Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
My physical experience is my truth, and everything else is just a story, without me, nothing can exist... so nothing does exist without me, and with me everything is. Having a plan is being afraid to succeed. The best way of being is to accept that the world is perfect the way it is now, and any changes that happen is a change in the right direction, for me.
Looking at my physical reality I can see that I am always physically in the center of my self (self = me and everything physically around me), so being a self centered mind is in aliment with my physical reality. I am all about nothing, because something always ends, and nothing lasts forever. The word "illusion" comes from the energy of fear, so I prefer to use the word "reflection". (divine/divided = I/ALL)
Pay attention at 2:30 minutes in.
I think the better way for us to be fully present to ourselves and each other in the present moment is for human experience to be permitted to be whatever it is
I put Wilhelm Reich’s The Mass Psychology of Fascism here because you had put it here.brainpanhandler wrote:…I assume there are many here that would take issue with Harris and indeed I disagree with a number of things he has said. He's a pretty controversial figure.
But nothing we do in this world matters as much as "know thyself". Nothing. All else that is good, right and true flows from it.
Some of us are more broken than others. All forms of superstition lead to further fracturing.
From Perls I moved onto Wilhelm Reich who to this day I still believe had the answers to our woes. The way out though is an impossible passage from where we are.
As beautiful as the human race is we are just as monstrous. But that is not our nature.
Allegro wrote:-
I suppose I’ve been fortunate in that I seek art and music as well as contemplations such as the one Harris spoke toward the close of his lecture in the video. But not everyone is able to appreciate art and music, or even visualize one’s feet or ankles or knees or legs, brain, heart, breathing, etc., during that sort of contemplation.
-
So, what for me was missing in Harris’s talk? A story. A really good story to hang on to.
-
Atwood is a woman, and (all, some, most) women can have and usually do have different ways of describing life than (all, some, most) men. And, that’s what I enjoy about life. ’Gotta have a somewhat equal number of fe/males speaking to find that balance; that’s probable yet not always possible. Maybe that’s just me.
Thoughts?
~ A.
brainpanhandler wrote:I swear that I sometimes feel like I am the only one here willing to defend science.
When we assert that one number is greater than another number or one body greater than another body, we know very well what we mean. For in both cases we allude to unequal spaces, as shall be shown in detail a little further on, and we call that space the greater which contains the other. But how can a more intense sensation contain one of less intensity? Shall we say that the first implies the second, that we reach the sensation of higher intensity only on condition of having first passed through the less intense stages of the same sensation, and that in a certain sense we are concerned, here also, with the relation of container to contained ? This conception of intensive magnitude seems, indeed, to be that of common sense, but we cannot advance it as a philosophical explanation without becoming involved in a vicious circle. For it is beyond doubt that, in the natural series of numbers, the later number exceeds the earlier, but the very possibility of arranging the numbers in ascending order arises from their having to each other relations of container and contained, so that we feel ourselves able to explain precisely in what sense one is greater than the other. The question, then, is how we succeed in forming a series of this kind with intensities, which cannot be superposed on each other, and by what sign we recognize that the members of this series increase, for example, instead of diminishing : but this always comes back to the-inquiry, why an intensity can be assimilated to a magnitude.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 192 guests