42
   

Destroy My Belief System, Please!

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 04:21 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

You see? I write a long, issue-driven post and you just shoot back some half-baked ad hominem... So insecure!


Not an insecure bone in my body, Olivier. Gotta wonder why you mention insecurity so often. Are you trying to mask your own?

Quote:
Alright, I should really stop this, it's not going anywhere.


Yeah, you really should, but you won't. You will continue to allow me to play you like a cat might play with a string.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSmgDBRHisVJkbZtVcsgYinvBAnizhD6ccEVmIM8NTwPkMYjUBKsg

Quote:
plus I have already learnt everything I could from the exchange. Diminishing returns on investment I guess.


Well...it is pretty obvious to me that you have missed quite a bit...but there is always hope. Wink


Remember: You started all this!
JLNobody
 
  1  
Fri 9 May, 2014 11:09 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Oh, dare I hope this will end?
sunyata
 
  1  
Sat 10 May, 2014 12:03 am
@Thomas,
fire can not destroy fire.
thought can not destroy thought.
water can
silence can
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Sat 10 May, 2014 06:59 am
@JLNobody,
Yep.

Was it that painful?
JLNobody
 
  1  
Sat 10 May, 2014 02:08 pm
@Olivier5,
Only mildly so, but I don't log on to suffer even a little bit.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Sat 10 May, 2014 06:33 pm
@JLNobody,
Honestly, I don't think we ruined much. Too little traffic means nobody cares or should care if there's a broil here or there... but you and I were having an interesting conversation before.
sunyata
 
  1  
Sat 10 May, 2014 06:38 pm
@JLNobody,
the cycle of life never ends.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Sat 10 May, 2014 07:57 pm
@Olivier5,
Yes, before!
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Sun 11 May, 2014 04:55 am
I thought the conversations were fine...right along!

Apparently they have not ended yet...and I intend to be a part of them until the end.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Sun 11 May, 2014 08:17 am
@JLNobody,
We were unable to disagree about what a "person" entails....
carnaticmystery
 
  1  
Thu 15 May, 2014 12:56 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
We were unable to disagree about what a "person" entails....

unable to disagree? how sad for you, haha. but anyway, your long argument with frank seems to just constantly be about reality vs illusion, blah blah. how can you not see that both are simple human concepts, neither can be categorically the ultimate truth. the ultimate truth, if you need to define it, has to be that both reality and illusion are non-dual or at least an inseparable duality.

see, how does the concept of illusion arise? anything which differs from normal waking 'reality'. so dreams, hallucinations, altered states, whatever. but in order to define any of these altered or illusory states, one must be coming from the assumption that normal waking consciousness is 'reality', and compared to this, other things are illusory.

but if you look at waking consciousness, its reality is limited by time, and we cannot remember before birth or foresee after death. so the entire reality we assume is an impermanent, limited existence which is unsure of its OWN reality, because how can you define something as real unless you know what happens to it in infinite time.

you can only define an illusion once a deeper reality is revealed. therefore, no reality can ever be completely confirmed, because the possibility of a deeper reality is ALWAYS there, no matter what, and this can be confirmed by your own experience. in certain dreams, you are 100% unaware it is a dream, and fully experience a different reality, until something deeper kicks in (waking up). therefore, by the same logic, it is always possible that something deeper than this life will disprove it as illusory on some level.

now, i am not assuming there is something deeper, or speculating what it is. i am simply saying the definite possibility of it reveals the nature of reality vs illusion to be non dual, ie, eternally inseparable.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Thu 15 May, 2014 01:27 pm
@carnaticmystery,
carnaticmystery wrote:

Quote:
We were unable to disagree about what a "person" entails....

unable to disagree? how sad for you, haha. but anyway, your long argument with frank seems to just constantly be about reality vs illusion, blah blah. how can you not see that both are simple human concepts, neither can be categorically the ultimate truth. the ultimate truth, if you need to define it, has to be that both reality and illusion are non-dual or at least an inseparable duality.

see, how does the concept of illusion arise? anything which differs from normal waking 'reality'. so dreams, hallucinations, altered states, whatever. but in order to define any of these altered or illusory states, one must be coming from the assumption that normal waking consciousness is 'reality', and compared to this, other things are illusory.

but if you look at waking consciousness, its reality is limited by time, and we cannot remember before birth or foresee after death. so the entire reality we assume is an impermanent, limited existence which is unsure of its OWN reality, because how can you define something as real unless you know what happens to it in infinite time.

you can only define an illusion once a deeper reality is revealed. therefore, no reality can ever be completely confirmed, because the possibility of a deeper reality is ALWAYS there, no matter what, and this can be confirmed by your own experience. in certain dreams, you are 100% unaware it is a dream, and fully experience a different reality, until something deeper kicks in (waking up). therefore, by the same logic, it is always possible that something deeper than this life will disprove it as illusory on some level.

now, i am not assuming there is something deeper, or speculating what it is. i am simply saying the definite possibility of it reveals the nature of reality vs illusion to be non dual, ie, eternally inseparable.


