What is truth ?

@Chights47,

On another note. I have found that if you will start your reply to a quote right after the "[/quote]" without any returns you will have your reply end up being closer to the quote you're referring to. I have also found that if you want to add another quote and enter the "quote" command right after your reply (without any returns), it will close up the space between your reply and the following quote.

Just something I figured out. You don't have to change anything you're doing.

Some people (me, for instance) get bugged about all the space they create in their replies and want to know what to do about it.

1 Reply

@Dasein,

Quote:

I find that most people spend their entire life defining and defending their territory and don't want to relinquish any part of it for understanding.

Understanding is over rated...nature wants you to try something, anything, and if it doesnt work she will tell you by killing you .

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Your understanding of the 'ground' you stand on is what you project into what is misnomered 'future'.

The purpose of life is to 'remove' what is not the ground you stand on so the ground you stand on may uncover itself.

Make no mistake about it, you WILL project your understanding into what is called the future. You have no choice about that. What you project depends on you uncovering/not uncovering who you are.

I agree with you if you meant that conceptual understanding is overrated. Conceptual understanding is a waste of everybody's time/temporality.

1 Reply

@Dasein,

Quote:

The purpose of life is to.......

You know the purpose of life ???? I doubt you do .

1 Reply

@Dasein,

Dasein wrote:

Chights47 wrote:
Maybe we need to also find a new way to understand it. It's agreed that there is a problem presenting the information, but is there a problem receiving it as well? Or is receiving the information the only real problem?
Understanding will always fix the problem, however, I find that most people spend their entire life defining and defending their territory and don't want to relinquish any part of it for understanding.

Well no one can be changed, only altered. No one can have views which are so strong that they are completely unbendable. In this world, it's not what's defined, but how it's defined. It's not them that has to have any understand other than their own. The very basic method of conveyance, is analogies. The more we understand, the more we will be able to make connections between our "territory" and theirs in order to breed enlightenment and understanding.

Dasein wrote:

On another note. I have found that if you will start your reply to a quote right after the "

without any returns you will have your reply end up being closer to the quote you're referring to. I have also found that if you want to add another quote and enter the "quote" command right after your reply (without any returns), it will close up the space between your reply and the following quote.[/quote] I apologize, I've always been fond of the spaces because it makes it so that it's not all so "crowded". I'm not a very picky person though so I'll comply with what you are comfortable with, no biggie.

Better format?

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Your response is ridiculous, you know what I'm saying.

Why is it that the most intelligent people on the planet also have the ability to be the stupidest? We are the cosmic joke.

1 Reply

@Chights47,

As I said, this not was for the "picky" people. You don't have to change anything.

0 Replies

@Chights47,

Chights47 wrote:

Well no one can be changed, only altered.

No one can be altered. The individual has to initiate the alteration.

Chights47 wrote:

No one can have views which are so strong that they are completely unbendable.

You and I both know that ain't true.

Chights47 wrote:

The more we understand, the more we will be able to make connections between our "territory" and theirs in order to breed enlightenment and understanding.

Nobody has a territory to defend.

1 Reply

@Dasein,

Quote:

Your response is ridiculous, you know what I'm saying.

If you mean I know what you said, yes, if you mean I know your meaning, no . You say the purpose of live is.....what about bacteria ? I was more correct with the generalisation that life is about trying something, anything and if it doesn't work nature will kill you . Your response was based on that and it contradicted it .

If you dont like debate, watch TV .

0 Replies

@Dasein,

Dasein wrote:

No one can be altered. The individual has to initiate the alteration.

People are altered all the time by presenting something to them, by them listening to it and for it registering in their "minds" that adds to the "collective". Now which way they're changed from there, depends on a great deal of other things. If I were to physically push you, you would move whether you "initiated" the push at all. How far you move would depend on how strong your stance was(open-mindedness), the amount of force I use(intelligence), and where that force is applied(wisdom).

Dasein wrote:

You and I both know that ain't true.

It may seem as though people can't bend, but it's a balance of sorts between how open their minds are and the "pursuasiveness" of the other person...but yes, some people are very stubborn.

Dasein wrote:

Understanding will always fix the problem, however, I find that most people spend their entire life defining and defending their territory and don't want to relinquish any part of it for understanding.

Territory as in their thoughts whether they're beliefs, ideas, theories, understandings, etc. If people don't have "territories" then what are you defending?

2 Replies

@Chights47,

Quote:

People are altered all the time by presenting something to them, by them listening to it and for it registering in their "minds" that adds to the "collective".

Dasein doesn't work like that. If you don't agree with him you are simply wrong, and the only way you can get "right" is to read Being and Time one hundred times. Wink

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:
People are altered all the time by presenting something to them, by them listening to it and for it registering in their "minds" that adds to the "collective".

Dasein doesn't work like that. If you don't agree with him you are simply wrong, and the only way you can get "right" is to read Being and Time one hundred times.

The problem with that, is I'm never wrong...I may not be right, but it's not about being right. Wink

0 Replies

@Chights47,

You can present something to someone (like Cyracuz) until you're blue in the face or dead and they still have to initiate the alteration.

