On 30 Oct 2013, at 16:26, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
>This *looks* like a description of the salvia experience, but term
like "anti-consciousness" is a bit >pejorative for that, although it
has anti-life aspect, pointing on the fact that theology is not much
"pro-life".
That would make children's joy "vain".
Why?
When I say that theology is not much "pro-life" I just point on the
fact that theology is often concerned by "after-life".
I don't buy that, nor the notion that Samsara is separate from
Nirvana as in some Buddhism, because such statement is too
inconsistent with negative theology principle.
With comp, there is a sense to say that the Samsara is part of the
Nirvana, like (not exactly like, of course, but enough like for my
point), provable (by the correct machine) is part of truth, or G is
part of G*, or Z part of Z*, etc.
Chiefly, because there are multitudes of ways to negate universality/
self-reference intelligence by entering trance, sexual practice,
music, play, collaboration and playing with others, voyages,
adventures, building and fixing things, improvisation, re-discovery/
revelation of appearances that mirror the ideals more precisely,
that all negate the isolated self-reference dream; or at least
reduce it to a less exaggerated and distorted size, if one is
willing to lose enough control/security and do high enough dosage.
I am not sure why trance, sex, drugs need to negate universality/self-
reference intelligence, (at any dosage which is not self-injuring
which depends of the product or activity). It can lead beyond
intelligence, but it does not negate it, for the same reason the
Samsara is part of the Nirvana, and science is the best tool for
theology, even if *our* science cannot complete *our* theology.
The studies of these activities should be brought back into serious
repertoire of science, as without their rigorous practice and our
betterment in them, intelligence will tend towards self-destruction.
The politics or AI that we write, will be depressed, the science we
search will lead us further astray etc.
I know this kind of statement of "trapped in Samsara", "outside
divine mind immortal nirvana" is found in a lot of scripture and in
the self-reference constraints of universal machine, but to me it is
priests taking too seriously their interpretation, or their own
smoke/emanations in Plotinus terms. Not funny enough to be true,
like some grumpy catholic hymn of "you don't deserve divine
stuff"... ;-)
You might be right. Plotinus, or Proclus talk about "procession/
emanation" and "conversion", but "the fall" is a pop terming that has
its charm, and is justified, for a strict Platonist, by their relation
between matter and evil.
I agree we might not insist on that, or taken it too much literally.
It is the place where theology negates in some way biology. Like
accepting to die negates the effort to prolongate life. We are not a
long way from the Euthanasia topic.
Like they think they can tell the future or equate all joy with
vanity of self-referential motion.
Everything is vain, but joy.
Vanity kills joy.
Too quick for me; bad + sad for children and so called "adults".
Smoke is not fire.
Not sure I follow you, but arguments in "rational theology" should not
be guided by what we want, unless we discuss politics, and decisions,
where what we want is the principal concern.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
