really stupid to a point that you can’t imagine! I hope he is not reading this, otherwise, he is going to throw such an unimaginable tantrum…! :D
___________________________________

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Lacewing » Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm

Averroes wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:46 am
I think one must take the time and objectively assess, to the best of one’s ability, all the different options that are presented to us. It is true that there are many delusional people who have been brainwashed and as a result have become intoxicated with an ocean of psychological diseases. But these people cannot hide their condition, so here, I think, it would be over-reacting were we to shun all points of views because of some delusional and distorted perspectives. The intelligent and wise is clearly distinguished from the stupid and ignorant. Don’t you agree? And the beautiful and wholesome clearly stands out from the abhorrent and harmful. So the equation is much simplified as it just reduces to us avoiding the toxic people and ideas, and to rather chose and surround ourselves with points of views and people who nourish us into actualizing the wholesome and blossom the beautiful in us. I believe that each of us has the ability to distinguish the beneficial from the harmful. Don’t you agree?
I agree, but I do not think we can realistically draw dividing lines in any particular ways. There is wisdom in all directions and from all people... just as there is ignorance in all directions and from all people. There is also clarity and there is intoxication. I think it is good to acknowledge and call-out and interact with ALL OF THAT honestly. This is why sometimes I can have a reasonable discussion with someone, then at other times be cursing their intoxication, and then discuss things politely again with them if they step outside of their intoxication.

I am wary of ALL religion... as I think it is intoxication. There may be much good that comes from it (in certain ways)... but it is still a significant intoxication. Simply being human is intoxicating... and I do not want to add on more to that. The only reason I would seek out a religion is if I had some sort of need. I do not (right now). I much prefer trying to attune to a state of clarity -- than of adding or following anything. I would say that I am typically in a state of continual observing and casually assessing (like intuition/instincts) in the moment, as authentically as I'm able to do. I try to let go of preconceived notions -- and not be driven by anything particular other than the clarity in the moment.

Some hear this and say that I have no guiding principles... but that is ignorant and not true. Of course I have principles -- I just don't attach them to a specific immovable structure/foundation. It is my experience that life is free-flowing, and it makes sense to me that there is broader value and awareness in flowing with that.

It is shocking to me to see how intoxicated and UNBALANCED people can be in all sorts of ways. There is much of it in religion -- but also, in common beliefs in society. For example, the way someone may praise Trump, only seeing (or speaking of) him in a glowing light -- that level of intoxication is just scary. It's difficult to trust people who are that extreme. Being extreme appears to be an indication of how intoxicated a person is. Such a person is not operating with clarity and mobility. They are not fluid with life and the Universe, so-to-speak. They are rigid. They are not open to the moment. Agendas and egos are crafty things -- it does not matter if it is claimed that they are used "for good". Being closed to the moment means NOT embracing what is in that moment. And that is not authentic... it is contrived. I'm not suggesting that we deny or hate our human tendencies -- rather, that we just be aware. For example... if we want to be intoxicated with an idea or belief... do it, but admit it... just as one might admit their intoxication after having a few shots of whiskey. Rather than insisting blindly (like a complete drunk) that the ideas/beliefs are some kind of ultimate reality and truth that others must see/believe.

I don't think there is any ultimate and unchanging reality and truth. Rather, everything is in motion. Like the waves in an ocean... they do not suddenly stop and hold position. It doesn't make sense to me that we humans think ANYTHING OF A SPIRITUAL NATURE is in a solid, unchanging state, that we must strive for. Nor that we can or must strive to "know". Do we "know" a wave in the ocean? Where it has been, where it is going? It arises and is gone again. THIS to me reflects the spirit in all things. Movement WITHOUT agenda.

It is beautiful and fascinating and natural. And in my experience, there has been much that arises and flows through any moment that isn't bogged down by or restrictively tied to anything.

Averroes
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:48 pm

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Averroes » Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am

Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
I would say that I am typically in a state of continual observing and casually assessing (like intuition/instincts) in the moment, as authentically as I'm able to do. I try to let go of preconceived notions -- and not be driven by anything particular other than the clarity in the moment.
This reminds me of the famous mathematician and philosopher Descartes in his philosophical work the Meditations. On the statement I emphasized in the quote above, one could read his famous hyperbolic doubt method, and also his clear and distinct ideas.

