0
   

Reality revisited

 
 
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2013 12:02 pm
As my No. 2 Son rightly advises, in reality nobody cares what I think; but when can something be called real

Well, in
http://able2know.org/topic/207906-1
…., Ig states
,
Quote:
The burden of proof is with anyone who says there is a truly existing self. The Buddha just says OK find it and I'll believe in it; if not then I won’t believe in dualism.
…raising an issue I've long confronted, with however only the most limited success; though somewhat OT and hence this OP

The casual philo supposes a dualism where X is real or existent on one hand but unreal or nonexistent on the other. Now, dualism itself suffers all sorts of contradiction and paradox, sending one running for reassurance in a sort of Unity. But then such a singularity in turn seems to deny "Realities" such as The Self; even Dualism itself; much less God HerSelf

My own take, for what it's worth (not much hereabout, I'll have to concede) is that Reality, Dualism, the Self, even Her, fall into a semantic range of abstraction with the concrete, say a rock, near one end and the transcendental, say She HerSelf, near the other

Thus whether a thing is real depends upon where one draws the line within this range. According to the general principal that nothing is entirely anything while everything is partly something else, at at least one other participant has pointed out certain abstract qualities of even the cobblestone

Only incidentally, mind you, for the sake of Unity as an apodictical existential pantheist I herewith declare that very term as best describing Her. But to reassure all our irascible athiests, Her very existence can be logically denied by the claim that She lies on the right side of that line (pun unintentional)

….while all the foregoing distinctions eventually will be demonstrated only as semantic issues
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,401 • Replies: 6
No top replies

 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2013 02:23 pm
@dalehileman,
The one thing that seems to be almost certain is: Whatever IS...IS.

I included the "almost" for tactical reasons.

The notion that there is NO ULTIMATE REALITY is an absurdity...not a paradox.



dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2013 02:48 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
The one thing that seems to be almost certain is: Whatever IS...IS.
Of course we're left wondering what IS and what ISN'T

Quote:
I included the "almost" for tactical reasons.
Yes, in accordance with the general principle that nothing is…….

Quote:
The notion that there is NO ULTIMATE REALITY is an absurdity...not a paradox.
If I described it as a paradox then I'm guilty. Yes we have to live as if there's a reality though some wonder if we're not just a figment of God's imagination. Still that leaves Her as a kind of reality doesn't it
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2013 03:07 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
Quote:
Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5252969)
Quote:
The one thing that seems to be almost certain is: Whatever IS...IS.

Of course we're left wondering what IS and what ISN'T


If it isn't part of the IS...it isn't.


Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The notion that there is NO ULTIMATE REALITY is an absurdity...not a paradox.

If I described it as a paradox then I'm guilty. Yes we have to live as if there's a reality though some wonder if we're not just a figment of God's imagination. Still that leaves Her as a kind of reality doesn't it


Whatever the REALITY IS...that is what it IS. That IS the ultimate REALITY.
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2013 03:10 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
If it isn't part of the IS...it isn't.
Leaves us wondering though about the abstract, where we draw the line and how


Quote:
That IS the ultimate REALITY.
Yes, whatever that is
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2013 03:14 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
Quote:
Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5253015)
Quote:
If it isn't part of the IS...it isn't.

Leaves us wondering though about the abstract, where we draw the line and how


No line to be drawn, Dale. No definition necessary...no description.

Just...whatever IS...IS.
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Feb, 2013 03:25 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
No line to be drawn, Dale.
Yet others draw the line, calling the rock concrete and, say, The Self abstract. Billions believe She exists 'way over to the right, insisting that in spite of "non -material" nature She IS

Not me, understand, but many.

Further to the left we have something like Costco for instance, which we think of as concrete 'til we examine the issue a little more closely and find that it's just a number of humanoids mumbling toward one another whilst moving objects from place to place

….while Intuition insists there's more to the Whole Megillah than the random and meaningless bouncing of particles off one another…….etc ad infinitum

Quote:
Just...whatever IS...IS.
But isn't that a tautology
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
Is "God" just our conscience? - Question by Groomers123
believe in god! - Question by roammer
The existence of God - Question by jwagner
Are Gods Judgments righteous? - Discussion by Smileyrius
What did God do on Day 8? - Question by HesDeltanCaptain
What do you think about world? - Question by Joona
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Reality revisited
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/23/2022 at 10:50:48