Not sure why you seem to think you're saying something different from what I said...
Do you think a person either has complete spiritual clarity or is completely filled with noise? Is it not possible to experience each in varying degrees?
Not sure why you seem to think you're saying something different from what I said...
Do you think a person either has complete spiritual clarity or is completely filled with noise? Is it not possible to experience each in varying degrees?
I would be happy to help, Walker, but I do not understand what point Lacewing is trying to make? All I see is generic abuse being hurled; I do not know what specific issue/s Lacewing is reacting to ?Walker wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 8:09 pmDachshund, this is your thread.Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 5:19 pmMore of your cowardly avoidance and dishonest attempts to stir up a fog to deflect and obstruct. A lame-ass pattern you seem strangely impressed by and addicted to when avoiding your own accountability. Which makes it clear that clarity is an enemy of your crap and your need for protecting it.
Get that monkey off my back.
In truth, more power sharing within marriage took the place of autocracy.Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 2:05 amThe state has become the alpha male. it has taken the place of the husband. It has feminized the husband into a money making slave afraid to be male. This is all by design. Once the state takes over the responsibility of the husband the wife will vote for whoever offers protection and guidance. Hello socialism.
Destruction of the nuclear family and having the state taking the place of the husband serves the same purpose as spirit killing in the young. The state becomes the Great God of the Great Beast and who argues with God? Not some woman who depends on her God.
Freedom requires responsibility. Men have forgotten theirs and women have also forgotten theirs in support of the nuclear family. They have sold out for the proverbial thirty pieces of silver and now even believe somehow that diversity will make matters better. Classic secular progressive education. Long live the Great God of the Great Beast. Now a BS degree has an entirely new more authentic meaning in the war against freedom.
Your motto should be: "shoot first and ask questions later." Your need to condemn prevents any ability to see: to open to a higher perspective.In truth, more power sharing within marriage took the place of autocracy.
As always, you fail to notice the obvious links between overpopulation and financial inequality and all that you complain about - breakdown of marriage, state controls, loss of prosperity, loss of community. Instead you blame it on women, and I can only imagine the number of rejections you must have experienced to bring you to this state of rigid homophilosophy.
There is an entire dimension of reality to which you and your ilk appear blind, like Flatlanders flailing angrily at a multi-dimensional world.
Shocking!! How could he even think such a thing much less say it? Why should new arrivals in America want to assimilate much less work at it? Absurd!New York (CNN Business)NBC News, facing mounting backlash stemming from former "NBC Nightly News" anchor Tom Brokaw's comments that Hispanics should "work harder at assimilation" into American culture, distanced the network from his "inappropriate" commentary.
"Tom's comments were inaccurate and inappropriate and we're glad he apologized," an NBC spokesperson said Monday.
You said:
When you have crystal clear clarity, then it really is very easy to just distinguish between what is just noise and what is actually real and true.
That all depends on over what length of period are you talking about?
It is very possible to experience each in varying degrees.
Well, no... there are many degrees and variables (to everything) from my perspective. You are mistaken if you think you know some sort of absolute in regard to what I am referring to as "spiritual nature"... or some certain way it must be experienced. I don't think that way.
You remind me of dontaskme, in that she always wanted to have "the best/highest answer".
Really? How about over the span of just a few moments? Or a lifetime. Does it matter?
You said earlier "Whereas, I KNOW just how truly simple and easy it really is to gain and have clarity, even with ALL of the human noise going on."Age wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:10 amSome people, at times, have complete spiritual clarity while at other times they are completely filled with noise. Some people are filled with noise more than others are and some have more spiritual clarity than others have. Some other people may be able to reach complete spiritual clarity for very short periods but are most of the time filled with or partly filled with noise, while other people may never have had complete spiritual clarity but are far less filled with noise compared to the other person. There are just to many people with countless many variables and varying degrees of differences of complete clarity to complete noise in every thing else in between to actually discuss this to its full extend.
But there is, at the moment, no person that I can see who has always complete spiritual clarity nor completely filled with noise.
You shot first, I returned fire. If someone started slamming men that way you attack women then your response would be fast and fierce. You know this is true. Must we play these games?Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 3:26 am Greta
Your motto should be: "shoot first and ask questions later." Your need to condemn prevents any ability to see: to open to a higher perspective.In truth, more power sharing within marriage took the place of autocracy.
As always, you fail to notice the obvious links between overpopulation and financial inequality and all that you complain about - breakdown of marriage, state controls, loss of prosperity, loss of community. Instead you blame it on women, and I can only imagine the number of rejections you must have experienced to bring you to this state of rigid homophilosophy.
There is an entire dimension of reality to which you and your ilk appear blind, like Flatlanders flailing angrily at a multi-dimensional world.
I've wondered why you do. It all reeks of personal issues - where's the attempts at objectivity?
You seem to have missed my last post. Maybe this will help?Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 3:26 amThey are as much a slave to the human condition as men. A free society is only possible when its metaxu serves as a source connecting a society with its source and its leaders protect this relationship.
Now progressives are doing their level best to cheapen metaxu as done now with ridiculing the traditional mrriage and install leaders dedicated to replacing liberty with statist slavery.
Tom actually had to apologize because he used the wrong catch phrase. He used "work harder", and not "work smarter". By this slip of the concepts, he insinuated (willingly or inadvertently) that Hispanics are incapable of human-level thought processes, which we commonly call "smart".Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:03 am https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/27/media/to ... index.html
Shocking!! How could he even think such a thing much less say it? Why should new arrivals in America want to assimilate much less work at it? Absurd!New York (CNN Business)NBC News, facing mounting backlash stemming from former "NBC Nightly News" anchor Tom Brokaw's comments that Hispanics should "work harder at assimilation" into American culture, distanced the network from his "inappropriate" commentary.
