As you say....the modes are both only different methods of percieving perhaps....what i want to know orn...is when does an individual feel empowered....an individual...a will...an active will....what attributes to it...what conditions...is it more likely in a certain setting.....i hope i make sense
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 5:09 PM, ornamentalmind <[email protected]>wrote: > “i guess ..i meant a secular rather than a religious or theological > mode of > understanding things...the world.... “ – PSK > > Well, that does point towards an area of your beliefs so thanks for > this much. Perhaps you could be even more specific? > > As far as I’ve found out…reviewing human thought over the ages,… > secular and religious views often are at the very least intertwined. > > On the other hand, perhaps you are being much more literal when you > use the notion of “…mode of understanding things…”. If this is the > case, a more specific unpacking of what the two apparently (to you) > different modes would be of value, OK? > > I’ll suspend judgment until I hear more. > > > On Mar 7, 3:01 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > i guess ..i meant a secular rather than a religious or theological mode > of > > understanding things...the world.... > > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:21 PM, ornamentalmind > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “…revolution in knowledge and philosophy…” – PSK ??? > > > > > To continue the discussion, one would need to know what you mean here. > > > Would you unpack it a bit? > > > > > Before actually knowing what you mean, I see little if any > > > ‘revolution’ in this context. Yes, there is a process of change in > > > thought over the millennia yet such general ‘change’ doesn’t mean a > > > progression towards a more accurate view. Case in point – you are > > > apparently using the dialectical view of one view being in > > > contradiction with another. While many do apprehend in this way, in no > > > way is that an indicator of the accuracy of such a view. > > > > > As best as I can see, both can be known consubstantially. > > > > > On Mar 7, 2:25 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I was thinking .... i agree with what yuo guys say ....could it also > be > > > the > > > > revolution in knowledge and philosophy...when it was > questioned....what > > > > can an INdividual know.....it kind of pitts one against the whole in > this > > > > struggle to know...or salvation through knowledge...what say.... > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:01 PM, pol.science kid < > [email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > True we have come a long way..and the word has been taken for > > > > > granted....but i would like an opinion of each one of you ...on the > > > > > Sanctity of Freedom.... it is also my casual inference > > > > > that....individuality ...the modern obsession with it....how come > > > > > some primitive tribes...hold the community at a level above the > > > > > individual....while it is not quite so in our 'modernised'...or > rather > > > > > westernised world.....are there concepts of radicalised > individuality > > > > > in the oriental philosophy..... need your opoinions fellows > > > > > > -- > > > > \--/ Peace > > > > -- > > \--/ Peace > -- \--/ Peace
