-
Feeds
Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
-
Lynn Cornish:
1)I'm not looking for power. Tell me: what does power mean to you? I feel pretty powerless over most things; no, I should say: I AM powerless over most things.
2)You are not persuading me or dissuading me and I trust I am not you either. This is just a friendly exchange of ideas, right? If I'm completely misunderstanding you, please forgive me.
3)I too gravitate towards what sounds true to me. Our sound-true's are quite different, huh? So that's interesting.
1) I believe you because you said it.
PS: power to me is "being" and mastering your own "being". Jesus said: "be" ye, therefore, perfect. Not "do" perfect; "be" perfect. Being exists only in language. I have experienced my own being shifting by my word alone. Oh, what it would be to master my speaking and therefore master who I am being.2) I didn't mean to say I thought I was persuading or dissuading you; it was actually my way of saying that I was not trying to do either. Yep. Friendly.
3) Well, truth is relative.
Paradigm = Point-of-View
Think of a person standing in front of and facing an elephant and another standing behind of and facing the same elephant. The elephant paradigm of the two people is quite different even though they are looking at the same thing.This is why I say truth is relative. It is not that it is. It just appears that way to you and me, or at least, we could never say for sure one way or the other. We could walk around the elephant and see it from all points of view but ideas are not that way. They are much harder to view from all possible points of view.
-
- CommentAuthorLynn Cornish
- CommentTimeNov 5th 2006 edited
I have an gut experience of sounds true. That experience includes a feeling that whatever it is is just a piece of something bigger, a piece in the puzzle. I accept it for what it is and that is enough for me. It's a finger pointing towards the moon (or the leg of an elephant works too). There is a deep contentment that there is a moon to point at and that also is part of the experience. And when Carl says: yes, but moon and no moon produce each other, I am okay with that too.
Your experience is quite different. You experience your consciousness as language. I don't. I perceive being without language, although that "being-ness" is without self. But I also perceive myself as wierd.
-
Lynn Cornish:
Your experience is quite different. You experience your consciousness as language. I don't. I perceive being without language, although that "being-ness" is without self. But I also perceive myself as wierd.
Heads and tails are different sides of the same coin. I don't fully understand what you are describing but I think I have a sense of it. That alone, I don't feel, is the whole picture and it is an important aspect of who we are.
I don't mean to say that language is the whole picture or any more or less important part of the picture. We need to be careful not to make either aspect more or less than it is.
I don't think you are wierd. You are a point of view and I could learn a lot by seeing that point of view.
-
Topher:
I think anyone that doesn't use language to its fullest, that doesn't seek to master its potential and its pitfalls, is missing a great pleasure and a great opportunity of being alive.
Human history suggests that we are far more likely to "seek to master its potential" than face "its pitfalls". Humanity's bias is definitely 'pro-language'. Nevertheless, my intent is not to debate the pros and cons of language - really! Debating pros and cons is like discussing which political party is best. There are good and bad apples on both sides. The pros and cons of language probably offset each other. I'm after full disclosure of the "pitfalls".
Language, like a knife, is a superb tool. But, like a knife, cuts both ways. Unlike a knife, 'the pen is mightier than the sword'. The trouble is, we aren't aware of the danger. Language 'owns' our mind - it is the foundation upon which much of our awareness sits. It is like we are sitting on our 'mighty sword'... ouch.
Being more circumspect in our relationship with language might help us avoid falling on our 'sword'. My advice is to trust language like you would a pet cobra - trust, but verify. Is it where it belongs, or is it running loose? Language is dangerous. Thus, as soon as there are names, one ought to know that it is time to stop. Stop trusting perhaps?
Language is a linear process. We proceed from baby babble to names and words (language's axiomatic foundation), to Shakespear and beyond. On the other hand, Taoist thought (and the like) is a circular process receding from language backward, dropping the axiomatic authority of names and words (and popping preconceptions if we can). This helps us, however briefly, again return to being a babe - our original 'self'.
-
Carl:
The trouble is, we aren't aware of the danger. Language 'owns' our mind - it is the foundation upon which much of our awareness sits. It is like we are sitting on our 'mighty sword'... ouch.
This is not unlike what I think even if the words are not the same.
My approach to life is to look where this is causing a problem in my life and to generate new words to own my mind. It is a constant process of re-creation. I am not looking for the right way. I am looking for the way that has me being myself in life. To be inspired by being in life. To be a source of inspiration to myself and others. To own the rare moments in life when it seems that I have found the pinnacle of peace, contentment, & satisfaction.
One thing I am finally dealing with in my own life is that high and low are two sides of the same coin.
-
I take a hot bath after I wake to loosen my arthritic joints for their yoga ahead. As I 'cook', thoughts invariably bubble up. Anticipating this, I decided today to just listen to my senses. So for a few minutes the morning sun, the duck's quack, and the steam rising off the water washed over my mind.... but sure enough... thoughts percolating below popped into mind.... (and I think I know why, but that's another story.)
Topher:
I do think that the world works in a certain way and that we as humans work in a certain way. Learning what that is and how to work with it to have the kind of life I want is my pursuit.
Ostensibly, we yearn to "learn" how to solve life's 'problem'. What if the 'problem' is an eternal reality, and the 'solution' is a transitory illusion? To paraphrase: The eternal 'problem' and the transitory 'solution' produce each other. Ironically, embracing the 'problem' may be the easiest way to accomplish our private ends, i.e., "to have the kind of life I want".
Embrace the 'problem' rather than the 'solution'? To paraphrase again: Thus what we gain is 'the solution', yet it is by virtue of 'the problem' that this can be put to use. By chasing and embracing 'the solution', there is no end, no stillness, no returning to one's destiny. Round and round she go, where she stops nobody knows - as you'd expect chasing an illusion.
Topher:
I am not trying to convince or be convinced. I am not looking for the "right" way nor the "truth"
But what does "right" or "true" really mean ? Language is odd. People use it to "convince" others, but I don't think that actually works. In practice, we only "convince" ourselves and those within our like minded tribe. So for example, I'm not trying to "convince" anyone. Rather, I'm just vocalizing what a few others may feel already and possibly find useful.
I suspect that we are only "convinced" about that which we already intuitively feel to be so. That is why it is foolish to trust language as much as we do. Moreover, language is a linear process that requires a belief in polar reality, which flip flops.
Hmm, perhaps we've reached a point where it is time to examine a wider question: Which Point of View is True, Circular or Linear?