I read this quotation of yours as you expressing the principle that one should not be complacent in life and take for granted anything one has gained but on the contrary one has to continually observe and assess oneself and one’s environment in the light of new information and then act accordingly. I think this is the good recipe for progress and authenticity, because as we progress on the path of life, we see the common place from new and more enriching perspectives.

I like the idea of having an open mind, and that means that one is not closed to new and potentially better ways of thinking and that I think is an indication of intelligence. But with intelligence also comes responsibility to act accordingly.
________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
It is shocking to me to see how intoxicated and UNBALANCED people can be in all sorts of ways.
Yes, I understand your sentiment. With experience in philosophy, I have learned to take stupidity with humor. But I understand people being shocked by stupidity. But at one point those who are shocked should emerge from the initial shock and start engaging in serious philosophy with these people. I think that the lives of all human beings living on earth are intertwined and thus we should each be helping each other to the best of our ability in order for humanity to emerge from darkness into light. But of course, there are also stupid people who just cannot be brought back and in those cases one would have no other choice but to abandon those people in their darknesses.

________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
I don't think there is any ultimate and unchanging reality and truth. Rather, everything is in motion.
Now, there is a contradiction in these statements of yours. If you allow me, I would like to expound on this a little further. This is a common mistake, so don’t worry. You firstly said that you don’t think that there is an unchanging reality and truth. And then you say that everything is in motion. Now, clearly the proposition “everything is in motion” is either true or false. If it is true then it is a truth. Right? But if it is a truth, is it unchanging or not? If it is unchanging, then it contradicts your earlier statement such that there is no unchanging reality and truth. And if it is not true, then there is at least on thing which is not changing and once again your earlier statement is contradicted! So by reductio ad absurdum, we must conclude that there is an unchanging reality and truth.

_________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
Like the waves in an ocean... they do not suddenly stop and hold position. It doesn't make sense to me that we humans think ANYTHING OF A SPIRITUAL NATURE is in a solid, unchanging state, that we must strive for. Nor that we can or must strive to "know". Do we "know" a wave in the ocean? Where it has been, where it is going? It arises and is gone again. THIS to me reflects the spirit in all things. Movement WITHOUT agenda.
Respectfully, allow me to say that we know quite a lot about waves in general and ocean waves in particular in physics. Through scientific investigations we have come to know how ocean waves are caused, how they operate and propagate and we also know their role and purpose. In fact, ocean waves are very important for marine life. Everything has a purpose in nature even ocean waves! Through my study of science, I have come to the conclusion that “the spirit of all things” is that all things around me, and myself as well have a purpose.

An accessible article where you can learn a bit more about the physics behind ocean waves is here: https://ci.coastal.edu/~sgilman/770Oceansinmotion.htm

As for the importance of waves you can have a look at this article: https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resourc ... g-the-sea
Movement of water, in the form of waves, tides and currents, plays an import role in our oceans and impacts on all marine organisms.

Wave action is one of the most significant environmental conditions affecting life in the sea. The impact of waves generally reduces with depth.

  • Waves are caused by wind acting on the surface of the sea. However, they impact on life beneath the surface, too. For example, a wave that is 2 metres high above the surface may be felt up to 6 metres below the surface. Waves can be very destructive; however, they also cleanse organisms and help to increase oxygen availability.

  • Tides are caused by the interaction of the forces of the sun and moon; in most places, tides occur twice daily. Tides have the biggest impact on marine organisms that live on coastlines. For example, these organisms need to adapt in order to resist drying out and to survive daily changes in temperature and salinity, and exposure to land-based predators at low tide.

  • Currents are caused by wind, tides and the global circulation of water. Currents play an important role in moving water between the poles and the tropics. Currents also move food and nutrients from the coast further out into the sea. Many organisms also rely on currents to transport their eggs and larvae.

___________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
It is beautiful and fascinating and natural. And in my experience, there has been much that arises and flows through any moment that isn't bogged down by or restrictively tied to anything.
I too find waves and in general nature itself to be beautiful and fascinating. You mention being not “restrictively tied to anything,” and that speaks to me. For this makes me think about our solar system! When we think about it, the planets revolving around the sun and the sun itself are not supported by anything, they are just floating in space, I.e they not are tied to anything, yet there is so much balance, order and harmony in their motion. The state of our knowledge nowadays is such that we can even predict their position quite accurately in a distant future with respect to each other, and these precise calculations are fundamental for us to be able to put satellites in space. I find this really fascinating. Don’t you? It makes one wonder Who is the cause of such a tremendous order in our solar system and beyond that!

