dust

If the point of existence is happiness, or purpose, there are some guys in Iraq and Syria right now really living life to the fullest. They revel in death and destruction, they relish the subjugation of others including the enslavement and rape of women; their goal is to turn the world into their personal Allah-endorsed death party before the coming apocalypse. If this (a group of humans seeking and apparently finding happiness and purpose) doesn't appeal to us as a satisfactory 'point of existence', it might be good to qualify what we mean by 'happiness' or 'purpose' -- "the point is to be happy, but not at the expense of others", for example -- but then we end up leading ourselves down a rabbit hole of ifs and buts and failing to establish a single 'point of existence'. The answer is simple, though most will never admit it: The question is meaningless. There is no point. Whether you like it or not, all we are is randomly generated code. We have no designated purpose. We exist because we're good at existing, because our genetic code has made humans (and our fellow life-forms on Earth) very good at reproducing and surviving, which essentially means eating and breathing and having sex. I think it is very important to realize this before continuing. I think it's important to realize that your existence is entirely in your hands. If we assume free will is real (another debate) we acknowledge that we all decide for ourselves, and control our future as much as it is in our power to do so. And then we likely realize that there's no point in Allah, or God, or murder or rape. We figure out our desires and ideals based on logic and experience, and this tends to lead us to simply live a healthy, peaceful, mostly productive/creative/nondestructive, mostly happy life. But only because it seems like a good idea, not because it's the 'point of existence'.

Thanks. I knew he was very flexible though wasn't aware of such a talk. Watching now!

Cool video. I have seen it once before. Not sure what she's actually saying half the time, though. "The inclusivity of a species' abundance becomes apparent as we enter into this vast and mysterious world of fluid." ...? Either way, these kind of movements are something to work on for sure.

What I was going to say has been said in pieces. I will link them together just for fun. -- the ones that began our whole existence, starting with the genome. Each genome that governs our behaviour is like a piece of computer code. And with such curious and powerful brains,

I've been trying to implement a more regular, throughout-the-day approach to stretching, with the idea that a small but frequent dose will be easier on the body and more likely to initiate a more permanent change. But I'm not very good at remembering.... Yes, it is slow. And impatience isn't helpful. But I've had to push away from being too patient, I think. I'm reading the PDF now..

Well I'm curious

Can anyone offer insight into what I've been told is called 'sinew stretching'? The way I've been showed it, it seems a little like PNF. A partner gently pushes the limb into the stretched position, while the person being stretched simultaneously pushes against the stretch -- but only enough so that the limb/muscle in question moves very slowly into the stretch. For example if I want to stretch hamstrings, I lie down on floor/table and a partner lifts my leg up, pushing it gently but firmly towards my torso, as I push back as if trying to return my leg to the floor/table. But I never push back so hard as to prevent the leg being stretched. Is this along the lines that anyone else has practiced?

..........

Wow. It will be a while before I can do the claw!! (one day...) As most people, I still spend too much time sitting here in a chair..maybe I should invest in a stool. Or build one... It's been a long time since I did tai chi. These waist moves involve a lot of bending, twisting, etc..?

Yes, I think this is exactly it. Perhaps if I had started with ballistic stretching at the beginning it would have gone badly, but because I had been stretching for so many months I had certainly developed a sense of my limits. I can kinda see why a physio would warn people away from ballistic in general -- there's probably a liability issue, when people have no body-awareness and go too far as you say, and hurt themselves. And it's certainly not to be recommended for stretching the back! For spinal mobility I've been trying a few things, though it's going pretty slowly. What kind of things did your physio recommend?

Breathing out and relaxing into a stretch feels pretty great, though I think there's a limit to how far it gets me. Haven't tried it with breath hold first though. I assume the breath-holding is influenced or based on Wim Hof's methods? I will probably try it. Is there some reasoning behind it? Oh, I forgot to mention non-stretching methods for flexibility. I have been taking one hot bath per week recently, and it certainly relaxes me though I've yet to decide if it's helping with long-term flexibility.

Alan Watts changed my perspective a lot early on. Can't be sure now, so long ago...! but I think stumbling across his lectures/books when I was in my late teens first got me looking deeper into Eastern philosophy. Without his particularly accessible and logical take on all the Eastern stuff, I'd probably have ignored them in favour of the Western stuff we were being taught already and missed out on some serious ideas. I remember studying Plato, Kant, Mill, Marx, Sartre, Descartes, Locke, and Russell, among others, but not a one had the same long-term effect as the TTC. Though maybe that's cos I had no idea what the TTC was talking about...(and still don't..) Either way, if it hadn't been for both Alan and the TTC (and a little bit of weed) I would surely not be quite the same person right now. Also On the Road when I was about 16.

