Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Skepdick »

SteveKlinko wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:43 pm Yes, Oneness cannot be put into words in the same way that Redness cannot be put into words.
You just succeeded putting into words that which (apparently) can't be put into words.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4217
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by surreptitious57 »

All language is an abstraction so there will always be a gap between a word and the thing it describes
No word can truly describe something because a thing and its word are two entirely separate entities

Apart that is from one thing and that thing is a word because a word is simultaneously both the thing and the word
But all other things are non words as obviously words describing non words is not the same as word describing word
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8480
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Dontaskme »

Skepdick wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:00 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:43 pm Yes, Oneness cannot be put into words in the same way that Redness cannot be put into words.
You just succeeded putting into words that which (apparently) can't be put into words.
Behind the named world of things is the nameless no thing from which they are sourced.

The map is not the territory. There is no you in the word you.

The informing principle is thus empty.
Skepdick
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Skepdick »

Dontaskme wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:36 pm Behind the named world of things is the nameless no thing from which they are sourced.
Putting a name to a nameless thing is naming it.
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:36 pm The map is not the territory. There is no you in the word you.

The informing principle is thus empty.
Then don't name the nameless things?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8480
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Dontaskme »

Skepdick wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:41 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:36 pm Behind the named world of things is the nameless no thing from which they are sourced.
Putting a name to a nameless thing is naming it.
Who or what would be doing this naming of IT? Who or what is this IT that is being named?

Who or what is a nameless thing?
Dontaskme wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:36 pm The map is not the territory. There is no you in the word you.

The informing principle is thus empty.
Skepdick wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:41 pmThen don't name the nameless things?
Who or what is naming ? ...the point of this exercise is that there is no actual name in the word name. Just as there is no tree in the word tree, or human in the word human etc...words are empty to the core.

However, words are very useful as they communicate to themselves only within a conscious observer, out of which appears a phantom writer and reader communicating with itself...aka the ONE who KNOWS each and every word as and when it arises.

Who or what is that ONE that KNOWS... but a word ALSO? ....AM I a word? if yes, then I am EveryTHING and (not one single thing)

Words only inform the illusory RELATIVE nature of the Absolute KNOWER. Relative knowledge of the ABSOLUTE is absurd.

.
Skepdick
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Skepdick »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:05 am Who or what would be doing this naming of IT? Who or what is this IT that is being named?

Who or what is a nameless thing?
SteveKlinko did the naming.
SteveKlinko is the name of the nameless thing.

That's why we have names.

Hey, Nameless, how was your day?
My day was great, Nameless.
Nameless, have you heard that Nameless had a new grandchild? They named it Nameless.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8480
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Dontaskme »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:08 am
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:05 am Who or what would be doing this naming of IT? Who or what is this IT that is being named?

Who or what is a nameless thing?
SteveKlinko did the naming.
SteveKlinko is the name of the nameless thing.

That's why we have names.

Hey, Nameless, how was your day?
My day was great, Nameless.
Nameless, have you heard that Nameless had a new grandchild? They named it Nameless.
The point being made is that although there appears to be a 'living something' as being the named thing, in reality there is no thing living in the 'named thing'. A 'named thing' can never tell itself it is alive or dead because words are empty. . concepts are neither alive or dead, they are just known imagined appearances in the form of concepts within pure awareness. Awareness that has no known begining nor ending.

The belief there is an actual living thing in the named no thing, is what gives the illusory continuity to an illusory autonomous self which is only ever imagined and known by Awareness that has no known beginning nor end. A named thing is a story No One ever wrote, and yet is read by Everyone as Awareness is Everything and not one single thing.

It's very subtle, the mind identified with it's own imagined story will never see the emptiness in which it's story is arising and known instantly for what it is and is not upon recognition or realisation.



.
Skepdick
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Skepdick »

Dontaskme wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:48 am The point being made is that although there appears to be a 'living something' as being the named thing, in reality there is no thing living in the 'named thing'.
Why do you insisting on giving labels to 'no things' ?
SteveKlinko
Posts: 563
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:00 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:43 pm Yes, Oneness cannot be put into words in the same way that Redness cannot be put into words.
You just succeeded putting into words that which (apparently) can't be put into words.
I don't understand this conclusion. Are you just playing semantical games?
Skepdick
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Skepdick »

SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 12:41 pm I don't understand this conclusion. Are you just playing semantical games?
No. I am pointing out what happened.

You put Oneness into the word "Oneness". Did you not?
You put Redness into the word "Redness". Did you not?

You did what you said cannot be done. TWICE!

That's called a Performative contradiction.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8480
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Dontaskme »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 11:33 am
Dontaskme wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:48 am The point being made is that although there appears to be a 'living something' as being the named thing, in reality there is no thing living in the 'named thing'.
Why do you insisting on giving labels to 'no things' ?
For the same reason a parent sticks a label on it's newborn child. It's useful in the sense of gaining knowledge and making sense of the world in which we live and have our being. The fact that there is no person there before the label was planted nor is there any person there in the label either .. except as believed, aka imagined to be there by the believing brain. Is all irrelevant.
Because without a name who the heck AM I? or what the heck is any thing at all?
Without the projection screen of the mentally constructed narrative that is I and my story...which is totally empty of any literal substance or identity except as a belief created by the same emptiness that is the mind that created it ...where and what Am I and where do I happen?