________________________________

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Lacewing » Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm

Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
I would say that I am typically in a state of continual observing and casually assessing (like intuition/instincts) in the moment, as authentically as I'm able to do. I try to let go of preconceived notions -- and not be driven by anything particular other than the clarity in the moment.
I read this quotation of yours as you expressing the principle that one should not be complacent in life and take for granted anything one has gained but on the contrary one has to continually observe and assess oneself and one’s environment in the light of new information and then act accordingly. I think this is the good recipe for progress and authenticity, because as we progress on the path of life, we see the common place from new and more enriching perspectives.
Yes, that is an accurate description.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
with intelligence also comes responsibility to act accordingly.
Being open to more information, and not being caught up in identity, ego, and preconceived notions, may reveal more ways to act "appropriately" for each situation. There are many layers to what we are dancing with. Some of us may choose to deal with most things in a similar fashion (of our own), because we have determined that is the right/best way to handle things. That's fine. But there are more options for dancing, as well -- perhaps a bit more free-form -- that can be very effective.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
I understand people being shocked by stupidity. But at one point those who are shocked should emerge from the initial shock and start engaging in serious philosophy with these people. I think that the lives of all human beings living on earth are intertwined and thus we should each be helping each other to the best of our ability in order for humanity to emerge from darkness into light. But of course, there are also stupid people who just cannot be brought back and in those cases one would have no other choice but to abandon those people in their darknesses.
I do not think there's a particular rigid methodology that must be used, nor a particular outcome that must be achieved. I have always tended toward being "naturally" philosophical, and communicating that as effectively as I can. I used to be consistently very gentle with that. :) More recently in life, I do not pussyfoot around because intoxicated people will miss that. Nor do I think that people have to realize anything in particular. I am simply dancing with people... based on how they (too) are dancing.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
I don't think there is any ultimate and unchanging reality and truth. Rather, everything is in motion.
Now, there is a contradiction in these statements of yours... /...You firstly said that you don’t think that there is an unchanging reality and truth. And then you say that everything is in motion. Now, clearly the proposition “everything is in motion” is either true or false. If it is true then it is a truth. Right? But if it is a truth, is it unchanging or not?
If this is the way you want to analyze and "know" it, you may. But then you miss/ignore the value of what I'm pointing to.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
So by reductio ad absurdum, we must conclude that there is an unchanging reality and truth.
That deduction may work for you. It doesn't work for me.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
Like the waves in an ocean... they do not suddenly stop and hold position. It doesn't make sense to me that we humans think ANYTHING OF A SPIRITUAL NATURE is in a solid, unchanging state, that we must strive for. Nor that we can or must strive to "know". Do we "know" a wave in the ocean? Where it has been, where it is going? It arises and is gone again. THIS to me reflects the spirit in all things. Movement WITHOUT agenda.
Respectfully, allow me to say that we know quite a lot about waves in general and ocean waves in particular in physics.
I knew someone was going to eagerly say this, I just didn't think it would be you.

Again... for some reason you are skipping over what I'm pointing to, and I suspect it's because what I'm saying is contrary to something you believe. Why not just say that instead of trying to invalidate my simple examples? Human concepts and words are naturally limited when trying to speak of a "spiritual nature". Does that mean we shouldn't try? Is it truthful for you to try to pick apart larger efforts/concepts by dissecting and nit-picking wherever you see small opportunities to do so? That is meaningless to me. I see it for what it is. Either you can see the broader concept I'm talking about or you don't.

What are your larger concepts, and how do you describe them?
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
You mention being not “restrictively tied to anything,” and that speaks to me. For this makes me think about our solar system! When we think about it, the planets revolving around the sun and the sun itself are not supported by anything, they are just floating in space, I.e they not are tied to anything, yet there is so much balance, order and harmony in their motion. The state of our knowledge nowadays is such that we can even predict their position quite accurately in a distant future with respect to each other, and these precise calculations are fundamental for us to be able to put satellites in space. I find this really fascinating. Don’t you? It makes one wonder Who is the cause of such a tremendous order in our solar system and beyond that!
Why must logic jump to a "who"?