I've been practically penniless for a decent part of a long time. It's been in the times of a relative lack of money -- times when I'm less willing to go out and spend frivolously, less happy to lead a life of expense, less inclined to pay people for services even if those services might benefit me -- that I've been more content to sit at home, often alone, and work on things I wouldn't have bothered with otherwise, to teach myself to do something or practice something long forgotten. In my opinion, meditation can take numerous forms. Cultivating concentration, mindfulness, awareness, and self-awareness can be done through practicing art, exercise, study, or a number of other things -- if you approach them in the right way. The key, I think, is to focus on the process, not the result. The process is the meditation. Maybe this is the kind of 'simple practice' you ask for. Could be learning to draw, learning a handstand, studying the contents of the DDJ, figuring out a mathematics problem, whatever. Something like learning Tai Chi or a specific meditative technique will require a teacher, but many things do not. And I think it's useful to know how to learn without being led, without relying on a human teacher. When you are at work, or at school, the tasks you are set always have a goal -- you necessarily focus on a deadline, a grade, a result of some sort. If you're poor, with time alone at home (or outside), you can get lost in a process, using the Dao as your guide.

Surely that would be a reasonable technique? Pull the scabbard down as you pull the sword up. Tying suchly with cords would allow some manipulation of the scabbard without letting it flop all over the place. Sorry, Taomeow. I know you're not asking for speculation from the untrained clueless. But it's an interesting topic...

For a tattoo? Whatever it's for, as someone who loves Chinese characters (and, in case it is a tattoo, someone who loves good tattoos) and in the interest of all, you can find some excellent ancient calligraphy on http://www.shufazidian.com/ Just paste in the character you want (in this case 慈 ) and choose a writing style from the dropdown menu.

Well, yes. I was trying to refrain from my exasperated/angry tone, because it doesn't usually help my case. But you've said pretty much what I wanted to say. I almost linked this http://listverse.com/2014/02/04/10-evil-crimes-of-the-british-empire/ and various other examples of British atrocities and wrongdoings, but decided to try and be more moderate, mostly pointing out the fact that the article was taken out of context. Well, the cat's out of the bag now! To be sure, though, China is still pretty indefensible in many areas, both at home and abroad... but abroad, no more so than anyone else, really. They haven't invaded any countries for a few decades now (the same not being said for certain Western powers..)

Perhaps you should make a habit of reading articles past the first paragraph. "But that was in 2007, when Mr Sata, as leader of the Patriotic Front, then Zambia's main opposition party, was eager to tap into growing resentment against Chinese investors.. ... Over the past decade, the Chinese have invested over $2 billion in Zambia, the GDP of which is only $16 billion. More than half of that came in last year. And China is committed to pouring in billions more. There are now about 300 Chinese companies in Zambia, most of them privately owned, employing around 25,000 locals. Standards differ: some companies treat their workers badly, but most of the big state-owned companies genuinely seek to respect local labour laws. "We are learning," says Mr Zhou, with an apologetic smile. In the past, he admits, mistakes were made. An explosion at a Chinese explosives plant in 2005, which killed 51 Zambian workers, and last year's shooting of protesting Zambian miners by Chinese managers at the Collum coal mine, wounding 11, certainly tarnished China's image. The Chinese are exasperated by the way in which they have been singled out for criticism, particularly in the Western press. Mr Zhou says this is mainly due to Western fears of China's economic and political resurgence. But cultural and linguistic barriers also play a role. The Chinese, most of whom do not speak English, tend to be reserved, to live separately in compounds behind high security walls and to go straight home after work rather than prop up the bar with the locals. Generally hard-working, disciplined and dedicated to getting the job done, they are often puzzled by what they see as the Zambians' often lackadaisical attitude to life." They mention a couple of nasty things the Chinese have done. Perhaps it would interest you to look into the history of Northern Rhodesia under British rule. Nobody should be defending China as a political or corporate entity, but in comparison European colonialism was still worse. The Portuguese essentially introduced the slave trade on a large scale, then the British went along and started grabbing minerals and disenfranchising the native population, killing quite a few people along the way. And that was an extremely tame version of British Imperialism.

Veezel: Are you Christian? Matthew (and Luke): "Judge not, that you not be judged." John: “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” James: "If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless." dwai and BES: Don't we see the irony in, in demanding tolerance of religion, asking that a Christian keep his opinions to himself? Christianity is judgemental. Despite all those quotes just above, the whole Abrahamic thing is essentially about judging one's own religion, one's own god, to be the only real one. In fact, Veezel wasn't judging people but judging the gods of Hinduism, and the right to do that is surely an essential part of his religion...?

