Mathematics is an incorrect interpretation of a MESSAGE

[Iwannaplato]

Mathematics is not the path of Truth, but of delusion

https://youtu.be/YU1_FKx_XH0

I thought I'd take a run at watching your video. In the very first second you pick your left ear with your left index finger. This gesture seems to evoke the ancient source of mathematics, namely pointing. When you point, you indicate "one," or "that one." It's a primal act of selection. From there to the abstraction of the number one is but a brief evolutionary step.

But more than that. You did not just point at your ear. You did definitely pick your ear, as if there is something in there. What? A flea? My cat often sticks her paw in her ear to attend to an itch. Nothing mathematical about that. Perhaps you simply had an itch, and this was not a proto-mathematical gesture at all.

Then you removed your finger from your ear, exclaimed, "Ok!", and smiled wryly. Meaning that without picking your ear, you could not begin. And that having now picked your ear, and with evident success and an expression of joy uncharacteristic of your usual dour countenance, you are able to begin.

I should add that this ear-picking gesture is in no way incidental to the video. Coming at the very first second of recording, it could easily have been edited out, or the recording restarted to omit it. But no. This gesture is deliberate. We are made to see the ear picking, to experience it, to unconsciously absorb its raw physicality. Indeed, it's revealing that physical considerations, physical demands, physical necessities, physical urges, impose themselves upon your verbal flow in spite of yourself. Not unlike the accidental (or deliberate) hilarity of the knocked-over whiteboard in the other video. You try so hard to present an image of pure intellectuality, yet you are inevitably betrayed by the physical world around you, and your own body's needs. And you want us to see that. Rest assured I did see that, and was struck by the nonverbal message even before your words began.

Well that's enough deep analysis for tonight. I was going to speed-read Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, but this is better.

Just lovely. It reminds me of a friend I had at college. I was critical of The Killing Fields. A movies about Khmer Rouge through the eyes of some journalists. It is a very powerful film, but I disliked how the drama of the white journalist from the US somehow came out on a part with the societal disaster in Cambodia. Those scenes, following him, seemed clunky to me and, well, sort of narcissistic. His concern about a Cambodian journalists fate seemed of greater importance than the Cambodian jounalists fate and, well, the human disaster. Agency and herorism and the tragedy somehow lived in the American reporter's body. Maybe I was right, maybe I was wrong, but that's what I experienced.

Now, my friend acknowledged that those scenes were clunky. However....he said that was on purpose. That the filmmakers intentionally did that to mock the Hollywood tendency to make other people's lives important only because they aid in the drama development of the white hero. I still don't know how tongue in cheek he was being. I mean, this would entail them saying things like 'OK, you're acting too well in these scenes. Be a bit more stiff and unreal.' And intentionally weakening those scenes, openly. At the very least with the film editor. I don't think anyone consciously does this. But.......

Why take the conscious parts of people as the only agents in making the film. We certainly don't when it comes to the good stuff. Motifs the directors or authors only notice themselves years after their works are distributed and published.

Why not take Roydops failures or 'failures' as the organism of Roydop managing to critique himself and present a vastly more interesting ironic story with more value then he realizes, even, perhaps a value that he would consciously abhor?

Now this may seem like my naively taking your post at face value, but upon rereading my own post here (this one) I can see the errors in there and know that actually I am not naive (nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more).

Jeez, now I don't even know what I've ended up saying...so....

I loved that post of yours. Smartest thing I've seen in years in discussion forums.

[wtf]

I loved that post of yours. Smartest thing I've seen in years in discussion forums.

Thanks so much. I made some final edits after you posted, last para in particular. I'm done now.

Your story about The Killing Fields reminded me of the time decades ago when my college friends took me to see some Ingmar Bergman film featuring Liv Ullmann screaming and wailing piteously for two hours. Upon leaving the theater one of my buddies said, "Wow, that was ... art." I didn't say anything but thought to myself, "That was a massively pretentious piece of sh*t!" I've never been able to take people seriously who are so intent on getting others to take them seriously. I suppose that's some kind of character flaw.