1 Reply

@Dasein,

If by "initiate the alteration" you mean passively accept whatever flies out of your face...then yes, you are correct. If you say anything of value to anyone and it registers in their mind. Then it will cause change, an alteration, a "movement" whatever you want to call it. Whether they move closer to an acceptance of what you're presenting, further from it, or some kind of lateral move. An example: If someone were as "narrow-minded" as you have stated about, lets say, evolution. Then any fault you find with that, they would just correct to strengthen their argument. They would still be within their views...but a change has been made. Which is why 'what' you say isn't as important as 'how' you say it.

2 Replies

@Chights47,

Chights47 wrote:

If you say anything of value to anyone and it registers in their mind.

I know what I'm going to say is extremely hard to swallow, however, what I'm saying is that you have absolutely no say in anybody's life but your own. There is no "it" to register in their mind and since we're on the subject, there is no mind. There is no "it" that will EVER cause change. There are only individuals making distinctions and declaring new possibilities. If by chance what you have to say coincides with some perceived change it is because you just happened to come along at the right time to support the change initiated by the person approximately 3 months prior to your encounter.

If that person attempts to give you 'credit' for the change, they are mistaken. If you attempt to give credit to someone else for the change, you are mistaken. To assign 'false cause' is to deny that you are the 'creator' in your life.

No matter how much you 'admire' someone, no matter how much you speak with them, and no matter how 'valuable' what they have to say is, you are always the one making distinctions, declaring new possibilities, and doing it on your own schedule.

In an 'instant', outside of time, humans, 'Be'-ing, make distinctions on their own and they declare new possibilities for living, 'Be'-ing.

'Change' doesn't happen the way you suggest.

0 Replies

@Chights47,

Refer to my last post. If you "agree" with what I said it will be because you made a new distinction and declared a new possibility.

From what I have observed, we get 'bored' with who we are 'Be'-ing, make a distinction, and declare a new possibility for 'Be'-ing. I have found that a lot of times that 'alteration' only 'shows up' when we confront our own mortality which is why people change after having an accident. Curiously, I have noticed that the 'accident' happens approximately 3 months after "getting bored" with who we are 'Be'-ing.

I surmise that this is one of the ways we 'call' our 'self' back to 'Be'-ing our 'self'.

1 Reply

@Dasein,

If I "disagree" because I'm completely close minded, would I then be completely unchanged as if I never came across your theory in the first place?

Dasein wrote:

From what I have observed, we get 'bored' with who we are 'Be'-ing, make a distinction, and declare a new possibility for 'Be'-ing. I have found that a lot of times that 'alteration' only 'shows up' when we confront our own mortality which is why people change after having an accident. Curiously, I have noticed that the 'accident' happens approximately 3 months after "getting bored" with who we are 'Be'-ing.

I disagree, I believe that we are constantly changing regardless of whether we're bored or not. It's like "walking down the path of life", we can't stop "walking" until we die, but we can switch paths at anytime. As far as with your "accident" theory, that only forces a change regardless of whether you're "bored" or not.

1 Reply

@Chights47,

Chights47 wrote:

If I "disagree" because I'm completely close minded, would I then be completely unchanged as if I never came across your theory in the first place?

Until you make a new distinction and act consistent with it, then, no, you haven't changed. In essence you have to hear the premise and understand the premise before you can disagree with the premise. Nobody is "closed minded". It all gets in whether we want to admit it or not. "It all getting in" and "acting consistent with a new distinction" are 2 separate events. In between those 2 events is you projecting possibilities into the future or not. It IS all up to your choosing or not choosing.

Chights47 wrote:

I disagree, I believe that we are constantly changing regardless of whether we're bored or not. It's like "walking down the path of life", we can't stop "walking" until we die, but we can switch paths at anytime. As far as with your "accident" theory, that only forces a change regardless of whether you're "bored" or not.

You just said what I said only differently. "Boredom" can happen in a fleeting millisecond. It doesn't necessarily have to contain the "emotional baggage" associated with boredom.

1 Reply

@Dasein,

Dasein wrote:

Until you make a new distinction and act consistent with it, then, no, you haven't changed.

By listening or reading the words of the idea, that distinction has already taken hold of you and you're already changed to some extent. Acting consistent with the idea has nothing to do with that, it's simply a positive result of the debate.

1 Reply

@Chights47,

You are accurate, although the distinction doesn't happen by merely listening or reading the words. That may be the physical manifestation of what is going on, however, what's really going on is that the person is actively participating in the uncovering a new possibility of 'Be'-ing. I was attempting to show that "making a distinction" and "taking action" were 2 separate events. The "Acting consistent with the idea" happens pretty much on its own. What I mean by that is you don't have to "consciously" and consistently hold it in front of you as a possibility. It is transparently "held out in front of you" by 'Be'-ing-there and 'self'.

So, basically, who you are, who we all are, are "distinction makers" projecting new possibilities for 'Be'-ing out in front of our 'self'. Either we are projecting new possibilities that are consistent with our 'self' (authenticity), or we are projecting the world's concepts of who we are (inauthenticity) out in front of us.

1 Reply

What is truth ?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know