How wonderful. The sound of the Logos. I hear you (hear you, hear
you.)
On Feb 17, 12:38 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> What I criticise about your description of your relation towards
> others is the fact that it finishes at a model stage only to spiral up
> to the next relational experience. What you describe as perceived
> stillness within a process is what I make out to be your echo
> returning to you at the time you keep on saying the same thing over
> and over again. Same goes for
> Vam. )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
>
> On 17 Feb., 15:42, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > My experience is that I am all others, which would bring the finite
> > back to the infinite. My feeling is that I am (and we are) both in
> > all time and within this ultimate paradox lies the stillness - no more
> > questions or answers. But then again, what would we talk about? - so
> > the exploration there and back again is sublime.
>
> > On Feb 16, 10:43 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > What, in your experience, is our / your infinite nature, Molly ?
>
> > > I have a feeling we are using the term " infinite " too glibly. Since
> > > you have quoted Swami Vivekananda before, I would like to point to his
> > > reasoning where he concludes that there can be only ONE infinite. The
> > > presence, the mere thought, of another, an other, would render it
> > > finite.
>
> > > What is your experience of that ONE, Molly ?
>
> > > On Feb 17, 12:10 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Sci Fi has always seemed to point us to what is possible - like any
> > > > other great writing. I do, agree, Neil, that somewhere along the line
> > > > many of us have that "wait, what?" moment where we begin to question
> > > > more deeply and sift out the dross. A fascinating process, really,
> > > > and one that allows us to eventually include our finite and infinite
> > > > natures if we can trust ourselves in the process.
>
> > > > On Feb 15, 4:14 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > I think that vastness you speak of is definitely there. We may have
> > > > > measured the speed of light accurately but I don't think we've even
> > > > > come close to measuring the speed of thought which may just exceed the
> > > > > speed of light and approach infinity.
>
> > > > > Have you ever read Orson Scott Card's "Ender" quartet? He introduces
> > > > > some very thought provoking concepts in that series of science fiction
> > > > > novels. Ender's Game, Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide and Children of
> > > > > The Mind. I highly recommend them for anyone interested in exceeding
> > > > > the speed of light ... (watch for the ansible network).
>
> > > > > On Feb 14, 4:08 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I stick with Russell that sense quali are strangely some combination
> > > > > > of physical and mental, and with Whitehead that the bifurcation of
> > > > > > nature is some kind of mistake. The reality hypothesis seems to
> > > > > > work
> > > > > > rather better than believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden
> > > > > > and I ascribe hope to there being more to vastness than being barred
> > > > > > from it forever by the speed of light. I suspect many of our
> > > > > > problems
> > > > > > with thought stem from the realisation we have been fed dross from
> > > > > > birth and cannot work out just how much of our thinking is thus
> > > > > > constrained.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
