Reality

David Henry,

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1119

Please scan this and see if your points are covered.

0 Replies

I'd love to talk about tennis -- but golf is my life (except for Nancy, of course).

Let me mention this about golf:

Last week -- a young girl from Hawaii, Michelle Wei, was invited to play in a Men's PGA tournement.

Michelle is 14 years old.

Not only did Michelle play in the tournement -- she managed to shoot a better score than 47 of the world's best golfers -- and did so with an aplomb that absolutely astounded just about everyone who knows anything about golf.

It was the single most impressive sports happening that I have ever personally witnessed -- and from what I have been reading, there are lots of sports figures and sports writers who feel that same way. So my assessment cannot be chalked up to my occasional penchant for hyperbole.

To give some comparison -- in order for Tiger Woods to have done something comparable, he would have had to play golf while in grammar school against the gods.

Michelle is pretty as a picture; has a figure to die for -- and has poise and grace beyond comprehension.

As you might imagine -- I am much taken with her.

I'm not sure if you caught the event -- or if any of you others did -- but if you missed it, and if you hear of her playing again in the future, be sure to look in.

It will be pleasurable -- even if you hate golf.

I hope that answers your question, David.

0 Replies

David Henry

Quote:

I think what might be the case is that when I say reality is what exists, I mean that to have existence is to know something, therefore, what does exist is by virtue of our knowledge of it.

This is a tautology.

To have existence is to exist, to exist is to know something, that ?'something' which is known is that which exists. "Exists" and "know" are one and the same.

What exists is not by virtue of our knowledge of it, because the ?'our' in "our knowledge" is (an aspect of) that which exists. The ?'our' is not a ?'knower', it is the known. Meaning there is no knower. There is no ?'possessor' of the knowledge distinct from that knowledge.

Quote:

Anything I can't know, can NEVER exist by definition....as I can't identify it with my perceptions, so whilst there might be a totality, all we can know is reality, and that is what exists....if it exists, it's because I've identified it and it has become part of my knowledge* bank.

What or who is the "I" that can or cannot know?

"My perceptions"

Is there a ?'my' apart from perceptions? If so, what/who is it?

It may be that what exists is ?'reality' but that reality doesn't include that which knows/observers that reality. Your so called ?'knowledge bank' unfortunately doesn't include you, if 'you' is that which knows/observes/identifies etc.

That which you cannot know is that which knows.

Quote:

That which we don't know, doesn't exist....without existence we have no-thing.

I agree, but non-existence may exist, not as ?'something' but as the presence of the absence of something. IOW there may be ?'presence' when there is absence of some ?'thing'.

0 Replies

Well, that just proves my inferiority. I can't understand a damn word that he said.

0 Replies

MR, I wasn't ready to admit that, but understand what you're saying.. LOL

0 Replies

twyvel wrote:

[This is a tautology.

I agree, but non-existence may exist, not as ?'something' but as the presence of the absence of something. IOW there may be ?'presence' when there is absence of some ?'thing'.

Sorry Twyvel....but your mind has left the building.
Give me one quality/characteristic of non-existence?
If you can't, you have nothing....nothing isn't knowledge of anything{except in a relational sense to something, and then only as a linked concept}.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

I'd love to talk about tennis -- but golf is my life (except for Nancy, of course).

I hope that answers your question, David.

"Golf is not a sport"...JP McEnroe...circa 1980 something.....LOL.

0 Replies

David Henry

Quote:

Sorry Twyvel....but your mind has left the building.
Give me one quality/characteristic of non-existence?
If you can't, you have nothing....nothing isn't knowledge of anything{except in a relational sense to something, and then only as a linked concept}.

From a dualistic perspective it cannot be denied that what we refer to as consciousness or awareness is present, yet it is not any ?'thing' that can be observed, yet appears to exist. It is ?'nothing' yet here it is. It has no qualities or characteristics.

0 Replies

Mhatte-Rhaye wrote:

Well, that just proves my inferiority. I can't understand a damn word that he said.

