Sir Darius the Clairvoyent

Thank you @Trunk!

Im not sure what i want, but mat is kind of wack… NaturaNaturans is nice. Could any moderator please help me with this? : ) it translates to «nature naturing» or «nature creating» for those wondering

@Nungali I havent dug up your old posts, but i think i have a better understanding of true will. We, or anything, are not seperate from nature, right. Nature creates and destroys and transforms. The will is who we truly are, a being, and individuated part of an superorganism, and if we are free from external influences we will be/express ourselves fully and authentically. Just like how a flower flourishes if its left alone in its natural enviorment. What do you think?

Deus sive natura - God, or in other words, nature Spinoza

I apologize in advance, since this is not directly helpfull for your question, but i got to admit: ive never really understood the deal with meditation… its basically just closing your eyes, is it not? I do that every night! Sure, sometimes i find it helpfull, when i need to «ground» myself, but all in all i think it is kind of boring, i dont have the dicipline for prolonged practice and i cant say it have given me much of value. What has it given you people? And do you belive it is possible to reach a state of complete silence/no inner voice?

@kakapso i think that perspective (darwinism, gathering knowledge in order to deal with entropy) is perfectly valid. I do differ on some aspects tho. That we are wired to reproduce, doesnt automatically make it a virtue or a goal, so to speak. But by all means, reproduction is an essential part of life, and it do provide value. But i think im more on the «qaulity over qauntity» camp. This far, i reason that human (and plant and animal) flourishing is what i value the most, and therefor my personal answer to the «meaning of life.» Also, when we are talking about the universe, dying stars etc, that is so far out of our controll, understanding, capabilities and time that i dont bother thinking about it. It is not like we are going to do surgery to a dying star. But maybe im just overthinking. I mean, what is the purpose of a flower? Meaningless question, isnt it. edit: does a higher purpose need a belief in God in order to exist? Edit 2: adding a qoute here from a book i am about to start reading. «Etikk» by Spinoza. This is how it opens: After experience had taught me that all the things which regularly occur in ordinary life are empty and futile, and I saw that all the things which were the cause or object of my fear had nothing of good or bad in themselves, except insofar as [my] mind was moved by them, I resolved at last to try to find out whether there was anything which would be the true good, capable of communicating itself, and which alone would affect the mind, all others being rejected—whether there was something which, once found and acquired, would continuously give me the greatest joy, to eternity (TdIE 1). Edit 3: im only on page 8, foreword by Ragnar Næss, but it seems very relevant: He concludes that what can ensure truth, freedom, and happiness is a true starting point that can serve as the basis for further reflection. For "method is nothing but reflective knowledge, or an idea of an idea... a good method is the one that shows how thought can be guided in accordance with the standard provided by true idea."

I agree and support this. The problem however, is that if some ethnicities adopts a more peacefull and tolerant perspective, while others do not, they can be outcompetet by the more «egoic» one.

(tbh i have barley skimmed this thread, but i think flow is the term/state you are searching for?)

But If we sumarise some of the thread, it seems the concept of eudomnia/perfecting our nature/doing our duty/being us self are themes we agree upon? I am not sure this question is possible to answer, but it could be an interresting to take this one step further. Is there a purpose/function/higher meaning by achieving this? Lets illustrate: a hammer is used to hit nails. A good hammer does this effectivley. Lets say the nails purpose was to be used to hang up a piece of art. But is there a purpose of the art piece? (Speaking metaphoically ofc.)

Yes ive heard similar stories from the pasific islanders. They remember song that include stuff so foreign that they must be very old, in addition it helps navigating etc. You are right about bhagavad gita being a song. If im not mistaken, gita is sanskrit for song. If you look at much of the earliest epics youll also find that they often rhyme. "When they had sung the hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives" Matthew 26.30 this one is from 3th century greece. It is like a time machine. Same goes for nursey rhymes, sayings... Let me share with you my fav folk song: And this is the oldest written norse song we know about: The norse had «rap battles,» called flyting: Flyting or fliting (Classical Gaelic: immarbág) (Irish: iomarbháigh) (lit. "counter-boasting"),[3] is a contest consisting of the exchange of insults between two parties, often conducted in verse.[4] The Norse gods Freyja and Lokiflyte in an illustration (1895) by Lorenz Frølich Not to mention islam, that is almost entirely oral, is it not? Ive heard it claim that every muslim can recite the entire quran by the age of… very, very young. As you know, they also claim to have an unbroken chain back to the prophet, and If im not mistaken, its pretty well in tact?