Averroes
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:48 pm

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Averroes » Sun Sep 30, 2018 10:51 am

Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
I have always tended toward being "naturally" philosophical, and communicating that as effectively as I can. I used to be consistently very gentle with that. :) More recently in life, I do not pussyfoot around because intoxicated people will miss that.
I understand that quite well. :-)

__________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
I don't think there is any ultimate and unchanging reality and truth. Rather, everything is in motion.
Now, there is a contradiction in these statements of yours... /...You firstly said that you don’t think that there is an unchanging reality and truth. And then you say that everything is in motion. Now, clearly the proposition “everything is in motion” is either true or false. If it is true then it is a truth. Right? But if it is a truth, is it unchanging or not?
If this is the way you want to analyze and "know" it, you may. But then you miss/ignore the value of what I'm pointing to.
With all due respect to you, I am open to assess different possibilities but provided that they be expressed clearly in an English sentence. However, I am not into mystic or esoteric ways of thinking. I left the mysticism and esotericism of my upbringing because it did not make sense to me. And having left that, now I do not feel inclined to adopt other forms of mysticism or esoteric knowledge. But it goes without saying that I respect the choice of anyone who is inclined in that direction. And since we are sharing our points of views, I think it is interesting to have the opportunity to consider and assess different points of views from our own. As you said previously in your first post to this thread:
Lacewing wrote:What we CHOOSE can reveal a lot, regardless of what we are claiming. So whatever we claim, be wary/watchful for the opposite!
And I think that this kind of exchange where we are having different points of views provides an opportunity for each of us to assess our own claims in the light of the reasoning of the disagreeing party. In this way, I think, we are tending more towards balance and away from intoxicated ways of thinking. Don't you agree?

__________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Lacewing wrote:
Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:49 pm
Like the waves in an ocean... they do not suddenly stop and hold position. It doesn't make sense to me that we humans think ANYTHING OF A SPIRITUAL NATURE is in a solid, unchanging state, that we must strive for. Nor that we can or must strive to "know". Do we "know" a wave in the ocean? Where it has been, where it is going? It arises and is gone again. THIS to me reflects the spirit in all things. Movement WITHOUT agenda.
Respectfully, allow me to say that we know quite a lot about waves in general and ocean waves in particular in physics.
I knew someone was going to eagerly say this, I just didn't think it would be you.
May I, respectfully, ask you why? Is there a problem with the scientific perspective in construing the statements you made? If so, may I ask you from what conceptual framework were your words intended to be construed?
_________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
Again... for some reason you are skipping over what I'm pointing to, and I suspect it's because what I'm saying is contrary to something you believe. Why not just say that instead of trying to invalidate my simple examples?
Well, there are many reasons for this. Firstly, because I think that you are intelligent and you would understand! And I was right. :-) It would not have been wise of me to treat you like I treat the stupid people knowing that you are not stupid! Had I spoon fed you, it would have been a lack of respect and an insult to your intelligence! So instead of saying it confrontationally, I showed it diplomatically and tactfully. Don’t you think that this is better among gentlemen? This is the beauty of exchanging with intelligent people, one need not be rude or confrontational in expressing disagreement! Secondly, since the start of our exchange you have been polite and civilized and I will strive to reciprocate this initiative of yours as far as possible as I think this is how an intellectual exchange ought to take place. I think that among intelligent gentlemen, if there is a need to disagree, then we can intelligently disagree in dignity and civility. Thirdly, by giving a perspective that invalidates your example, that should have given you an opportunity to re-assess your claims. Didn't you say that one should "be wary/watchful for opposite" claims? So for these reasons, I responded the way I did. Don’t you agree with this approach?

Now to address the content of this comment of yours, respectfully, from my perspective, since there were logical and factual issues with your statements, you could not have been pointing to anything. If you intended your statements and queries to me to be construed from a mystical perspective then I point out that in logic from a contradiction everything follows. In that case, you cannot charge me with “skipping over what you were pointing to,” since every answer is valid from a mystical point of view!

