leth

From this perspective it seems that truth is not absolute but rather a concept of something which we regard as a correct view of reality, is that what you mean?

Is that the only charecteristics it has? Why is it not simply called "an absloute" or 'The Absolute' in that case?

What is truth?

Over a hunderd years old and will make you enlightened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centennial_Light

I've been looking forward to this with anticipation and I really like th result, the teas you carry sounds really interesting, I'll make sure to sample next time I order tea. I sincerely hope everything goes well for you in this endeavour.

GB-39 might work, but it might also not work, there are plenty of points that could work. But it's agross misunderstanding of TCM theory if you'd think that one particular point can always cure any one symptom.

In TCM there many different underlying causes for tinnitus. (but in general liver or/and kidney energies are involved somehow) Therefore it is not really possible to make a single treatment for all forms of tinnitus but rather each case must be treated individually.

Many of the healthies and long living people on the planet also smoke. The idea that if the healthiest and long living people do something then that mush be good is a rather problematic idea. What one should compare are the difference between those that do and don't do that thing. Of course you have to regard other factors aswell. There is actually no conclusive evidence that it really does reduce heart disease. And even if it does many argue that the benefits are not worth the problems it causes.

This tells us nothing about the health effect of alchohol.

I'm going to elaborate on the idea of teachers and ther scepsis to their own ability. Many good things have been said here and i could reply to everyone but i just agree with you and simple acknowledge the wisdom in many posts in this thread by writing this sentance instead. A teacher lacking scepsis to ones own achievments, is a dead giveaway of a false teacher. But there are many teachers with false modesty aswell. A good teacher should be reasonable and able to discusss the various points of their practice, show both great knowledge but also great patience in explaining their practice and their knowledge. As many have pointed out here aswell, we must be good students aswell, we must be polite and discuss things from our own perspective and view, and ask so that we may understand. It is this exchange of understanding and reason that is a sign of a good master and student relationship. There are many fals students, in a sense false students are the ones that become false masters.

Then what is knowledge too you? If there is no such thing as knowledge from a pure descriptive point of view, then there is no point in using the word either. Thus the statement that you have no knowledge makes no sense. We define knowledge as something which we have enought faith or confidence in to be true. We are inherently unable to fully understand ontological truths using our current logic. If we are to define the word knowledge so that any knowledge be an ontological truthbearer we can never know whether we have knowledge or not. It therefore makes more sense to deinfe knowledge as something that is not an ontological truthbearer but rather something we are confident enough through our reason to consider real. For instance I consider my language knowledge, even hough I have no absolute proof of it's ontology. So knowing is simply something that is reasonable to regard as real. I have reason to regard the fact that i am now writing on a forum on the internet and that other people are discussing with me via this form. This is knowledge for me. But if you define knowledge to deconstruct this you also deconstruct the value of using the word entierly, thus rendering any discussion on knowledge (including epistemological discussion and perhaps even metaepistemological discussion) inherently pointless.

As long as your spine is straight, it should be fine. You can try sitting on a chair perhaps?

This can be interpreted to a view of Daoists views on non-belief, it is however not very clear and can be interpreted in other ways aswell.

You seem to describe dogmaticism or some form of negative form of trivialism. Scepticism is characterised and defined as critical thinking and questioning, and it is rather confusing that you use word to describe the opposite of it's most common colliqual definition.

(Hard atheism is contrary to sceptic thought.) Scepticism is an important part of Daoist thought, so perhaps that explains why so many people in a forum for discussing Doaist thought are also sceptics. As for belief it is a complex concept, and from a Daoist perspective it can be said that one should only believe by not believing. Which might explain why so many people are non-believers in a forum for discussing Daoist thought. But this of course is a matter of perspective.

The highest spiritually achieved teacher should be sceptical to it's own abilities.

Sometime the silliest things are the best things to say, and sometimes the most important things to say or hear aswell. The formatting seems to be lost when i try to quote you, so i will simply just conclude that i agree with your points and how important that understanding is. And add that it is rather hard to learn how to discirminate a good teacher from a bad teacher and that this ability is a very important one that should be taught out to anyone that shows interest in learning from a master. EDIT: I would also like to add how hard it can be to know ones own achievements, and that one should always be sceptical in regarding ones own achievements and rather focus on practice or the road ahead.

It is hard to make such comarpisons since the view of 'sophia' in hellenistic philosphy was very varied, there was no one common interpretion of 'sophia', however there were certainly a lot of exchange of ideas between hellenistic philosophers and indian systems of thought, especially during the later part of the era of hellenistic philosophy when the Indo-greek kindgdom was established. We know that some schools of thought of hellenistic philosophy was heavily inspired by Indian schools of thought and there might very well be hellenistic philosophers that would agree with some definition of Jñāna and/or Prajña of that time. However it should be noted that the terms Jñāna and Prajña were discussed and had various interpretions in different Indian schools of thought during that era aswell.

Yes it's very common, and probably the reason why there is so much reaction towards following systems of belief. It is important to be sceptical. While there is a lot of effort from the Indian government to educate people and help them able to discern such tricks, there is still a lot of work to be done, and such cults are still common there. But there is definiyely progress made from a societal point of view. But in the end it education is the path to end such decievers. And there are countless more of them. It is a rather efficient way to earn money in a sense.

Yes, but there is a difference in being part of a cult and following a false teacher.

Figs are great! Also the importance of getting what is in season is not to be forgotten.

Birth control pills are really bad for you, man.

Yes. And an OS that taks it into practice to report you is inherently less secure than one which needs active breaching to pull that information out of. Breaking into a computer is also illegal in most jursidiction as oppsed to getting information sent to you by consent. (atleast in the legal sense, most people wold probably not agree to the terms of using such an OS because it requires your consent to propagate this information) Well, cryptography does make things harder, and even though NSA has some supposed way of more or less easily sniff ssl, the more it is used the more active and direct the gathering of information must become. And that is one of the many reason to why we should premier encrypted transmissions before unencrypted. Secondly the more widespread crptography is the easier it is for those in jursidiction that does not allow freedome of expression to express themselves freely. By premiering cryptography when living in a country were we do have freedom of expression we not only prevent that freedom of expression to be suppressed in thos places but also help people in places that lack freedom of expression to be opressed. As an example the use of https over http and the fact that ssl i widely spread is one of many factors that allow people to leap over the great firewall. You do realise that the major way they do this is to have contracts with big companies to collect data for them? In a sense you're describing the very core of the problems with operative systems that reports the users activities.

I recommend not using google at all.

So everything excludes those things that no longer eixst and those things that have yet to come? It is inherently temporal in it's definition? Is a cupt in any way connected to the future existance of that cup?