Rocky Lionmouth

Oh come on, you left me hanging on a ”How long is a piece of string?” joke.

Describe the lenght of a racecourse please.

So no takers on the ”Zeno had a sharp wit to test their reasoning amd a good sense of humor to boot”-theory? We’re still talking about paradoxes devised by one of the stoics, of Socratic descent by way of the cynic lineage yes?

I admitted nothing and if i did it’s probably true.

Since i am a mere man of minor ambitions and no fame nor intelligence to speak of i’ve always thought Zeno to be a funny guy in a very important position: ”oh, thats a very nifty idea this motion you speak of, but what if...” His formulations femind me of the initial problem in most koans. I’m inclined to say Diogenes already fixed the problem, but then again i am biased in favour of his take on most things except, among orher minute details, his purported claims to the uselessness of recreational sex as an argument in favour of masturbation. (The two might lead to similar results but cannot, imho, be compared with any satisfactory conclusions, ahremm.) His reply to Zenos paradoxes was to stand up and walk away, now wether or not this was just his usual short temper or a demonstration of his reply we cannot know. But his practical approaches to philosophy and human interaction also remind me of ”the twist” in many koans, like the one where a monk places a sandal on his head and leaves. I think Zenos paradoxes ultimately serve a very good purpose as cautionary examples of how easily Really Clever Stuff can topple itself because of the absurd extremities excessive deductive reasoning can present. Beware overconfident reasoning, all of a sudden you’ll get caught trying to verbally prove motion exists because you dug your own hole regardless of wether Zeno or one of his heirs handed you a shovel: Science is dependent on the investigation and critique of science to function usefully, proving and disproving are not as important as what we can use and understand. Sherlock Holmes has been casted quite often to illustrate how delicate the matter of inferring conclusions can be when important but easily overlooked details are in the mix. Case in point: ”featherless biped” needed the addition of ”with big, flat toenails” because some joker brought Plato a plucked chicken to illustrate a minor flaw in the theory of what a human is. * I reserve the right to be verbally inconsistent on this matter in favour of my appreciation of the topic and the paradoxes themselves. It’s also 3 in the morning and i’m still nursing my overcofident libationing yesterday. Happy New silly-Western-rational-linear-logic-antiwisdom Year!

Hung over

Mandala

For real? Wow. Thats, uh, interesting. I’ll have to check it out to see to what extent they do that and how. My paranoid side is currently immagining a shadow department who run blacksites where they imprison modern dadaists, dyslectics, those who make puns that are not grammatically correct and regular people who have an inventive or laissez-faire attitude towards language. Wait, oh shit, did i spell laissez-faire correctly? Theres been frequent footsteps at the door but not a single sound from the neighbours on my floor, which is odd... how long has it been? Did the lightbulb in the staircase really stop functioning since i got home or are they out there? I hear syncopated polyrythmically blended cadences in rushed phrases. Tactical boots under riot gear? Or is it just my two elderly neighbours exercising their shuffling gait? Was that a double burst of comms noise? Did iust see the knob twitch ever so slightly?! Maybe not. No. I hear it. Drums! Drums in the deep! There is not much time. They are comingg

There, fixed it for you. Now, if you would cease and desist quoting AT me (as if it’d change the fact that your approach is spontaneously confrontative and aggressive, i wonder how you figured that strategy out) and do something constructive with your time i think it’d be fruitful for you. This, as it is, is a waste of your obviously abundant energy. I dont like putting people on the ignore list on the off chance they actually have something to contribute sometime in the future, but i might just make an exception for you, mr. My-credentials-consist-of-a-list-of-people-i’ve-exchanged-emails-with. I’m wondering what kind of trauma you left the poor Professor Stweart with... shees. Dont write me, dont quote in my direction, dont mention me and dont read my posts unless they explicitly celebrate your infallible logic and emanent godhood, but dont hold your breath for those, seriously.

Void, i’ve been more than patient enough with your attitude of late, your lack of manners and restraint is embarassing to witness and i’ve had it. Do not engage me any further, you’ve had plenty opportunities to defuse and refrain from aggravating the situation any further and yet you persist in doing the opposite. Leave me be.