[Iwannaplato]

I loved that post of yours. Smartest thing I've seen in years in discussion forums.

Thanks so much. I made some final edits after you posted, last para in particular. I'm done now.

Your story about The Killing Fields reminded me of the time decades ago when my college friends took me to see some Ingmar Bergman film featuring Liv Ullmann screaming and wailing piteously for two hours. Upon leaving the theater one of my buddies said, "Wow, that was ... art." I didn't say anything but thought to myself, "That was a massively pretentious piece of sh*t!" I've never been able to take people seriously who are so intent on getting others to take them seriously. I suppose that's some kind of character flaw.

Persona, probably. I had the same reaction. But then I saw Persona long after it was made (and I've loved other Bergman). I think exploring what he did in his time, might have been much more interesting than when I saw it decades later. If it was Persona, that came out in 1966. I can imagine that if I hadn't seen some of the more emotional stuff that came out later and a lot of the quasi avante garde stuff that came out later that did work, his exploration there might have seemed more interesting, a door opening. But, yeah, it didn't age well (and much of his stuff does), and perhaps I'm being too generous anyway.

I mean, synthesizers in 80s films. And some day, we can pray, the three second max cuts and jumping around all the time editing of current films may be seen as interesting in its restricted corners but damaging the nervous system and aesthetically like large eyed puppy painting as a rule.

I think there is something useful in treating things as intentional, even when they're not or might not be. So, it was nice to read a parody of the idea, even if you weren't really suggesting Roydop, even the organism Roydop, had a handle on what the hell he is doing. IOW I enjoyed it as mocking him, but also reminding me of that potential other level. And I think this is true at the political level. When politicians fail, I think it can be useful to explore the idea that the negative outcome was intentional. Cui bono? If it benefits the people who failed or their benefactors, well....

[roydop]

I can sit in a chair without thinking or doing anything, and be completely happy and content.

How about you? Can you sit in a chair without thoughts flooding your consciousness? Do you have any control over your own mind?

[roydop]

The irony of the most important philosophical discourse in history being ignored in a philosophy forum is delicious irony.

I'm having difficulty keeping track of all the best and greatest philosopher of all time we keep on staff at this shit little web forum. So currently it's you, Advocate, Handjob7, Age, are all the greatest and wisest individual that has ever or will ever live(d).

I'm missing some aren't I? Do we need to take a roll call of the greatest mind in history to see how many of you fucknuts are him today?

Here is a video of me sitting, free of thought, in the natural state of absolute happiness and perfect contentment.

https://www.youtube.com/live/inIXjynOccQ?feature=share

When you sit in a chair without doing or thinking anything, how's that state for you? Oh, wait, you can't stop thinking. Not even for more than a few seconds at a time. So not being able to stop thinking = not having control over your own mind.

Fucknut indeed. To be more specific, you're insane. Someone who does not have control over their own mind is insane. And if you can't stop thinking, you have no control over your own mind.

You're insane. And the rest of humanity is at the same level of insanity so ya'll can get together and convince each other that everything's ok.

[roydop]

No one wants to recognize this.

recognition comes with truth; not schizophrenic delusions; unless you are the individual schizophrenic originator of the delusion.

The thing about being in a state of delusion is that you don't know you're in a state of delusion because you're delusional

Now that is true. You have missed it completely

The entire species is under the spell of a cult leader. That cult leader is academia.

This does not work for several reasons.
1) is that "academia"is not a single entity capable of leadership.
2) The entire species is not in contact with academia. Only a small percentage of the population is in contact with academia.
3) Academia is a very broad church. It is a collection of arguments and discussions. Maybe had you spend more time in contact with it you would know that?

The irony of the most important philosophical discourse in history being ignored in a philosophy forum is delicious irony.

Perfect

Urumpph!

I have no problems in life. I sit or ;ay around in Absolute (not relative to circumstances) happiness all day.