You is just another word for I ...and we all say I

You the you that you have been conditioned to believe by what another has passed onto you in the form of your name, aka knowledge that you have then taken on as your own personal I and story... can believe what ever you like about yourself.

That's what this one known as dontaskme does. You there do not have to agree with or accept anything I am saying, I am only speaking from my own personal direct experience, which feels right and true to this one here. There is no need to feel as though this discussion is somekind of ( I know better than you competition, where one tries to outwit the other ) it's just a sharing of personal direct experiences. Sometimes there is a total understanding and recognition of what the other person is talking about or what is being pointed to - but then sometimes there isn't. That's just the way it is.

If you are going to engage in communication with me, then you are going to have at least some proper understanding of the what and who the word ''YOU'' actually is and is not.


.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 563
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 12:42 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 12:41 pm I don't understand this conclusion. Are you just playing semantical games?
No. I am pointing out what happened.

You put Oneness into the word "Oneness". Did you not?
You put Redness into the word "Redness". Did you not?

You did what you said cannot be done. TWICE!

That's called a Performative contradiction.
You are of course just playing word games because as a disrupter that's what you do. You can only say what you say by throwing out all the context that has gone on for a hundred years when we talk about something like Redness. You are stuck in the intellectual sludge of your disruptive purpose so you must play word games. You have nothing else to offer. What I am trying to bring home is that merely saying Redness or Oneness does not Explain Redness or Oneness. There are no Explanatory words that you can attach to the word Redness or Oneness. Redness or Oneness, at this point in time, can only be Experienced.
Skepdick
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Skepdick »

SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You are of course just playing word games because as a disrupter that's what you do.
Please do not project your behaviour onto me. I am merely pointing out what you are DOING.

How is my observation "disruptive" exactly?
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You can only say what you say by throwing out all the context that has gone on for a hundred years when we talk about something like Redness.
Please try to abstain from telling me what I can and can't say. You can't read my mind, so let me choose my own words.
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You are stuck in the intellectual sludge of your disruptive purpose so you must play word games.
I am not playing word games. If you are going to make such accusations, you are going to have to bring some evidence.

I am narrating what I am seeing. Which part of what I am pointing out are you disagreeing with?
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You have nothing else to offer. What I am trying to bring home is that merely saying Redness or Oneness does not Explain Redness or Oneness.
At no point were you talking about "explanations" though. You were not talking about Explanation. You were talking about the (in?)ability to put Oneness and Redness into words.
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm There are no Explanatory words that you can attach to the word Redness or Oneness. Redness or Oneness, at this point in time, can only be Experienced.
Is this your way of going back on what you first said?
SteveKlinko wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:43 pm Oneness cannot be put into words in the same way that Redness cannot be put into words.
Can "Oneness" and "Redness" be put into words or not? This is not a word-play - this is a yes/no question.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 563
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 2:10 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You are of course just playing word games because as a disrupter that's what you do.
Please do not project your behaviour onto me. I am merely pointing out what you are DOING.

How is my observation "disruptive" exactly?
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You can only say what you say by throwing out all the context that has gone on for a hundred years when we talk about something like Redness.
Please try to abstain from telling me what I can and can't say. You can't read my mind, so let me choose my own words.
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You are stuck in the intellectual sludge of your disruptive purpose so you must play word games.
I am not playing word games. If you are going to make such accusations, you are going to have to bring some evidence.

I am narrating what I am seeing. Which part of what I am pointing out are you disagreeing with?
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm You have nothing else to offer. What I am trying to bring home is that merely saying Redness or Oneness does not Explain Redness or Oneness.
At no point were you talking about "explanations" though. You were not talking about Explanation. You were talking about the (in?)ability to put Oneness and Redness into words.
SteveKlinko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:23 pm There are no Explanatory words that you can attach to the word Redness or Oneness. Redness or Oneness, at this point in time, can only be Experienced.
Is this your way of going back on what you first said?
SteveKlinko wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:43 pm Oneness cannot be put into words in the same way that Redness cannot be put into words.
Can "Oneness" and "Redness" be put into words or not? This is not a word-play - this is a yes/no question.
You are a Disrupter because you know I started from the premise that, and this is quoted from my post just one page back:
"Yes, Oneness cannot be put into words in the same way that Redness cannot be put into words".

So why would you ask such a question except that you are trying to Disrupt, Divert, and Obfuscate the conversation? Do you have anything to say about Oneness, Redness, or Consciousness?
Age
Posts: 5049
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Oneness cannot be completely explained using words.

Post by Age »

Oneness is completely explained using just the one word, 'Oneness'.
Post Reply