Although not directed to me, CM...I probably agree with this post more than any other post you have ever written.

I am NOT trying to define REALITY either...or to describe it.

BUT whatever it IS...that is what it IS.

We seem to be in agreement on this...but because you are so certain of your non-duality thesis...you seem unable (or unwilling) to acknowledge this.

Non-duality MAY INDEED be the REALITY.

If it is...it IS.

If it isn't...then it simply is NOT.

I do not know if it is or is not.

Olivier5
 
  2  
Thu 15 May, 2014 03:59 pm
@carnaticmystery,
Quote:
unable to disagree? how sad for you, haha.

It's not sad but surprising. I did not expect so much agreement with a Buddhist.

As for the rest of your post, well... what can I say? I don't believe in the "ultimate truth", nor in non-duality. More importantly, I am not convinced that in terms of approach to the problem is right.

As I see it, illusion is not about being awake - it's about many many complex cognitive factors: being provided with genuine information rather than deception; the issue of innate and learnt biases and how to control for them; what people WANT to believe vs. what the data points too; etc. etc. It's quite complicated and of course there are different paradigms about what constitutes truth.

There are even cases where illusion is more true than a accurate depiction of reality, e.g. in caricature.
carnaticmystery
 
  1  
Fri 16 May, 2014 10:57 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I am NOT trying to define REALITY either...or to describe it.

BUT whatever it IS...that is what it IS.

not necessarily, only if you assume the word 'is' to have an ultimately real meaning.

Quote:
We seem to be in agreement on this...but because you are so certain of your non-duality thesis...you seem unable (or unwilling) to acknowledge this.

Non-duality MAY INDEED be the REALITY.

If it is...it IS.

If it isn't...then it simply is NOT.

I do not know if it is or is not.

no, all wrong in my opinion. you just don't seem to understand the word 'is' is only a word, and you assume it as ultimate reality. so of course, if 'is' equals ultimate reality, then of course, everything either 'is' or 'isn't'.

you say you don't do beliefs, but you certainly believe that everything either is or isn't. you just don't know, but beyond your knowledge, everything either is or isn't, this is your BELIEF.

carnaticmystery
 
  1  
Fri 16 May, 2014 11:02 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
I don't believe in the "ultimate truth", nor in non-duality. More importantly, I am not convinced that in terms of approach to the problem is right.

i don't care about any beliefs in ultimate truth or non duality or anything else. however, in my opinion, it is impossible to not believe in non duality, because it encompasses anything that could possibly exist or not exist. to say you 'don't believe in that' makes no sense, non duality INCLUDES a stance which does not believe in it. it is your inability to understand nonduality which creates the idea that you can't 'believe' in it. you fear it because it seems like a philosophy which explains everything easily, and something in you doesn't want that to be the case. that is just individual identity, you think your individuality will be gone if you accept this philosophy. but going beyond individuality does not mean losing it. it just means going beyond it, while still including it.

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Fri 16 May, 2014 11:44 am
@carnaticmystery,
carnaticmystery wrote:

Quote:
I am NOT trying to define REALITY either...or to describe it.

BUT whatever it IS...that is what it IS.

not necessarily, only if you assume the word 'is' to have an ultimately real meaning.

Quote:
We seem to be in agreement on this...but because you are so certain of your non-duality thesis...you seem unable (or unwilling) to acknowledge this.

Non-duality MAY INDEED be the REALITY.

If it is...it IS.

If it isn't...then it simply is NOT.

I do not know if it is or is not.

no, all wrong in my opinion. you just don't seem to understand the word 'is' is only a word, and you assume it as ultimate reality. so of course, if 'is' equals ultimate reality, then of course, everything either 'is' or 'isn't'.

you say you don't do beliefs, but you certainly believe that everything either is or isn't. you just don't know, but beyond your knowledge, everything either is or isn't, this is your BELIEF.




I KNOW what the word denotes, CM...and whatever the IS...IS.

I accept that you will not acknowledge that...but...that is the way things go sometimes.

Stick with what YOU "believe"...and I will stick with what I know...and what I guess.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Fri 16 May, 2014 12:10 pm
@carnaticmystery,
CM.
Amen.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Fri 16 May, 2014 01:03 pm
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

CM.
Amen.


Saying "I do not know" actually does what CM claims for non-duality...and non-duality does not do it, JL.

You guys are in love with your blind guess about the true nature of REALITY.

I KNOW I do not know...and I strongly suspect neither do either of you two.

But what IS...whatever it actually is...is what IS.

And if it happens to be that non-duality does not prevail...

...that is the REALITY...not your guesses.
Thomas
 
  1  
Fri 16 May, 2014 04:42 pm
So, can we wrap this up? What's the verdict?
Olivier5
 
  1  
Fri 16 May, 2014 05:34 pm
@Thomas,
I'd say your system was found robust. Strongly equalitarian, which I like.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/30/2023 at 08:41:04