Go head and keep telling me how nuts I am; the evidence is to the contrary. But now you will dream up something like I'm lying or being happy alll the time with no problems is itself some sort of delusion.

I care not what you have to say because I have no problems. See how this works?

[roydop]

How is it that it requires 360 pages of esoteric symbolism to "prove" that 1+1=2?

This is the emperor with no clothes riding on the elephant in the room. There is nothing fundamental about counting/addition. It's 100% fiction, made up by the thinking egoic mind. And everyone just shrugs their shoulders and assumes that those 360 pages make any sense whatsoever.

My theory shows that there's meaning and reason to numbers, and to life. But ya'll have been brainwashed into accepting that quantity and counting is valid/truth. No one is brave enough to call out the emperor.

Blind cowards.

[Sculptor]

No one wants to recognize this.

recognition comes with truth; not schizophrenic delusions; unless you are the individual schizophrenic originator of the delusion.

The thing about being in a state of delusion is that you don't know you're in a state of delusion because you're delusional

Now that is true. You have missed it completely

The entire species is under the spell of a cult leader. That cult leader is academia.

This does not work for several reasons.
1) is that "academia"is not a single entity capable of leadership.
2) The entire species is not in contact with academia. Only a small percentage of the population is in contact with academia.
3) Academia is a very broad church. It is a collection of arguments and discussions. Maybe had you spend more time in contact with it you would know that?

The irony of the most important philosophical discourse in history being ignored in a philosophy forum is delicious irony.

Perfect

Urumpph!

I have no problems in life. I sit or ;ay around in Absolute (not relative to circumstances) happiness all day.

Go head and keep telling me how nuts I am; the evidence is to the contrary. But now you will dream up something like I'm lying or being happy alll the time with no problems is itself some sort of delusion.

I care not what you have to say because I have no problems. See how this works?

Keep taking your meds buddy

[roydop]

recognition comes with truth; not schizophrenic delusions; unless you are the individual schizophrenic originator of the delusion.

Now that is true. You have missed it completely

This does not work for several reasons.
1) is that "academia"is not a single entity capable of leadership.
2) The entire species is not in contact with academia. Only a small percentage of the population is in contact with academia.
3) Academia is a very broad church. It is a collection of arguments and discussions. Maybe had you spend more time in contact with it you would know that?


Urumpph!

I have no problems in life. I sit or ;ay around in Absolute (not relative to circumstances) happiness all day.

Go head and keep telling me how nuts I am; the evidence is to the contrary. But now you will dream up something like I'm lying or being happy alll the time with no problems is itself some sort of delusion.

I care not what you have to say because I have no problems. See how this works?

Keep taking your meds buddy

Wow, what an intelligent and relevant response.

I'm not on any medication. Are you?

I have no problems and am happy in and of my own existence. This is evidence that my world view is correct.

Can you sit in a chair without doing anything or thinking anything and experience happiness? No you can't. When you sit in a chair and try to control your own mind, you are flooded with random and disjointed thoughts.

My life backs up my claims. What evidence do you have to support yours? Just other thoughts. No doubt others will come to your assistance, but thier minds and lives are as messed up as yours.

[Sculptor]

I have no problems in life. I sit or ;ay around in Absolute (not relative to circumstances) happiness all day.

Go head and keep telling me how nuts I am; the evidence is to the contrary. But now you will dream up something like I'm lying or being happy alll the time with no problems is itself some sort of delusion.

I care not what you have to say because I have no problems. See how this works?

Keep taking your meds buddy

Wow, what an intelligent and relevant response.

I know - and great advice

[roydop]

Keep taking your meds buddy

Wow, what an intelligent and relevant response.

I know - and great advice

Did I mention that I'm not on any medication? But you just keep living in that fantasy world you got playing on in that head of yours, don't you?

[Iwannaplato]

I have no problems and am happy in and of my own existence. This is evidence that my world view is correct.

