Owledge

You can read Cleary; you can read Wilhelm. Neither of those translations is wong. The former is written somewhat more cleary, the latter is richard in meaning. Personally I prefer the Pun version. (Not that I'm a punvert!)

@mike 134 Watch these:

Associations become concepts of the mind. The mind assumes that those ideas are true. Belief in truth eventually makes something manifest as 'real' when there are enough minds sharing the same belief and not enough minds that counter them with disbelief. So far goes my theory based on what I was shown during my ayahuasca trips. Of course, it could also be that the same applies to this idea of what I supposedly have been shown. Kinda mindblowing, because that angle is a theory that at the same time proves and disproves itself. Can you still follow?

They are your eyes, you know. ;-)

The truth will set you free... ... from your mind.

Very philosophically controversial. That view could lead to addiction to positive feelings during meditation. You might have to work through negative emotions in order to let them go. You know, catharsis, healing crisis, releasing suppressed stuff. On the other hand, that view can lead to bias, too.

Depression has its roots in the mind. When you take ayahuasca, your mind will process the experiences made. A depressive mind will process them from that standpoint. I think a crucial part of the healing procedure is to set the mind aside, and that might be more difficult in a depressed state. The Santo Daime church gives you a questionnaire and wants to know whether you have been treated for depression. It's an added risk. I think if you have a tendency to take what you see during a psychedelic trip as literal truth, it might not be wise to do it. It's the stuff flying under the radar that does the profound healing.

Yeah, Monty Python style. Could work. Bridgekeeper: What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow? King Arthur: What do you mean? An African or European swallow? Bridgekeeper: Huh? I... I don't know that. ........ Auuuuuuuugh.

I noticed the same thing, and I'd go further and say that that's not a sub-group of philosophy, but folly. As I see it, that branch of philosophy often talks about problems that are made up by themselves. For example, words are human creations, given a pre-defined meaning, and then philosophers might talk about those words as if they had some objective truth in them, despite them being mere meanings. Sometimes western philosophy is like talking about whether 1+1 equals 2.

But if the marine says he doesn't want to sound too progressive, then I guess that weapons market situation is somehow part of core American values. And in a way it makes sense. "War is business" is certainly part of US conservatism. Correction: neoconservatism. Darn, "neo" is kinda not conservative. ;-)

As always, the question not asked by the media is if the shooter took antidepressant medication. A side effect of those can be violent and/or suicidal tendencies. (Quite ironic.) When an incident like this happened in Germany (Erfurt or Winnenden), the only thing I found in the media mentioning this point was one article in a Swiss online newspaper. My impression is that in all of Europe, German media is among the worst - most censored and propaganda-filled.

The most funny/sad line in that video for me is when the U.S. marine guy talks about how people buy and sell weapons and maybe kill each other with it later on, and then says: "I don't want to sound too, like, liberal, or anything." Liberal comes from the latin word for "book" and means freedom through being educated about what's going on, but even if you don't know that, every half-intelligent person should be able to draw the connection between the word "liberal" and "(statue of) liberty". That marine is adding to the feeling of the whole thing being a parody that the commentator mentioned earlier. There you have it: US soldiers are actually afraid of coming off like valuing core American values like liberty, or people thinking you understand politics. Also, if he meant the word "liberal" in connection to the political party line in the USA, then it's even more messed up, because that free-market neoliberalism allows stuff like those weapons conventions to exist. I could write more about just that one remark in the video, but it's already all in there. It's a fucking joke, but you need a very high bullshit tolerance threshold if you want to keep your job in the military. P.S.: The world's biggest weapon exporting countries: 1) USA 2) Russia 3) Germany

My experience is that expectations are about the mind and control and thus mess up your luck. Once you form that though, it's difficult to forget about it.

This would be my first choice. In that state, I'd probably sooner or later decide for potion 2. Or maybe find a new solution that opens up in that state. Since it's eternal torture, but the wizard will eventually die, so his magic spell might end then.

As usual with these things: initial hype. The more you see, the clearer it gets it's not that awesome. Apparently the dogs don't even understand the concept of what a road is and that they're supposed to follow it. All it shows is that you can train them to do certain routines and follow voice commands. Wow. Big news.

This whole concept of spending beyond someone's means is an illusion, part of the interest-based monetary pyramid scheme. Since virtually all money is debt, making debt is not a sin, but inevitable, and slowing down debt accumulation merely means covering up the effects of the scam for somewhat longer.

Once I get this confirmed, the thread has surfed its porpoise. What is "latin name" in Latin? Is it "nomen latinum" or something like that?

Species evolve as everything else does. Seeing species extinction as a problem is more moralistically based and is actually a problem of unnecessary killing of animals, nothing more. Just imagine if a theoretical outside party had tried to save homo sapiens' predecessors from extinction. You know, after all, it was threatened by a conpetitive, more aggressive, intelligent species called homo sapiens now. ;-) Well, back to current species extinction: There are statistics about numbers of animals of a certain species. Tracking can never be perfect, so the numbers aren't precise, and often it just serves the purpose of making visible a trend. But what about all the new species? Scientists confirm that there are new species occuring all the time, and naturally those are much more difficult to count... you have to find them first. It's irrelevant to make a fuzz about a species vanishing from this planet just for the sake of it, unless they come to us for help. But here's another eye-opening thought: If you imagine a more 'progressive, wise' future where we terraform this planet's deserts into very habitable regions full of green vegetation... what about all the desert-climate-dependant species you would condemn to death doing this? Will you make a fuzz about that, too? Will you demand to stop the madness of destroying our planet's beautiful and unique desert ecosystems? Buddhists try to save all life, but they won't notice when they step on ants, and they probably don't think about the millions of microbes their body is killing each day. Don't try to be more hardcore than buddhists! ;-D

Tone of writing is speculative. Not an accurate science.

The definition of that is debatable.

Beware of people who say something is not debatable.

...because he's not over 9000.

http://progressquest.com

Most beautiful double ever.

Yeah, like that repeated remark of yours is of any substance. You're just completely disregarding someone else's writings, which is highly disrespectful and denialist, borderline trolling. Don't post on forums if you can't handle people disagreeing with you.