Well fuck me sideways. Are you fucking kidding? In the post just above, I outlined just a couple of the things he has done and said that were overtly wrong. Real quotes. Look at just some of the federal lawsuits he's been involved in. "Evil incarnate" !! It is AMAZING to me that you can focus so closely on this particular HIllary issue whilst ignoring the multitude of things Donald has done which are at least as damaging to other people. You, my friend, are the one going by a gut reaction! Seems to be? So feelings have indeed replaced facts now, then? Crime: https://www.aei.org/publication/at-a-time-when-violent-crime-in-the-us-is-the-lowest-in-a-generation-why-is-there-an-epidemic-of-police-violence/ The graph shows a steady decrease. 2014 was lower again (365 per 100,000). FACT is, it's lower. Your feelings don't come into it. Obama: No need to question. It has been proven. Hillary: That's not even close to the same as wanting them "all released" #4: Please. Like Donald, you have neglected to explain what you're talking about. What are these enemies doing? Where are they? Prove it? Tens of thousands? #5: The figure is not even close to what he said. Hillary: That's not the point, at all. Another illogical deflection. Trump: I don't know what you mean. Hillary: Right, she might hold some responsibility, just as any politician of the last few decades might be said to have some kind of responsibility for current affairs. But she is not single-handedly responsible for anything. The growth of ISIS (1999-present) predates her position (2009-2013). Don't be so ridiculous. Trump: The point is, he LIED. He claims to be the earliest to criticize the war, but he was not. It's an outright lie. He is a LIAR. He is an opportunistic egomaniac. He is a con man. Fear of him in power is entirely rational.

I can kind of see why the idea of an independent businessman in the White House attracts people. He's not a politician, he hasn't been "pimped out", his mind might not be corrupted in the way a politician's is, he's not at the behest of certain people, etc. But you cannot claim that he is not dishonest. He is a liar and a cheat. He lies all the time. Every interview or speech I see of him, he's spouting either dangerous or just wildly silly nonsense. And his professional history is one of much dishonesty. Look, for example at Trump University. Look at his refusal to disclose tax returns. Look at how many lawsuits he's been involved in (plaintiff in 1,900 and defendant in 1,450). Look at the outright lies he regularly says: "Crime is rising." No, it's not "The Obama administration was actively supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq, the terrorist group that became the Islamic State." No, it wasn't. It "is Hillary Clinton's agenda" to "release the violent criminals from jail. She wants them all released." No, she doesn't. "Look, we are at war with these people and they don't wear uniforms. … This is a war against people that are vicious, violent people, that we have no idea who they are, where they come from. We are allowing tens of thousands of them into our country now." What the fuck does any of this mean? "Frankly, (Hillary Clinton) doesn’t do very well with women." Yes, she does. The 2016 federal omnibus spending bill "funds illegal immigrants coming in and through your border, right through Phoenix." No, the opposite. "Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. The number's probably 28, 29, as high as 35. In fact, I even heard recently 42 percent." Ludicrous. President Barack Obama "wants to take in 250,000 (people) from Syria." No. "I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering" as the World Trade Center collapsed. No. "Hillary Clinton invented ISIS with her stupid policies. She is responsible for ISIS." How? "I was among the earliest to criticize the rush to war (in Iraq), and yes, even before the war ever started." No, he supported it. etc etc. More can be found here. Compare with Clinton here.

I know (hope!) you're being ironic, but there are people saying this for real, and people believing them. In the video I just posted, Trump is shown at the RNC actually saying: "Nobody knows the system better than me. Which is why I alone can fix it."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbV4HdYfrlo

Assuming for a moment that he is being "open", does him being "open" automatically make his opinions worthy of respect?

Sam Harris talks on Trump and Clinton, among other things. I'm trying not to post in Off Topic any more, but I figure a video can speak for me. The interview is an hour two hours, but worth it. Harris is always worth listening to. Even though no two people will always agree on everything, I agree with him on a lot. I think he approaches things from the kind of balanced starting point and with the cool, measured compassion that I wish everyone would. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EarzbmO3oU?t=52m50s (Have linked starting essentially at the beginning of the conversation about Trump/Clinton, but to get the full idea the interview should be listened to in its entirety.)

Actually, looking at descriptions of the Perfect Man in ZZ, I think he would let things be. I guess I'm not a Perfect Man! "The perfect man has (the charge of) the world - is not the charge great? and yet it is not sufficient to embarrass him. He wields the handle of power over the whole world, and yet it is nothing to him. His discrimination detects everything false, and no consideration of gain moves him. He penetrates to the truth of things, and can guard that which is fundamental. So it is that heaven and earth are external to him, and he views all things with indifference, and his spirit is never straitened by them. He has comprehended the Dao, and is in harmony with its characteristics; he pushes back benevolence and righteousness (into their proper place), and deals with ceremonies and music as (simply) guests: yes, the mind of the perfect man determines all things aright." "He may be described as acting and yet not relying on what he does, as being superior and yet not using his superiority to exercise any control. But now you would make a display of your wisdom to astonish the ignorant; you would cultivate your person to make the inferiority of others more apparent; you seek to shine as if you were carrying the sun and moon in your hands." Those of us currently poisoning the river feel it far less than those who live by the river. Nowadays, the river-dweller and river-poisoner can be half a world apart. If a stranger comes to a stream I'm drinking from and pisses in it, I shan't be expected to let it be! There is no "proper balance", I don't think. Only preference. Yes, these are the technologists I was talking about. Those who presume to know how to 'fix' things, which really means changing things unnecessarily. Then their fix needs a fix, and so on, and things spiral out of control. It might still be early enough to 'fix' the root of our problems, if people were only willing to understand. To rewrite ch18 a little, When the Dao is dispensed with, and knowledge and cleverness come out, we really begin to fuck things up.