Not necessarily at all. There is some truth in 'Ignorance is Bliss'. But most important here, for any dialogue with others online, it might be evidence for you, but for us it's just a claim, and one we can't check. Oddly, you don't seem to know this. You simply call it evidence as if it was evidence in general, when for us, it is merely what you are telling us.

Can you sit in a chair without doing anything or thinking anything and experience happiness?

Yes. But in addition to this there are problems that haven't been dealt with. You add to these when you promote your ideas in the ways you do. You seem to think that your meditative states are the only goal and since you are good at them, you are good in general. But you aren't very good at relating to people. You've used one person here and treated her poorly when she didn't go along with everything you thought she should. You're often condescending. You seem incapable of admitting mistakes or that you've communicated poorly. You don't seem to realize that your videos are not well organized to reach other people. IOW you're not a good teacher. There is a large hole in your skill set and not only do you not seem to realize this, but you get angry at people when they notice it and react to this lack.

Lots of incredible meditators have sexually abused people or set up all sorts of disgusting power dynamics. Because being good at altered states of consciousness can not reach certain patterns. Cannot change them.

My life backs up my claims.

It might back up some of them, but it doesn't back up the implicit claim in that you blame everyone else if there is a problem in the relation between you and them. And that's even if you are walking around in bliss all the time.
So far I haven't seen any evidence that you can learn from other people and admit this openly. I mean, the people you have come to preach to.

You're getting called out and accurately by people who you look down on. You could try to learn from the reflections you are getting in the mirror. Or you can keep on insulting the mirror and think it's not showing you something about yourself.

[Iwannaplato]

Wow, what an intelligent and relevant response.

I know - and great advice

Did I mention that I'm not on any medication? But you just keep living in that fantasy world you got playing on in that head of yours, don't you?

You can self-medicate with meditation. With anything.

[roydop]

I have no problems and am happy in and of my own existence. This is evidence that my world view is correct.

Not necessarily at all. There is some truth in 'Ignorance is Bliss'. But most important here, for any dialogue with others online, it might be evidence for you, but for us it's just a claim, and one we can't check. Oddly, you don't seem to know this. You simply call it evidence as if it was evidence in general, when for us, it is merely what you are telling us.

Can you sit in a chair without doing anything or thinking anything and experience happiness?

Yes. But in addition to this there are problems that haven't been dealt with. You add to these when you promote your ideas in the ways you do. You seem to think that your meditative states are the only goal and since you are good at them, you are good in general. But you aren't very good at relating to people. You've used one person here and treated her poorly when she didn't go along with everything you thought she should. You're often condescending. You seem incapable of admitting mistakes or that you've communicated poorly. You don't seem to realize that your videos are not well organized to reach other people. IOW you're not a good teacher. There is a large hole in your skill set and not only do you not seem to realize this, but you get angry at people when they notice it and react to this lack.

Lots of incredible meditators have sexually abused people or set up all sorts of disgusting power dynamics. Because being good at altered states of consciousness can not reach certain patterns. Cannot change them.

My life backs up my claims.

It might back up some of them, but it doesn't back up the implicit claim in that you blame everyone else if there is a problem in the relation between you and them. And that's even if you are walking around in bliss all the time.
So far I haven't seen any evidence that you can learn from other people and admit this openly. I mean, the people you have come to preach to.

You're getting called out and accurately by people who you look down on. You could try to learn from the reflections you are getting in the mirror. Or you can keep on insulting the mirror and think it's not showing you something about yourself.

None of this has anything to do with it requiring 360 pages of "proof", that basically NO ONE UNDERSTANDS, that 1+1=2.

When people call me names and question my sanity, I offer up my direct experience as rebuttal. I'm not delusional because my life is perfect. If what I am saying about reality is as whacky and crazy as some say it is, then it would be reasonable to assume that my life would be a mess. As my life is free of suffering and full of peace, happiness and contentment, my world view must be accurate.