Nelson

Que the market recruitment drive Linguistic Enforces Wanted! Are you physically encumbering, strong and have an air of quiet intimidation? Do you know the ins and outs of making sure people follow up on their promises and honor their words? Do you know the layout of semantic labyrinths as well as the back of your hand, which incidentally is also well weathered from slapping backtalkers around? Then you are the person we seek! Inquire at Human Resources Dept through our website: www.greatclarityoflanguage.com Enforced Meaning Inc., a subsidiary of Blackwater Paramilitary

@wandelaar i know, Russell was a true OG and he kept it realer. But yes, brilliantly stated. @voidisyinyang mmm, i cant tell if your comment was made in an unintended position of superiority or if you were just trying to be smug commenting about my western fear of nonwestern modality. My calling your post dense was a reference to how packed with information and hard to even take in for me was. Your reply made me cringe initially because you obviously missed that i was saying ”this is above my capacity at the moment” and I do take issue with the use of ”Western” and especially the way you describe it. Taoist Yoga has not interested me mostly because its most vocal proponents are wont to descend into logorreah of ”quantum” this and that, black holes, conspiracies of the lizard peoples influence on the Bilderberg, chemtrails and how resonant thingamajigs of the ”Obscure Chinese Term in confirmationally biased translation” and then some. It’s hard to stomach because both FORM and content is impenetrable and any mention of this is a severe ruffling of feathers and offense is taken quickly. Dont you commodity fetish me Void, you know better, we’ve discussed this previously, go non-western (no trace of content) at someone who’ll listen if you cant even distinguish ”sorry, i dont understand” from some vague ad hominem. If i wanted to flame you i’d be clear and direct, harbor me no ill will for your own suspicions. End of story.

My pleasure! Knees pointing inward you say... hmm. How wide is your stance compared to your shoulder width? A common mistake is to be too wide or too narrow. Ideally your knees should be slightly inside of your feet (in the vertical plane) when you enter this stance so that when you sit down they’re pushed out and end up more aligned, thats where you get part of the supporting structure. The back thing is tough, hip-bowl tips forward so compensation happens. I suggest you stretch. Back of thighs, front of thigs, inner thigh, front of core. Study your spine and hip-bowl in a Horse Rider Stance, you’ll surely find the relaxation points more easily. Reverse breathing is of course all right but it should not matter if you’ve built up your Double Horse enough, it’ll come along nicely. Reverse breathing is easily forced and this causes a bazillion tensions that mess with your structure. Again, try a narrower and higher stance, find out where you loose your structure and practice from there. Try natural abdominal breathing in the low stance and see if this helps your alignments. I cant say i’ve practiced celibacy for more than a few days at a time so it’s hard to know what kind of consistent bumps show up. I’d generally say that varying your exercises, studying sung relaxation consistently and the different components of your main exercise separately is a good way forward. As with most of this stuff, it’s important know what you’re looking for in your exercise, but the errors make it less effective for its purpose. The ”trick” is often to go easier on yourself in part at least.

Ah, yes. But then again the criticism in both of them is vaguely aimed at ”false” thinking and knowledge as i’ve come to reconcile it. The message concerning the subject of thinking and knowledge is to beware a priori certainties, ad-hoc, tautologizing and trying to fit ones view of a vast, complex and differentiated universe to certain thoughts whose foundation is taken for granted, more or less at least. Unlearning in Daoism means, among other things and obviously according to mho, to critically analyze how what one thinks is a granted truth might in fact be unfounded or simply not explored to a point of true grasping. Compare it to Freges treatise on the foundationsof mathematics, it arose following a time where the numbers, the very axioms upon which mathematics as a system rested uppn, hadn’t been properly established in themselves. For a good stretch of time before he exclaimed ”Fuck no, this has got to be cleared up!!” mathematicians were making all sorts of stuff up, inferring solutions to equations based on how they presupposed they should reasonably be solved, but there was nothing to actually confirm it. So, Gottlob did what had to be done, he figured out how to solve it and then publicized his work and since math has been doing better. Now, math is ”easy” because it follows well defined rules, it’s pure synthetics or the ultimate meta-language we have access to, possibly. Observing the world aint the same. All the thinking and reasoning criticism in the two works are emphasised suggestions to stop limiting our thinking to what we know and how to confirm it in that specific order. Our true nature abhors it, it’s an atrocity to commit such acts agains even one of the ten thousand things, and at its extremes it is often identifiable as that thing humans do when completely idiotic things are stated and then become truth manifest because ”thats how things are, everyone knows it”. Cases in point: resistance towards Galileos heliocentric model, racial biology, isntitutional homophobia, ”poor people are lazy” etc. Then there’s the anti-rationalism and the anti-intellectualism that often follows ”spiritual” matters, it’s quite comfortable for us all i admit, but it is not legitimate to say ”what you must do is to fully suspend your disbelief, the world is a donut you see.” just because thats what dilutes and makes new age fast food out of a nutritious meal coocked with intent and purpose. You know?