Now, from your perspective, you previously said that there is nothing for “people to realize in particular” and also that there is “no particular outcome to be achieved,” and now, respectfully, you are saying that I skipped over something you were pointing to! What should I have realized if you believe there is nothing in particular for people to realize? Or what could I have skipped if there is no particular outcome to be achieved?

Please do not consider these comments and queries of mine in a confrontational way but interpret them as an opportunity for each of us to re-assess our claims so that we strive towards more balance and away from intoxicated ways of thinking. Any way, as I already suggested to you if you have the sentiment that I am bothering you then please do not hesitate to tell me and I will stop right away.
_________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
Human concepts and words are naturally limited when trying to speak of a "spiritual nature". Does that mean we shouldn't try? Is it truthful for you to try to pick apart larger efforts/concepts by dissecting and nit-picking wherever you see small opportunities to do so?
Absolutely not. But the thing is that if as you say "human concepts and words are naturally limited" then I know of no other way to communicate with you except than through human concepts and English words! You asked me questions using English words, and I tried to answer you to the best of my ability by giving the English words you use their common meaning. I cannot do more than that. I am sorry if I offended you, it was not my intention.
________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
What are your larger concepts, and how do you describe them?
Most often using English words whose meaning can be found in the common English dictionaries. Or if a word has a meaning specific to a field of study or a particular context then the meaning it has in that field of study or context, for example technical terms in medicine, law, science etc...
I never had the opportunity to invent and use my own words.
_________________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
You mention being not “restrictively tied to anything,” and that speaks to me. For this makes me think about our solar system! When we think about it, the planets revolving around the sun and the sun itself are not supported by anything, they are just floating in space, I.e they not are tied to anything, yet there is so much balance, order and harmony in their motion. The state of our knowledge nowadays is such that we can even predict their position quite accurately in a distant future with respect to each other, and these precise calculations are fundamental for us to be able to put satellites in space. I find this really fascinating. Don’t you? It makes one wonder Who is the cause of such a tremendous order in our solar system and beyond that!
Why must logic jump to a "who"?
Why not? Why should we not to be authentic and honest? Why should it be a problem to let go of preconceived ideas and express anything other than what is clear and legitimate in the moment? I thought letting go of preconceived ideas and expressing clarity in the moment were dear to you. It is clear that wondering about the Who as the cause of this tremendous order in the universe is a legitimate pursuit for the philosopher. For example, I have been reading and sometimes responding to posts on this forum. Each post consists of a particular sequence of characters in a particular order. The latter order in which these particular characters are organized makes me wonder who is the being/individual responsible for such an order! When some posts are eloquently and intelligently designed/written, they arise my curiosity and interest, and I sometimes I have found myself following these exchanges even if not participating myself. And always, I have to think about the meaning of the posts of each author and in so doing I am necessarily driven to wonder about the author of those posts but never have I got the opportunity to have any sensible experience of any author (except myself) on the forum! Similarly, I wonder about the Who as the cause behind the tremendous order of the universe. Why would there be a problem in wondering about the Author of the universe and not about the author of Philosophy Now forum posts? If there is a problem, may I, respectfully, ask what is the problem from a philosophical perspective?

_______________________________

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Lacewing » Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm

Averroes wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 10:51 am
I think that this kind of exchange where we are having different points of views provides an opportunity for each of us to assess our own claims in the light of the reasoning of the disagreeing party.
I agree. But this current exchange/case is not a genuine look if you aren't focusing on what I'm actually pointing to.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Is there a problem with the scientific perspective in construing the statements you made? If so, may I ask you from what conceptual framework were your words intended to be construed? .../... by giving a perspective that invalidates your example, that should have given you an opportunity to re-assess your claims.
I simply used the movement of ocean waves as an example of movement without agenda. I could have said the wind, or fire, etc. It is a way of communicating a broader concept/question: Are you able to conceive of movement without agenda? Do you believe such a thing is possible?
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Lacewing wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:48 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Who is the cause of such a tremendous order in our solar system and beyond that!
Why must logic jump to a "who"?
Why not?
If you are going to presume there is a "who" behind it, you should be able to communicate why you think the human model is superimposed onto what is beyond our world/reality. Rather than simply saying "why not?".
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
It is clear that wondering about the Who as the cause of this tremendous order in the universe is a legitimate pursuit for the philosopher.
I understand. But before you can wonder about a "who", you must first assume there is one... and I was asking why that assumption is being made in the first place? What is the logic for that? Is it because you think there must be an agenda? And an agenda requires a "who"? This is why I'm asking if you can imagine no agenda?
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Why would there be a problem in wondering about the Author of the universe and not about the author of Philosophy Now forum posts? If there is a problem, may I, respectfully, ask what is the problem from a philosophical perspective?
Because it is based on an assumption that favors humans above all else, and ignores all else in the Universe. How logical is that? To think that the human template (more than anything else in nature) must be representative of some ultimate source of the Universe. Human thinking, human understanding, human limitations -- all of it -- are a very specific model among countless models in the Universe. Why would such a specific model make any sense as the source for something so vast?
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Why should we not to be authentic and honest? Why should it be a problem to let go of preconceived ideas and express anything other than what is clear and legitimate in the moment? I thought letting go of preconceived ideas and expressing clarity in the moment were dear to you.
How does imagining there to be a "who" have anything to do with being authentic and honest and letting go of preconceived ideas and expressing clearly? Don't assume that you can simply repeat my words to give validity to your claims, or to discredit my statements.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
you previously said that there is nothing for “people to realize in particular” and also that there is “no particular outcome to be achieved,” and now, respectfully, you are saying that I skipped over something you were pointing to!
If you are going to confuse statements made about ultimate reality with the mechanics of having a typical conversation in which concepts/ideas are communicated, I am not interested in thrashing around in what is apparently word and brain salad with you. Here again you misuse and distort what I've said. This tells me that either you are manipulative and dishonest... or we speak languages that are too different to communicate with each other. Our communication may be coming to a close.
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
among gentlemen...
I am female.

Averroes
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:48 pm

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Averroes » Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:50 pm

Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
I simply used the movement of ocean waves as an example of movement without agenda. I could have said the wind, or fire, etc.
Had you given the example of the wind and fire, then again there would have been some factual issues.

The movement of the wind has important functions in nature.
Wind And Its Importance

Definition:
The air that moves parallel to any part of the earth surface is called wind or The air moving horizontally on the surface of the earth is known as wind.

Air Current:
Vertically or nearly vertical movements of air resulting from convection ,turbulence or any other cause is known as air current.

Importance or Role or Effects Of Wind In Agriculture:

1. Wind increases the transpiration and intake of CO2
2. The turbulence created by wind increase CO2 supply and the increase in photosynthesis.
3. When wind is hot, desiccation of the plants takes place, because humid air in the inter cellular places is replaced by dry air.
4. The hot and dry wind makes the cells expanding and early maturity, it results in the dwarfing of plants.
5. Under the influence of strong wind the shoots are pressurized and get deformed.
6. Strong winds produces loading of crops.
7. The coastal area affected by strong wind bring salt and make the soil unsuitable for growing plants.
8. Strong winds affect the plants life both mechanically and physiologically.

Site: http://www.agriinfo.in/default.aspx?pag ... opicid=404

The movement in fire is caused by the wind and a process known as convection.
The common distribution of a flame under normal gravity conditions depends on convection, as soot tends to rise to the top of a general flame, as in a candle in normal gravity conditions, making it yellow. Site: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire#Flame
Convection is a method of heat transfer and has very important uses in nature. You can read the following short article which outlines the importance of convection currents in nature: http://www.preservearticles.com/2010122 ... heat.html

The closest you could have come to illustrating your concept could have been what we call in science "Brownian motion" which was a process explained by Einstein in 1905.
Brownian motion or pedesis (from Ancient Greek: πήδησις /pέːdεːsis/ "leaping") is the random motion of particles suspended in a fluid (a liquid or a gas) resulting from their collision with the fast-moving molecules in the fluid

This motion is named after the botanist Robert Brown, who was the most eminent microscopist of his time. In 1827, while looking through a microscope at pollen of the plant Clarkia Pulchella immersed in water, the triangular shaped pollen burst at the corners, emitting particles which he noted jiggled around in the water in random fashion. He was not able to determine the mechanisms that caused this motion. Atoms and molecules had long been theorized as the constituents of matter, and Albert Einstein published a paper in 1905 that explained in precise detail how the motion that Brown had observed was a result of the pollen being moved by individual water molecules, making one of his first big contributions to science. This explanation of Brownian motion served as convincing evidence that atoms and molecules exist, and was further verified experimentally by Jean Perrin in 1908. Perrin was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1926 "for his work on the discontinuous structure of matter". The direction of the force of atomic bombardment is constantly changing, and at different times the particle is hit more on one side than another, leading to the seemingly random nature of the motion. Site: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion

But even Brownian motion has a purpose in that it is the mechanism by which diffusion works, and diffusion is a very important process in nature for example in our bodies itself diffusion is a fundamental process. So Brownian motion too has a purpose!

