"...Time and distance only limit the mind not allowing it to expand to its potential." - Allan
In fact Allan, do not these two things add to mind's potential? Yes, for some, who become attached to such relative things, it may be an impediment...but, in the big picture, mind includes these subjective things along with all you imply in the expanded state(s). On Apr 19, 11:23 pm, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > * *I think true reality has neither time nor distance .--. it just is. > Time and distance only limit the mind not allowing it to expand to its > potential. > Allan > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Marco Afonso <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Wow... i loved to read these posts. Can't understand english so easy > > as my motherlanguage - portuguese - but i got so many new ideas... > > > I like to think that in science, as in any other community, there are > > 2 (discretizing) areas: the most inner side (conservative) and the > > most outside (radical). I classify quantum physics as being the most > > outside... > > > Evolution needs the radical side. It is the side that pushes up, while > > the conservative side functions like a filter to consolidate the > > 'good' parts of the radical side. Let the 'scouts' do their work... > > > Reality: > > > Logically and semantically, I question the sentence: "if N is > > subjective, then N is not real". 'Subjective' and 'real' are > > disjunctive? Can we define that one is the opposite of the other? > > > Senses can lead to error at some experiments, while they are the best > > instruments in other situations. > > > Interdisciplinary studies are recent and do not fall exclusively in > > the old fashion method of reductionism. Experiments (of Reality) can't > > be isolated as they are a consequence of the whole. > > > On Mar 28, 5:53 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > We actually seem to live in a world of massive containment. We can > > > only meet because we are dominated by matter - otherwise a quick hug > > > would blitz a large town. > > > > On 27 Mar, 19:35, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Why not,, new world to explore.. The last true frontier. > > > > All things are possible. > > > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Questions arise as to whether we can construct conditions > > > > > for a very different human existence. > > > > > > Why couldn't we? We are only limited by our own constructs of > > > > > limitation. > > > > > > On Mar 27, 11:01 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > We spend a lot of time in science excluding things and explanations > > in > > > > > > trying to arrive at things that work reliably. In the general run > > of > > > > > > life there is much we cannot exclude or even recognise in what is > > > > > > happening. Like Justin I can only admit to blundering along - the > > owl > > > > > > of Minerva only taking flight in murky mud - to mix a few > > metaphors. > > > > > > In hot fusion the key is an exclusion boundary preventing the > > plasma > > > > > > from grounding out to a reality - contamination ruining the > > experiment > > > > > > and the conditions for its existence (though we hope to tap a > > power- > > > > > > line in). Questions arise as to whether we can construct > > conditions > > > > > > for a very different human existence. > > > > > > > On 27 Mar, 11:52, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Well, I am not sure what rubbing the lamp means to this thread, > > but, > > > > > > > Justin, I certainly appreciate the way you lead us along the > > lines of > > > > > > > philosophical reasoning to arrive at the poignant place that > > connects > > > > > > > us all in a thread. Completely meaningful. > > > > > > > > On Mar 26, 1:18 pm, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Reality is that it is there and that it is not me. > > > > > > > > > I look at a teacup. Is it a teacup or is it just my seeing a > > teacup? > > > > > > > > If it is a teacup it is real. If it is just my seeing a teacup > > then > > > > > it > > > > > > > > is not real. > > > > > > > > > This is the typical way of looking at reality. > > > > > > > > > The problem with this is revealed in the mystic traditions. If > > > > > > > > abstraction is the process of thinking of something that cannot > > exist > > > > > > > > without something else, as existing without that something > > else, then > > > > > > > > the idea of reality becomes an abstraction. The experienced is > > not > > > > > > > > conceivable apart from experiencing of some kind and reality > > and to > > > > > > > > the extent that it is conceived of that way, becomes the > > illusion of > > > > > > > > worlds behind the scenes. > > > > > > > > > Now this abstraction lies so deep in our ideas that all of us > > are > > > > > > > > capable of imagining the universe