Haven't all systems failed in the long run? It seems to me that humans are lost without joining a system that bestows an identity they can fashion their life and beliefs around- a purpose- yet they all wind up being corrupted whether religion, philosophy, politics, economics, etc. I wonder what will happen in the USA when Municipal Bonds dive?// I see transcendentalism as a link to the drug culture of the '60's. There's a great cartoon of Emerson as a giant eyeball on a stroll by Christopher Cranch- maybe you can Google it.//As for the cave as metaphor, I think it has several interpretations beyond blind escape from the world.
On Feb 9, 2:08 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > No Orn it is not enough that would be a choice to be blind to the realities > of life..living in a closed world. now thinking about it it is like a lot of > the fossilized religions of today. > Allan > > 2011/2/9 ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > Perhaps if one knows they are in a cave, it is enough? > > > On Feb 8, 3:49 pm, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Of which chosen one we might apply this to the philosophy or the woman, > > > but of the ensuing catastrophe it seems certain that most would choose > > > to struggle with their relinquished liberation and responsibility rather > > > than face the struggle with the self and megalomania. Humility might be > > > enough to keep our footing and prevent falling into a self prison where > > > we will thrash around with figments and projections of the real. Perhaps > > > we are each chosen to step out of the cave, as it seems something only > > > one may do for oneself. > > > > Any way simply does not seem 'right' > > > > On 2/8/2011 6:30 AM, ornamentalmind wrote: > > > > > No...actually, for some, attaching to a personal epistemology and > > > > convincing themselves that it is reality works too. > > > > > On Feb 8, 2:07 am, gabbydott<[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Ah! I see the problem! Elevating the personal philosophy to a > > transpersonal > > > >> one, would mean entering the realm of religion, would mean no choice > > but > > > >> being the chosen one, which either suits my personal philosophy or it > > > >> doesn't. Is that all that keeps us going? > > > > >> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 3:25 AM, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> It is astonishing to delve into Daoism again, so elegantly it > > describes my > > > >>> long struggle with identity. How could I forget? The fundamental > > precepts of > > > >>> my nature that have stood in stark contrast, this is far too > > convenient and > > > >>> significant.. In my view I see all as nature and the transcendent a > > growth > > > >>> or exploration beyond the horizon that today I can only feel the pull > > and > > > >>> draw of the innermost. I would certainly enjoy hearing more from > > someone who > > > >>> has chosen this path as their personal philosophy! > > > >>> On 2/6/2011 5:51 PM, �zen wrote: > > > >>>> On Jan 31, 4:00 am, Ash<[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>>>> Hello and greetings Aezen my replies are mixed in the post below. > > > >>>>> On 1/29/2011 10:47 PM, zen wrote: > > > >>>>> This is my first post here, so I thought that this post I shared > > in > > > >>>>>> another group would actually be a good introduction here =] > > > >>>>>> *** > > > >>>>>> "There are 2 ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a > > > >>>>>> miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." > > > >>>>>> - Einstein > > > >>>>>> In science, nature - or at least energy - is taken to be something > > > >>>>>> inert and void of consciousness. Only from some quirk in the > > evolution > > > >>>>>> of chemistry arising in abiogenises, that engenders evolution of > > life > > > >>>>>> is consciousness derived in ever more intricate and developed ways > > of > > > >>>>>> expression. > > > >>>>>> However, on the quantum level, it is the interaction of basic > > energies > > > >>>>>> that give rise to the fundamental forces - the laws of natural > > > >>>>>> behaviour (also referred to as the fundamental interactions). > > These > > > >>>>>> most basic interactions of energy give rise to all the variety of > > > >>>>>> chemical, biological relationships. That again go on to evolve > > ever > > > >>>>>> further, to the point that the interaction of individuals gives > > rise > > > >>>>>> to society, and then nations and global poltics and economics. Yet > > no > > > >>>>>> matter the level of relationship or interaction we want to > > discuss, > > > >>>>>> all relationships are built out of the same fundamental > > relationships > > > >>>>>> between energies. > > > >>>>>> To suggest that consciousness may exist in energy, yet just like a > > bit > > > >>>>>> in a computer, a lone quanta of energy doesn't do very much. But > > build > > > >>>>>> up the bits and a computer can do amazing things - but all from > > the > > > >>>>>> same fundamentals of a simple 'On& Off'. Similarly, energy > > could > > > >>>>>> simply be consciousness in an undeveloped 'raw' form. > > > >>>>>> "God sleeps in the rock, dreams in the plant, stirs in the animal, > > and > > > >>>>>> awakens in man." > > > >>>>>> - Ibn al 'Arabi > > > >>>>>> I am not referring to the God of any scripture. But Einsteins > > > >>>>>> 'pantheistic' leniency towards seeing nature as divine. > > > >>>>>> And I agree. I do not believe that a rock is conscious in the same > > > >>>>>> sense as we ordinarly define consciousness... but