I am showing the source of all suffering and the cure to it. The source of suffering is the voice in your head. The short version is that the vast majority of the population isn't willing to let go of the illusion projected by that voice, and so they go on in delusion and suffering.

[Iwannaplato]

None of this has anything to do with it requiring 360 pages of "proof", that basically NO ONE UNDERSTANDS, that 1+1=2.

IOW it has nothing to do with the video you posted in the OP. That's correct.

But look at your second post which comes directly after the first.

No one wants to recognize this.

The thing about being in a state of delusion is that you don't know you're in a state of delusion because you're delusional

The entire species is under the spell of a cult leader. That cult leader is academia.

The irony of the most important philosophical discourse in history being ignored in a philosophy forum is delicious irony.

Perfect

No one had responded to your OP yet. You react by judging people, mindreading, calling people delusional, saying everyone (here, everywhere, hard to know) is in a cult and assume that the problem is elsewhere.

No one responds (with praise perhaps?) and you starting insulting people.

None of your second post has anything to to with the topic.

When people walk through the doorway you built and talk about you in a negative, it is as if you are not aware of what you are doing.

You don't even notice, despite your incredible state of bliss, what you are doing.

That's evidence there's a problem in you and even if you are in bliss, you're not exactly in an enlightened state. Far from it.

When people call me names and question my sanity, I offer up my direct experience as rebuttal.

And you still seem not to understand that your claim about your life is not evidence for us. Personally I don't question your sanity. I question your character and interpersonal awareness. I black box your claims about your joyfull state. If you are in great bliss all the time, this isn't helping you relate to other people well.

I'm not delusional because my life is perfect.

I can't know, but I doubt that's true. Here's one reason why. You're post, the OP in this thread, does not get a response for three days. What do you do? You go on the attack.

That to me shows a reactive personality and one that blames others and cannot consider himself as part of any interpersonal gap. It smacks of narcissism. Not claiming you are a narcissist, but enough of that kind of act and that label starts to fit.

If what I am saying about reality is as whacky and crazy as some say it is, then it would be reasonable to assume that my life would be a mess. As my life is free of suffering and full of peace, happiness and contentment, my world view must be accurate.

I can certainly understand that if you are feeling as you want to feel, then it makes sense to continue with your models and practices. I don't think you are content or you wouldn't react in a number of ways you have since you came here, including the one I mentioned above. You do not at all come across as someone at peace.

I am showing the source of all suffering and the cure to it. The source of suffering is the voice in your head. The short version is that the vast majority of the population isn't willing to let go of the illusion projected by that voice, and so they go on in delusion and suffering.

Let me take a different angle. Here we are like voices in each other's heads. We are not in each other's direct presence. We don't see facial expressions in reaction to each other. Our fields are not overlapping. We can't hear tone of voice and so on.

We just get this string of words. I actually tend to hear what I read so it is fairly literal for me that it is like a voice. Others may not but here we have words flowing into minds.

You didn't get what you wanted, responses to your OP. And what did you do, you added a bunch of condescending judgments, aimed at everyone here, which is just another voice in the head potentially creating suffering.

How could you possibly not understand the things I am pointing out when you want to present yourself as having found the cure to suffering?
How can you not notice what you are doing interpersonally to such a glaring degree?

Can you see how people might not take you seriously as the discoverer of the cure to suffering when you seem not to understand people very well? Likely including yourself.

And, since it really doesn't seem to be sinking in: your feeling great is not something we experience directly. All we have is your claim. It is not evidence FOR US. And honestly it doesn't look like it in your videos, though what is truly going on in other minds, is not easily found.

You can either consider that you have something to learn or not. You can run forward shouting that you have the great secret and judge others for any reaction that doesn't fit your image of yourself. Or you can consider learning from other people here and elsewhere.

If you want to now say you have learned from others including from their criticism, well, peachy. But what we have to go on is what you do here.

You went insulting and ad hom and mindreading. When it comes back, you just have more blame. Is this the sign of contentment?