As I said, from my perspective, everything in nature has a purpose, even the movement of the wind and the movement in fire.

_______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
It is a way of communicating a broader concept/question: Are you able to conceive of movement without agenda?
I take note that you have used the word “conceive” in the question addressed to me.

My answer: I do have a CONCEPT of movement without purpose, like I have the concept of a unicorn or the concept of a flying turtle or a pink elephant or whatnot. But to infer from my mere concept of something to the existence of that thing in nature is a leap/step that I have great difficulty with! In my conceptual framework, even though I have the concept of something, it does not mean that that thing is to be found in nature. But again, I will respect the choice of anyone who thinks otherwise.
______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
Do you believe such a thing is possible?
There are many different concepts of possibility. You can read about some of the different concepts of possibility here: https://everything2.com/title/Types+of+possibility

The broadest concept of possibility is logical possibility.
Wikipedia wrote:Logical possibility is usually considered the broadest sort of possibility; a proposition is said to be logically possible if there is no logical contradiction involved in its being true. "Dick Cheney is a bachelor" is logically possible, though in fact false; most philosophers have thought that statements like "If I flap my arms very hard, I will fly" are logically possible, although they are nomologically impossible. "Dick Cheney is a married bachelor," on the other hand, is logically impossible; anyone who is a bachelor is therefore not married, so this proposition is logically self-contradictory (though the sentence isn't, because it is logically possible for "bachelor" to mean "married man").Site:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive_possibility
So since the concept of a movement without purpose contains no contradiction, therefore it is a logical possibility. A pink elephant and a unicorn are also logical possibilities. In nature though, you will not find examples of such concepts. Therefore, even though conceptually these are logical possibilities, in nature those concepts have no actuality. Note that inferring physical actuality from logical possibility is a logical fallacy.
______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
If you are going to presume there is a "who" behind it, you should be able to communicate why you think the human model is superimposed onto what is beyond our world/reality. Rather than simply saying "why not?".
Hold on my friend (so to speak)! Who is talking exclusively about humans here? For one thing, I did not even use the word “human” in my exposition of this issue! I talked about “The Author of the Universe”, the “authors of posts”, “individual”, and “being”. I did not mention humans specifically! Read that passage again and you will not find reference to humans in it! It is true that humans are beings and individuals AS WELL, but my comment was not restricted merely to human beings! For one thing I am certain that I am a human being, but I do not know about you for certain or any other member on this forum. Well, I can trust someone if he/she say that he/she is human, but I have no knowledge of that as I have never seen any of you! So, from a purely objective perspective, I cannot rule out the possibility that there might also be non-human posters on Philosophy Now forum of a kind I do not know. So, my concepts of “individuals” and “beings” and “authors” were not restricted only to the human species. If you think that only humans write or should write posts on Philosophy Now, you should communicate to me why you think that? What is your evidence that only humans have ever posted on Philosophy Now?

______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
It is clear that wondering about the Who as the cause of this tremendous order in the universe is a legitimate pursuit for the philosopher.
I understand. But before you can wonder about a "who", you must first assume there is one... and I was asking why that assumption is being made in the first place?
This is a great question. Thank you for asking that. So, why assume that each post on Philosophy Now has an author? It can be that all these posts just happened to be formed without any author behind it. Each of us might just be conversing with our identical self, and there is no one I am replying to. Why assume that I am replying to another human being with the username ‘Lacewing’ on PN? I have seen no one writing the posts and I have seen no physical person. All I am aware of are Latin characters in a particular order on my screen. Why should I assume that there is an independent cause who arranged these characters in such an orderly fashion? That is a very good question!! Let us investigate it together.