with no one in it, no one > > > > > > > > experiencing it. We do that easily and we ascribe the term > > reality to > > > > > > > > that abstraction. That is "the universe" and the fact that it > > is > > > > > > > > experienced is considered a contingent fact that might have > > been > > > > > > > > otherwise. It is just luck that we experience the universe. If > > > > > > > > evolution had gone the other way then .... Its simple, just > > imagine > > > > > > > > the world before people or sentient beings evolved or imagine > > it > > > > > after > > > > > > > > they are gone. We are almost completely unaware of the how our > > real > > > > > > > > absence (not just a temporal structure with a point that has us > > > > > arrive > > > > > > > > and end - but complete absence) would erode the hypothetical > > nature > > > > > of > > > > > > > > "it". It is easy to see how its color would be undefinable but > > much > > > > > > > > harder to see how its spatial material structure, the stuff of > > set > > > > > > > > theory and mathematical modeling, would become equally > > meaningless. > > > > > > > > > Only in the mystical traditions are the notions of reality > > > > > appreciated > > > > > > > > and the presenting of already-merging-originally is > > experienced. The > > > > > > > > world is correctly experienced as a verb and the meaning of its > > > > > > > > reality -or perhaps better "reality-ing" becomes clear. Here > > the > > > > > > > > notion of reality is seen as being meaningful, as having > > meaning and > > > > > > > > therefore is not separate from, nor reducible to, mind. It is > > > > > meaning- > > > > > > > > ing itself around us and throughout us. This does not then > > exclude > > > > > our > > > > > > > > temporalizing and spatially abstracting the essent, of > > recognizing > > > > > > > > material structures and of understanding the relationship of > > those > > > > > > > > structures to our own incarnation, but all of this becomes > > essential > > > > > > > > material and is not the One reality at the center. It is just > > > > > > > > contingent structure. > > > > > > > > > Those states of conscious are hard to come by but their insight > > is > > > > > > > > invaluable in comprehending the meaning of reality. > > > > > > > > > While the notion of reality as being that which is "other than > > > > > > > > thought" has uses the problem with it is that it cannot handle > > the > > > > > > > > mystical experience of reality. It is ignorant of the Tao. > > > > > > > > > Consider these two statements: "When we say something is a > > fantasy, > > > > > we > > > > > > > > mean that it isn't a part of the world of our natural senses. > > It > > > > > > > > exists soley in the subjective mind." "When we say something is > > real > > > > > > > > we seem to be implying that the object is perceived through > > senses > > > > > > > > other than pure thought" > > > > > > > > > The first problem is that reality as it is usually meant is not > > > > > > > > ascribed to something that is seen sensually as opposed to > > > > > > > > cognitively. For example if I induce the sight of a cow > > electrically > > > > > > > > by stimulating the right neurons (or even by projecting light > > in a > > > > > > > > realistic way into our eyes, we would usually say that the cow > > that I > > > > > > > > experienced is not real even though I saw it. Alternatively we > > may > > > > > say > > > > > > > > that it was a "real experience" but not a "real cow". My "just > > seeing > > > > > > > > it" means that it was subjective and therefore not real. So the > > > > > > > > distinction between mind and senses is not the key. It is the > > > > > > > > distinction between that which is "purely subjective" and that > > which > > > > > > > > is not that is the key. > > > > > > > > > However, the problem is that in reality itself the meaning and > > being > > > > > > > > are kind of the same thing. It is the meaning-ing of being and > > the > > > > > > > > being of the meaning-ing of being originally as one experience. > > > > > > > > Otherwise being becomes roughly "that which is not meaning", or > > at > > > > > > > > least "that which is not just meaning" - something again other > > to > > > > > pure > > > > > > > > meaning - and becomes something other, something necessarily > > > > > > > > meaningless. > > > > > > > > > I am sure that I am being clumsy here but the essence of my > > comment > > > > > is > > > > > > > > that a notion of reality that makes distinction between either > > > > > sensory > > > > > > > > vs cognitive content or objective vs subjective entities will > > not > > > > > work > > > > > > > > because of its failure to realize the Tao. > > > > > > > > > Being in reality is completely meaningful. > > > > > -- > > > > ( > > > > ) > > > > I_D Allan > > -- > ( > ) > I_D Allan- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