@Nungali i have a segment about that to in my journal, hope its entertaining and that im not boring you to death:

Good post. I agree with the Genius segment - true beauty is created out of inspiration, and god knows where that comes from. On finding your «will»… we have had a little convo about this on pm (skillset, inspiration, what gives you a sense of meaning etc.), but do you think you could expand on it? And please dont tell me to burry 50$ or sacrifice a goat, im not ready 🙏

@thelerner agreed 💯 ___________________ feeling inspired tonight: Jesus said you know the tree by the fruit. Wouldnt the same apply to actions (the tree) and the result (the fruit? ___________________ As Jordan B. Peterson wrote in "12 Rules for Life": "The scientific world of matter can be reduced, in some sense, to its fundamental constituent elements: molecules, atoms, even quarks. However, the world of experience has primal constituents, as well. These are the necessary elements whose interactions define drama and fiction. One of these is chaos. Another is order. The third (as there are three) is the process that mediates between the two, which appears identical to what modern people call consciousness. It is our eternal subjugation to the first two that makes us doubt the validity of existence — that makes us throw up our hands in despair and fail to care for ourselves properly. It is a proper understanding of the third that allows us the only real way out." _______________ Sharing a segment from my journal: Dragon Slayer In "The Horse, the Wheel, and Language" (p. 134), David Anthony describes the warrior, the third figure, Trito: "After the world was made, the sky-gods gave cattle to the third man (Trito). But the cattle were treacherously stolen by a three-headed, six-eyed serpent (Negation). The third man entreated the storm god to help get the cattle back. Together they went to the cave (or mountain) of the monster, killed it (or the storm god killed it alone), and freed the cattle. Trito became the first warrior. He recovered the wealth of the people, and his gift of cattle to the priests ensured that the sky gods received their share in the rising smoke of sacrificial fires. This ensured that the cycle of giving between gods and humans continued." The myth of the hero who ventures into the unknown, slays the monster, and is rewarded is so ingrained in us that it requires no explanation: we know. Hercules and Hydra, Beowulf and Grendel, Sigfried the dragon slayer. This has its roots in the Indo-European tradition. A myth is more than a list of causes and effects. In "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" (1949), Joseph Cambell wrote the following: "A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered, and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man." The dragon, the ultimate predator: a flying, fire-breathing reptile guarding priceless treasures. It makes little logical sense, but stories of dragons and heroes have fascinated millions of people for thousands of years. The story of the hero who ventures into the unknown, confronts his greatest fears, and triumphs, both personally and for the good of the community, is an ideal. Something we strive for, a truth. The ideal is, in my opinion, the core of storytelling. It tells us about attitude, courage, and justice. Conquer fear, and you will be rewarded.

Remind me of Zoroastrianism. Ahura Mazda represents truth, beauty, and creation, and his (ours?) battle against Angra Mainy. Good thoughts leads to good words, and good words leads to good action. With fire and truth we shall defeat the forces of evil/the lie haha.

Earlier in life, i used to set concrete, long term goals. Lets say, for example, that I want to loose 10kg and be able to run 5km in 20 min. Than, I would ask my self when have free time on my hand: what is going to lead me close to my goal: videogames or a hike? Reading a book or watching porn? That method worked well for me. I have also asked some highly motivated and successfull friends where they find their motivation, and they usually answer my setting clear goals and that doing a good job is inherently better than doing it badly, or not doing it all. The science is pretty clear on the impact of goalsetting as well. But i am still looking for "the highest goal," the top of the pyramid.

You raise great and interresting points, and id like to hear your take on it aswell. Im kind of short of time, so in this post, I will probably not give the questions the time and contenplation it deserves. Not to mention how wast the topic is, and how many traditions and individuals who approach it differently. Anyway, lets give it a go. So, hoe did Aristotle define rationality and man? He believed that the distinguishing feature of humans is their capacity for reason. Rationality enables humans to think, learn, and make choices based on moral and ethical principles. Rationality, for Aristotle, involved the ability to deliberate and make choices. Humans could consider various options, weigh their consequences, and make decisions based on their rational judgment. Rationality was the means by which individuals could understand and apply ethical principles, such as courage, justice, and temperance, to their lives. The ultimate goal of this, was eudomnia. (some help from chatgpt here) What I think is just as important, is the concept of akrasia (non-management). This means to me one of two things: either you are being controlled by others, or you lack the discipline yourself, because, if you are free and disciplined, why would you act against your own will/whats best for you? For a action to be virtuous, it has (according to my understanding), be done for the sake of it, and not because of fear of punishment or external reward. (chatgpt) I am writing a paper on wisdom, leadership, and motivation, so this topic is closely related. So, rationality determines the correct action in a given situation. This is pretty much identical to (one of the many) definitions of wisdom: (wiki) Let's say you're having dinner, and the choice between something fresh and healthy, and something unhealthy, quick, cheap, and delicious. What is the correct (rational/wise) choice? It would depend on your goals, right? If your goals is to feel good, be healthy and in shape, look good, etc, then the healthy option is the correct option. If your goal is to feel pleasure, have a feast with loved ones, and enjoy the moment, there is a case to be made for the second option. For Aristotle, what was on top of the pyramid was eudaimonia: it was good in itself, and if ought to use our rationality to make choices in line with our nature/purpose, illustrated belove: I have a problem with this, or rather... a small disagreement. (1) I don't belive that these five aspects are fundamental for every human, in every situation, all the time. Also, they sometimes come in conflict with each other. That's why I defined wisdom as the ability to balance different, sometimes opposing, needs and interests. To illustrate: short-term vs. long-term goals, your personal vs that of your employer, your responsibility to society at large etc... The thing is, humans are complicated, and I don't know whats on top of the hierarchy of values (that's why I made this thread). But if we drop the human aspect and look at this beautiful anecdote, I think we are getting somewhere: I agree with the thinker, do you remember his name? Im not sure this works in English, but the Norwegian word for virtue is "dyd." Dyd is related to dydighet, witch means functioning (something like that, anyway.) So a thing is good if it serves its functions, is one possible answer. Forgive me for quoting the most used and abused cliches, but here we go: "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." “Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the present.” Meditations by Marcus Aurelius:

I am doing some writng for my self, and so far, this is the closest answer to nihilism ive found: For him (Aristotle), humans were the rational beings. Through reason and virtuous action, we can approach the perfection of our nature. This involved friendship, self-realization, health, prosperity – things that are good in themselves. Virtuous (arete) action leads to eudaimonia. This is not a feeling like happiness, but a state of human flourishing. The opposite here would be akrasia (lack of self-control).

Simallarily christians are "born again." Jesus said that eternal life comes from knowing the Father, so in once sense i can agree with you, it is not all the kingdom of God, as all havent received "the spirit." Luke 17:21: “Once having been asked by the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied,’ The kingdom of God does not come from your careful observation, nor will people say, ‘Here it is’ or “There it is’ because the Kingdom of God is within you.” What can i say, the text seems to open for many interpertations ___________ Whats more interresting then what the flesh symbolises, is the wine/blood In the book "the immortality key," it is argued convincingly that it refers to the wine of Dionysus. Same goes for Soma, beer with urgot, various mushrooms and the mead of poetry: it is an experience that grants death before death/being born again/awakening/ressuraction/immortality, not a book (for the most part, all though i have gotten a lot from various texts and conversations as well). Pictures in spoiler. The last one depicting Oding transformed as an eagle, shitting some of the mead of poetry down at humanity on his escape after having retrieved the mead from a couple of dwarfs

I would just say kingdom. (Kingdom (kingdom) kingdom) I am not claiming that i have the one and only truth. I havent read a lot of the bible either. I am not to interrested in how x church says scripture should be interpet, from beggining to end, either. But there is a lot of gold in there. If we call it monist or pantheism or any or any other term is ultimatley not that important. But when you ask me what flesh symbolies… it symbolies flesh. Its not even a symbol, flesh is flesh. And Christ literally said he had become flesh (Thomas 33). You asked about enlightenment as well. I feel like a dick saying this, but i feel i have «awakened.» Useing these terms makes it sound much grander and mystic than what i belive it is. For me it just mean realising that what you are, is fundementaly awarness. But it is not, i belive, something you can reason you way into, but an sudden insight… «gnosis». http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html I cant tell you what Gods will is, or If he exists for sure. I can only tell you what these sayings mean to me.

The flesh is christ

more qoutes for you: Friedrich Nietzsche i often find that twice as much can be said with half the Words. Its more about dropping the bs and getting to the core.

Id like to be a cat in the next one. They are so… zen.

A little of topic here, but come to think of something: according to christ the only unforgivable sin is denying the holy spirit, the divine inside us. edit, continuing: so, If eternity is now, heaven and hell is eternal, the holy spirit fell from heaven like a dove and the only unforgivable sin is denying it: shouldnt we conclude that embracing it is what leads to higher conciousness?

Image didnt work: edit: i dont have a source, but ive read somewhere that the concept or the trinity is older than christianity.

I see it is as the trinity. The father (god), the son (the logos incarnate) and the divine with us (the wholy spirit). An analogy would be that me and my brother is both from the same dad. We are separeres, bur in one sense we are one. Does that makes sense to you, Daniel?