that the very > > same > > > >>>>>> interactions that have coellesced in a particular way to form a > > rock > > > >>>>>> are the same that have have formed different relationships that > > have > > > >>>>>> formed our biology. > > > >>>>>> I'm basically dancing around the point that we are very much > > divine > > > >>>>>> entities, that our lives are spiritual experiences - however, that > > > >>>>>> doesn't entail the need for an individual soul. Merely that there > > is > > > >>>>>> one eternal universal soul that we are apart of. > > > >>>>>> You can intepret this in a religious context... but I don't see > > the > > > >>>>>> need. If that is as it is, then that is simply it. And as much, > > > >>>>>> science is the best tool we have to explore nature. In that sense, > > > >>>>>> science, in my opinion, must realise that it IS very much a guide > > on > > > >>>>>> morality& ethics, because it explains to us who we are and why > > we are > > > >>>>>> as best it can. > > > >>>>>> That rational argument must be the only true way to derive our > > ethics > > > >>>>>> because it opens things up to be tested and see if they hold true. > > > >>>>>> What consquences do our actions have? And how can we improve them, > > and > > > >>>>>> improve ourselves? > > > >>>>> Yes, and the philosophy of science at times will call our attention > > to > > > >>>>> cultural anthropology or other fields as they merit, all within > > science > > > >>>>> IMO. I myself have a very high regard for science as an evolving > > > >>>>> paradigm spanning all things, especially the living which devise > > tools > > > >>>>> to interpret environmental information. In my personal belief > > science is > > > >>>>> complementary to nature. > > > >>>>> Very much so. A tool to better understand and even percieve > > nature. > > > >>>> When at peace, when my mood is amenable to it, or otherwise thrust > > into > > > >>>>> consciousness like the most apparent truth I feel very similarly. > > At > > > >>>>> times I hold both perspectives in equanimity, transcendentalist and > > > >>>>> naturalist, I have no expression for it.. > > > >>>> The feeling is mutual. However, I dislike the notion of > > > >>>> transcendentalism. I prefer to consider it as more a permeation of, > > or > > > >>>> merging with the more sublime essence of nature, rather than rising > > > >>>> above it. > > > >>>> I am very much into Buddhist and Daoist philosophies. Though, I > > > >>>>>> consider myself a 'Bukist' (my nickname amongst friends is Buk =] > > )... > > > >>>>>> I believe that progress of an individual can only be made when > > they > > > >>>>>> believe that they can live up to the highest moral ideals - even > > if we > > > >>>>>> don't know what they are, to at least believe we can try and > > discover > > > >>>>>> them > > > >>>>>> I am neither a pessimist nor an optimist, yet a little of both. > > > >>>>>> Buddhism has taught me the value of balance between all extremes. > > The > > > >>>>>> middle path. All things in moderation - even moderation in > > moderation! > > > >>>>> As a good friend says it, "All things in moderation, especially > > > >>>>> moderation." > > > >>>>> It is healthy to explore the variety of life, yet even better is > > to > > > >>>>>> come to understand the cycles of our own habits as individuals, > > and > > > >>>>>> our general habits as humans. I believe that by being aware of our > > > >>>>>> potential to cause harm form our animalistic nature, to our > > ability to > > > >>>>>> be influenced under social pressures allows us to begin to free > > > >>>>>> ourselves from them - to understand our nature and help express it > > in > > > >>>>>> productive and creative ways. To choose the things that infuences > > us. > > > >>>>>> Before I finish. I will say that I realise Buddhism as a religion > > is > > > >>>>>> full of its own pitfalls of a religion. That it's socio-economic > > > >>>>>> tradition is unsustainable and detrimental to a society. Yet, the > > core > > > >>>>>> philosophy - that life is stressful, life is suffering brought > > about > > > >>>>>> by our ignorance and attachments to certain things - is a > > beautiful, > > > >>>>>> apt and in my experience, a true teaching of our human condition. > > > >>>>>> Learning to be apart of life, but letting go of wanting more from > > each > > > >>>>>> moment, and simply making the most of what is right in front of > > you. > > > >>>>>> - That doesn't deny responsibility to make plans. It tries to free > > us > > > >>>>>> from the stress of worry to allows us to then do our best in any > > > >>>>>> particular moment, from having learned about the cycles, habbits > > and > > > >>>>>> patterns of ourselves and nature - our greater nature. > > > >>>>>> I will not deny that I wished more people understood Buddhism& > > Daoism > > > >>>>>> in the way I have experienced those philosophies. But that's the > > crux > > > >>>>>> for anyone. That we all think we're right. It's a contradtion to > > > >>>>>> believe you're wrong!! Even if you think you are wrong now about > > > >>>>>> something, an idea, an action - you are sitll thinking that you > > are > > > >>>>>> right, in that moment, about being wrong, in another moment! > > > >>>>> A favorite topic of mine is assessments because the dynamics can be > > very > > > >>>>> complex or simple and revealing, and much of it boils down to such > > > >>>>> logical statements. One key point is comprehension, if the matter > > or > > > >>>>> variables are beyond > > ... > > read more >>- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