"Tom's comments were inaccurate and inappropriate and we're glad he apologized," an NBC spokesperson said Monday.
The goose that laid the golden eggs representing American principles and values is now dead. Only the eggs, the results, remain and the diverse denying assimilation are doing their best to consume them while they can. When the eggs are gone the result will either chaos or a form of statist slavery.
But in the meantime everyone on this thread (except me) who has questioned the value of denying assimilation in support of diversity must apologize as did Tom Brokaw. Not to so so will incur the wrath of the politically correct. You wouldn’t want to do that.
Yes I know all this.Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 am Age...I think you're taking all of this a bit too extreme and out of context.
I said this to Nick "If you want to truly consider human nature interfering with spiritual nature, you have to stop the human noise." This was applicable based on things he has said about human nature interfering with spiritual nature. I wanted to point out the element of human noise to him (which he has a lot of).
I said this in response to you "It seems to make sense that it's hard to have clarity when one is filled with noise". It is a general statement... not some sort of absolute.
To you, are there other ways of truly considering human nature interfering with spiritual nature other than just stopping human noise?
I am not thinking at all, so that is completely inaccurate, and, there was absolutely no need to say this here.
Yes I know. That is what I am pointing out, when I asked you if that certain way, which you proposed, was the only way. I was just clarifying if, to you, that there could be other ways.
If that is what I remind you, then that is fine. I can not refute that. But I can tell you that by just expressing what I have or do is NOT having "the best/highest answer", at all. I was just pointing out that there are other ways from the one that you were proposing.
I am not sure why you are seeing I have some rigid "interpretation" of your words, when all I did at the start was just ask for clarification, of your words. Usually just by the process of asking for clarification, of one's words, shows inquisitiveness, and not a rigidness. You clarified that you seem to not know of any other way than the one that you proposed. So, if an 'rigidness' appeared, then was that because of your response to my clarifying question?Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amIt CAN OFTEN be hard to have clarity when one is filled with noise. It is also possible to have clarity despite the noise. You seem intent on disputing some rigid interpretation of my words in order to classify me compared to you. There's really not that much disagreement here.
Yes
Then one can very easily and very surely have complete spiritual clarity.
Yes.
Yes I know. The purpose for writing the below was to show how much variance there actually is.
Here you write your interpretation of me... (I just wrote this because when this happens you like to make it known).Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amYou said earlier "Whereas, I KNOW just how truly simple and easy it really is to gain and have clarity, even with ALL of the human noise going on."Age wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:10 amSome people, at times, have complete spiritual clarity while at other times they are completely filled with noise. Some people are filled with noise more than others are and some have more spiritual clarity than others have. Some other people may be able to reach complete spiritual clarity for very short periods but are most of the time filled with or partly filled with noise, while other people may never have had complete spiritual clarity but are far less filled with noise compared to the other person. There are just to many people with countless many variables and varying degrees of differences of complete clarity to complete noise in every thing else in between to actually discuss this to its full extend.
But there is, at the moment, no person that I can see who has always complete spiritual clarity nor completely filled with noise.
You would have to first know the difference between the word 'I' and the word 'you', from a completely objective perspective, to be able to understand the correct response to this question.
Certainly could be. The idea I have the most clarity and ease in expressing, however, has to do with eliminating human noise (which is a vast realm on many levels). Surely you see the validity in such a statement, considering how much noise you wade through for yourself... and your challenges in expressing clearly beyond that at times (as evidenced in this forum, like all of us, and as I think you've acknowledged when you get tired of arguing ).
Trouble is, LW, that we are ourselves human noise If you strip away the human culture within then all that remains are basic animal tendencies, which broaden in scope when shaped by layers of complex conditioning.Lacewing wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:02 pmCertainly could be. The idea I have the most clarity and ease in expressing, however, has to do with eliminating human noise (which is a vast realm on many levels). Surely you see the validity in such a statement, considering how much noise you wade through for yourself... and your challenges in expressing clearly beyond that at times (as evidenced in this forum, like all of us, and as I think you've acknowledged when you get tired of arguing ).
Can you clearly and easily describe these methods/aspects that you see "of considering human nature interfering with spiritual nature" other than through "removing human noise"?
This is just silly. There are women I greatly admire and also those who are superficial fools causing more harm to themselves and others than any good they pretend to doYou shot first, I returned fire. If someone started slamming men that way you attack women then your response would be fast and fierce. You know this is true. Must we play these games?
You post results while being oblivious of the dynamics of the cause. You continue to blame results which is just being naive without a clue as to the cause of why everything is as it is.You fail to notice the obvious links between overpopulation and financial inequality and all that you complain about - breakdown of marriage, state controls, loss of prosperity, loss of community. Instead you blame it on women, feminism and your myth of secular societies.
The problem is that you are closed to the objective complimentary differences between men and women. Like other feminists you demand an imagined equality with no conception of the value of differences.Nick_A wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 29, 2019 2:26 am
The human condition and the universal laws which create its expression are the reason why without help from above everything turns in circles. Why blame women?
I've wondered why you do. It all reeks of personal issues - where's the attempts at objectivity?
Great.
Yes I am aware of your idea. I was just curious if you saw that idea as being the only way, as this is how it appeared to read from the way that you expressed your idea. You have now clarified that, to you, there could be other ways, so now my curiosity has diminished.
Yes I could see how your idea is just one way.
What do you mean by "noise you wade through for yourself"?
I am not here, in this forum, to express clearly. I am here, in this forum, to LEARN HOW TO express better, more clearly, more concisely, and more succinctly, at some other place.
Yes.