Please let me ask you: do you think that the posts that you have been replying to on this thread were actually purposefully written by a being whose username is “Averroes” or do you think these posts to which you have been replying just occurred without any author, i.e. they just manifested like that?

Please let me make it easy. Choose any one of the options below that you believe is the case:

A: Purposeful author behind each post.
B: Posts just manifested without any author.
_____________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
What is the logic for that? Is it because you think there must be an agenda? And an agenda requires a "who"? This is why I'm asking if you can imagine no agenda?
These are very good questions again and I propose that we investigate them further together.

You say “you” in the above question, which I underlined and bolded. My question to you now: what/whom are you referring to by this “you”?

Is it
1. someone or something whom you think authored the post you were replying to or
2. nothing at all and you are just talking to yourself?

_______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Why would there be a problem in wondering about the Author of the universe and not about the author of Philosophy Now forum posts? If there is a problem, may I, respectfully, ask what is the problem from a philosophical perspective?
Because it is based on an assumption that favors humans above all else, and ignores all else in the Universe. How logical is that? To think that the human template (more than anything else in nature) must be representative of some ultimate source of the Universe. Human thinking, human understanding, human limitations -- all of it -- are a very specific model among countless models in the Universe. Why would such a specific model make any sense as the source for something so vast?
Respectfully, here you should consider that I did not restrict my explanation to humans exclusively. The law that I mentioned apply to different other beings in the universe and not just humans! It is only you who read “only humans” into what I wrote. And that is called in logic a strawman argument!

______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
Why should we not to be authentic and honest? Why should it be a problem to let go of preconceived ideas and express anything other than what is clear and legitimate in the moment? I thought letting go of preconceived ideas and expressing clarity in the moment were dear to you.
How does imagining there to be a "who" have anything to do with being authentic and honest and letting go of preconceived ideas and expressing clearly?
Very good question. Try to answer the following question and you will get the answer: Is there a “who” to whom you are addressing the above quoted question?
______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
you previously said that there is nothing for “people to realize in particular” and also that there is “no particular outcome to be achieved,” and now, respectfully, you are saying that I skipped over something you were pointing to!
(...) Here again you misuse and distort what I've said. This tells me that either you are manipulative and dishonest... or we speak languages that are too different to communicate with each other.
Not at all. There is nothing of that sort on my part, I just pay very careful attention to what you say.

For example, I recalled that you had made the following statement:
Lacewing wrote: Nor do I think that people have to realize anything in particular.
I previously took that statement to be a universal statement which admitted of no exception and now I understand that this is not the case. So, now I understand that in your understanding there are particular things that people need to realize. For example, you wanted me to realize the empty concept of “movement without agenda.” Alright, I understood your point of view now. Thank you for the clarification.

If there is any thing that you need to clarify with me, please do not hesitate. Besides, this is the purpose of our discussion. I try to speak the language of logic and science and I take consistency as my guiding principle.
_______________________________
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
Our communication may be coming to a close.
That’s up to you. I am already very grateful to God, the Almighty for having given me this great opportunity to have this wonderful exchange with you. :-)
Lacewing wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 5:38 pm
Averroes wrote:
Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 am
among gentlemen...
I am female.
Oops! My mistake. All along I was thinking that you were a man with a pronounced artistic disposition while you are simply a “female” (as you say)! That makes a lot of sense to me now! I am still very pleased to be having this discussion with you. So, correction: it is a civilized discussion between a lady (possibly!) and a gentleman. :D

______________________________

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3308
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Lacewing » Mon Oct 01, 2018 4:21 pm

Averroes wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:50 pm
...
Thank you for the quick and clear revelations of your thickness and arrogance -- I appreciate knowing this so that I will not waste any more time in discussion with you.

Averroes
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:48 pm

Re: Buddhism: "Enlightenment" through Sexual Orgies!

Post by Averroes » Mon Oct 01, 2018 4:34 pm

Lacewing wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 4:21 pm
Averroes wrote:
Mon Oct 01, 2018 2:50 pm
...
Thank you...
It was an interesting exchange. Thank you for contributing to this thread. I thank God, the Almighty for having given us the opportunity to have this wonderful exchange and for giving me the opportunity to get to know my sister in humanity Lacewing. :D

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests