Karl

Yes, that how it seemed to me from personal experience. I asked my wife to see if it resonated with her. I think I'm always challenging my own bias. I actually woke up early morning with a definition that radically altered my earlier definition (which I had struggled to reconcile)-so yes, it seemed to me I had already moved position. I laid it open for others to comment from their experiences. That's about all that is possible other than chopping off my head and grafting on a spare.

Yes.

It didn't seem like craziness at the time.

Indeed Stosh.

Nope, it's not happening. I'm just not interested in those things. They seem over complex explanations that I cannot relate to life. If it's economics or philosophy I'm fine, but mathematical concepts and abstractions seem remote.

Yes, I was nodding after about 3 paragraphs. I gritted my teeth and forced myself to get perhaps a 1/3rd of the way through then all the springs, cogs and sawdust flew out of my head. I remember such nightmares during electromagnetic field theory. The tutor would give us a problem which sounded simple. Magnetic field, particle on a string scenario. I truly thought I had it in about 6 lines and had several fellows agreeing with me. After 4 entire black boards full of tiny, almost indecipherable scribble I knew for certain I was better at wiring control cubicles than particle physics. Just too dumb I guess.

I don't understand what you mean.

Straight over my head. No idea what that was all about. Just acres of confusing equations which mean little or nothing to me. Sorry, I'm going to stick with what I can understand.

Can I buy one of your books Mr Marblehead. I need a lot of help from my self. :-)

Me neither. It also sounds bloody impossible. I don't go chasing material things to bring me happiness because I discovered years ago that they dont(that's not to say I don't like some of the things), but I do things (actions)that bring me happiness. When I do things that don't bring me happiness I conclude I'm doing something against my values and should stop doing that action. Makes life very simple. I got immense unhappiness from following spiritual practices, I concluded they weren't the right solution. Now I go with the flow as much as any normal person can.

That's how I see it, but it seems this is considered a pointless exercise because....well I don't really know ?...cleverer people tell us not to bother because we are confirming our own bias. "Don't go playing on the grass" "Why?" "If you have to ask then you shouldn't be playing on the grass" That seems to be what I hear ?

Yeah but 'thrifty' ? I can't believe Feyman actually used that phrase. What's more you want me to read all of Feynmans immense output, all his papers and books ? For what purpose ? I probably wouldn't understand more than a few percent at most. I've never been great at maths, barely passable, so you might as well tell a monkey to read nuclear physics for all the help it would be. :-)

Are you talking the plain action of physical clapping and the space between beats ? It's not the same as 'one hand clapping' though because there is permanent silence. It is just a version of a and non a. How can something exist that doesn't exist. It a logical loop that the mind cannot untangle and goes into a state of trance. In the trance state it is easy to bypass reasoning, then embed commands directly into the subconscious. I regard it as trespass unless the party knows exactly what the hypnotist is up to and consciously enters into an agreement to allow it. It was always the end question during goal setting visualisation. "What wouldn't you get if you didn't achieve it" ? The client is asked to answer without thinking in order to subconsciously affirm the visualisation. In other words give up all logical control and accept the programme you have just visualised. If you want to get the client on the hook, it would be easy to set easier goals and embed the idea that it was the hypnotist which was creating the conditions for success. I didn't do this, but I know some who earned fabulous sums of money by this trick. It's possible to embed commands within a sentence, a string of numbers, lists, or even by creating a mistake during a presentation, firing off the command (low tone, pace and lead) then pretend to suddenly notice the mistake and erase it. That way everything between noticing the mistake and erasing the mistake disappears from the mind of the audience. I know hundreds of these tricks to bypass the barriers of the mind. I had thought it was all for doing good and helping people, but I don't anymore, it's subterfuge.

I can tell you precisely what it is, but that wouldn't suit your concrete view, so touché my friend.

I would suggest you ignored my posts for the sake of your health.

Isn't suffering psychological discomfort just another version of suffering ? Haven't you just said suffering is suffering ? I can see where you were going but all we would agree on was that suffering was some sort of emotional anguish/psychological discomfort/mental trauma which, we all seem to agree on. I don't reject evidence, but I am at liberty to question theories just as you are. The difference is that it appears to annoy you that a lesser, more stupid mortal, without the requisite intelligence and education dares to argue with you. If I'm not prepared to read multiple volumes of hard physics then I'm considered by you to be an idiot amateur and should be ignored. Ie that what the Tao teaches ?

Thrifty ?

This is the same thing that every mystic says. 'It's beyond you' and 'we are superior' then a load of vapid commentary which contains nothing of substance. It's all mystical and unknowable by the less enlightened mind of course. If only I was more enlightened I would know the deep significance.

Of course it does, because the Koane goes nowhere, it's nonsense.

You think that ? Can you produce a better definition Brian. The idea isn't just to present negative criticism to support you own position but to have a go at producing something which is broad and narrow enough to serve. Standing on the side lines and saying 'that's crap' isn't getting us far.

That's precisely what I think. Unless we can get the words directly from Buddah then everything is second hand. I wouldn't decry Buddhism or Taoism, but the words have been through so many heads it's hard to know what the essential philosophy was.

Well, that's fine Nikolai, but why don't you explain it because it looks like a pile of existential woo woo to me. We are getting some truths here so let's further the investigation.

Light takes the route which takes the least time. A bit of calculus and the angle of incidence = the angle of reflection. As I read it. The calculus is a bit daunting, if like me you are not a very good mathematician it can be hard to follow, but it just boils down to sin i = sin r, which wouldn't make a mathematician very happy to just cancel out the trig function, but it works. I think Brian might be trying to add some quantum effect here ?

Exactly, the fallacy of the false alternative. Wisdom or happiness but not both, or some other option. The entire passage is riddled with logical fallacies. I stopped after about ten. There isn't a coherent argument, it's just a salesman selling his wares to the naive.

Can you explain that ? Something in the way Brian posted ie you can clap on your knee etc, but if we take clapping to mean two hands banging together then we can say that one hand makes no sound on its own, but, as the Koan specifically mentioned 'clapping' ( the act of banging hands together) we can remove the reference completely and say 'what is the sound of one hand?' Which out further reference is nonsense. It's a definition without a definition.