Assuming you are talking about Twyvel's last post, I think that is something you share in common with him! :wink:

0 Replies

David Henry wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
I'd love to talk about tennis -- but golf is my life (except for Nancy, of course).

I hope that answers your question, David.

"Golf is not a sport"...JP McEnroe...circa 1980 something.....LOL.

Yeah...he claims it is just a game.

But what the hell does John McEnroe know! :wink:

0 Replies

twyvel's quote, "From a dualistic perspective it cannot be denied that what we refer to as consciousness or awareness is present, yet it is not any ?'thing' that can be observed, yet appears to exist. It is ?'nothing' yet here it is. It has no qualities or characteristics." Very good! It has meaning to me, but it is actually "nothing," because it can't be observed. Quality is only my subjective interpretation. Wink

0 Replies

Excellent, cicerone imposter,

Yes, and to take it a bit further: if ?'you' are that awareness, then anything that is ?'observed' i.e.

meaning
me
interpretation
quality
etc.

is not ?'you'.

"You" or " I " are the ?'nothing'.observing the something, whatever that may be, including a sense of ?'self'.

This ?'nothing' that observes yet cannot be observed or conceptualized has been called: Toa, Suchness, Consciousness, Hidden Witness, Unobserved Observer, Neti Neti, Not This Not That, Brahman-Atman, Void, Nous etc.

Yet all it is, is what we call ?'consciousness' or awareness, that which is right here right now observing these words.

The impossible seer of seeing. We are it, though it is not an it, Very Happy

0 Replies

And if you shoot an arrow at a target -- it cannot reach the target, because in order to do so, it must first traverse one-half the distance to the target -- and then traverse one-half the distance remaining -- then one-half the distance remaining -- ad nauseum.

But the arrow gets there.

And whether some people want to suppose that because there is thinking going on...and because the thinking is perceiving...that means...

...whatever the hell some would have us suppose it means...

...really does not matter.

What matters is REALITY.

Whatever the REALITY of the situation in which we find ourselves is -- IS.

It may be the conclusion these people want to suppose it is -- it may be the conclusion Christians have developed -- and it may be something so distant from both that we cannot even imagine it presently.

But that is a very difficult concept for some to perceive -- whether they are actually "there" or not.

0 Replies

Frank wrote:

"But that is a very difficult concept for some to perceive -- whether they are actually "there" or not."

Yes, and in order to perceive it 'you' have to ?'be' there, so it's futile,..until, we are told, there is the recognition that ?'you' are the ?'nothing' that is observing, in which "recognition" is more then a concept, it is actual.

0 Replies

twyvel wrote:

Frank wrote:

"But that is a very difficult concept for some to perceive -- whether they are actually "there" or not."

Yes, and in order to perceive it to have to ?'be' there, so it's futile,..until, we are told, there is the recognition that ?'you' are the ?'nothing' that is observing, in which "recognition" is more then a concept, it is actual.

Exactly the kind of argument a good Christian would use to insist on his/her guesswork. :wink:

0 Replies

That 'awareness' cannot be observed is not a guess.

Smile

0 Replies

Even when electrodes are connected to the brain? Wink

0 Replies

Even when.

Smile

0 Replies

Most of you seem to agree with the Wallace Stevens quote, "Reality is things as they are." I, however, completely disagree because things are never the same.

A schizophrenic might see the world in a completely different way than anybody else would. In fact, we don't even know whether anyone perceives the world in the same way. Therefore, reality cannot be proven by what you see.

Not only that, but, scientists regularly find that any rule they make always has at least one exception. To every absolute, there is always an exception. Which makes reality ever-changing and inabsolute, it is never the same thing for any period of time which really makes me doubt whether it actually exists or not.

By the way, sorry if I repeated anything that someone has already stated. I don't have the time to read the entire thread.

0 Replies

Whether or not people see things the same way has nothing to do with whether they are that way or not. The fact that we all see things similarly suggests that they are the same outside of perception.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know