C T

I was wondering why you got (figuratively) horny midway thru, but was afraid to ask, to save possible embarrassment. But the fog's cleared a bit now, though i still don't get the association btwn topic and this testosterone activity you mentioned.

Yeah? Who would the other 4 be, and how would you rank them? (pardon this little diversion please, OP)

I agree too, but the writer's intent is not to be seen as denying the usefulness of scientific platforms.

Marblehead will like this one....

If some things don't get broken in the name of science, many scientists will be left pensionless. No no no.... that won't do at all.

Fairly new movie on YT - The Lost Bladesman (in hd) - based on Guan Yu, if anyone's interested. Stars Donnie Yen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9neQX0BD6s

I recently started reading Mou Zongsan's Nineteen Lectures. I enjoy his work immensely, mainly due to his often vigorous examination of both classical Eastern and contemporary Western philosophy. Imo, his views are very broad yet thorough enough to consider seriously. In one of the Lectures, he succinctly noted: "At present people first convert the problem of conducting one’s life into psychology, then from psychology into physiology, then from physiology into physics, and then into anthropology or some other science. Each person looks at the human being from a different scientific viewpoint, in the process of which the person disappears altogether. That is why all of this is pseudo-science. Given that there is no big or small in scholarship, no big or small in truth, there is nevertheless cause and effect. The order of beginning and end, cause and effect, and priority in values must be distinguished. Some things cannot be solved by science. I do not object to this level -- science -- but besides this level there are other levels. But there are pan-scienticists, scientific mono-levelists who fail to recognize this. We do not object to science, but we do oppose the pan-scienticists, the scientific mono-levelists who make science the only criterion. " A pertinent and critical point indeed. Mou Zongsan's brief bio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mou_Zongsan

oops!

If Lennon's song 'God' was to be accepted as a reliable indicator, then it would clearly suggest that his views were purely atheistical. But describing his as a 'Cosmopolitan' is quite interesting.

And i was only presenting mine, rsvp.

Nor religion, nor magick, nor dreams, nor unmistakable inner experiences, nor... ... aah, nevermind.

flying to heaven woke up to find myself lost in neighbour's attic!

clever pug

You're merely clinging to sheer bravado, Protector. Your views have been rebutted since page 3.

that's when you let go once the cistern starts pumping don't look behind you...

I have no idea. I know its definitely not this one...

simply fly.

Please try to lower your expectations generously as the subject has now evolved from spirituality to religion, and clearly, the OP is unable to get a handle on the difference between the two, presuming both religion & spirituality to be like siamese twins when in fact they are more like distant relatives, visited briefly only during holidays and/or bereavements. However, i do admire the tenacity with which the OP defends this quagmire of a premise upon which he built his case and now attempts to damage-control; knowing full well the battle is lost, yet he exercises guardianship like a faithful soldier. Whoever said faith only holds water for the religious-minded, eh?

In Latin... Ordo ab chao. Of course, some would chant, "Ordo ad chao".

Humanities is an appropriate field of study for those who want to pursue a service-oriented career, and that industry is massive, with a constant high-flow of staff turnovers. Managers and supervisors who have tertiary qualifications in Lib. Arts tend to fare better.

Thats an example of Nature donning her make-up in front of the mirror of (our) perception. Cool starfish, eh? Here's another recent 'new' find:

Of course its not ok, but in this context, you have been dazzled into seeing only what the press wants you to see, all this from the inability to fully grasp how human ignorance can also be garbed in religious robes, doing despicable things, all of which they cleverly, or stupidly (depending if one is numb or dumb) proceed to hide behind the cloak of religious affiliation.

Imo, Nature's simply what it is, giving and taking as she does, true to her fundamentally intelligent nature. This self-governance is not indifference, instead, it is essentially compassionate, though not in the manner by which most would define as. As it gives, it takes, without pause, gaps, reason, or preference. This activity, an eternal cycle, is one which we normally associate as 'Change', and what Buddhists would understand as the beginningless union of Mother Wisdom and Father Compassion. In this understanding, compassion in its purest form is simply 'activity that naturally leads to self-arising perfection'. The implication is that we should not over-interfere with the way things are (allowing things to settle on their own merit), and cultivating an alignment to this virtuous way of being is wisdom.

region? Did you mean 'reason'?