Well, i still haven’t read Taoist Yoga, i cant say i’m really turned on by what you describe. Not that it’s incorrect, i can’t say and won’t suggest it, but your post is VERY dense and i cannot make a meal from it, sorry.

Just when i thought i was out they pulled me back in XD Well, neither have i with yours Unproductive was my feel also, but hey, defense is not an easy position and there is a lot to say about how people respond to mildly or specific boundaries, i’ll give you that with no holding back. I for one find your employment of rational analysis in these matters legit af. Those teachers, costudents and mentors of Daoism, spiritual matters and so forth i’ve trusted in have always taken a rationally analytical stance even when the subject goes ”out there”. It’s serious stuff and if you’re serious about it then flights of fancy are all right but shouldn’t be part of the collection of data and definetly not in the pile of support for exploring theory. Daoists of ye good ol days were methodical and analytical even about their most religious and outlandish stuff, thats my humble impression.

So ah, hmm... i was, previously not saying that rational analysis is banned nor that i study and practice for the sake of feeling chi. Just wanted to say that before i express my thanks for allowing me to participate in the discussion and graciously decline parttaking any further.

Oh? Niiice! Hope you get good results with the sithing zapps! Well, i’m out then since everything i’ve ever read or watched about Mo Pai made my stomach churn ominously.

I broke my 18 year ham abstinence yesterday for a delicious piece of grilled ham with strong coarse mustard, apple sauce on dark bread. My god it was delicious. Well worth waiting for.

Many thanks @voidisyinyang for the tip on Oshins, i have not taken part of his findings, i hope i might understand them. Well, i’ll have to look into the matter of right and left sides of the brain. The formless awarness i am familiar with from meditation and i suspect it could correspond to the silver within water, but i cant say if it is Yuan Qi or not.

Hey @Mudfoot, whats zapping?

Well, i do like the secular christmas thing we do up here in sweden but there’s more or less zero room for this type of discussion within the family circle, my belly is full and i am quite at peace, but there is a part of me that is restless while dormant Pardon my ignorance but whats an einzelgänger? True, thats an important distinction and i’m thankful you pointed it out, obsolete (for the moment at least) is quite different from ridiculus. Indeed yes, the strenght of improving upon older theories is remarkable. As far as my limited experience goes in the context of classical martial arts i see this happening also, a lineage holder has the choice to preserve a thing and so ensuring it transitions towards a torpor if not permanent death or continue to work and improve, study etc on the body of knowledge. Each generation that continues with the latter maintains the organism core. Qi is an umbrella term yes, and NA influence on the use and understanding of vitality and energy alongside qi has indeed muddled the waters considerably. The term qi, when used and understood with the right semantics and semiotics is far more explanatory compared to both our own words, within a given context where its use is part of a defined terminology. This terminology is farily obscure because of many reasons but i do believe the primary one to be that there are few who are at the adequate level of knowledge and comprehension, at least in proportion to those who have a ”popularized science” understanding of it. Sure you can substitute qi for energy but only successfully so if painting with a broad brush, because not using the correct term does what it does as we all know. Thats why qi has well defined subcategories depending on context and school: qi of this, qi of that. Those distinctions are as important as the one you made. I’m not promoting pseudoscience, thats not my intention at least, i’m just saying that if a term isn’t transferrable to quantifiable terms within a very different paradigm then it’s not necessarily useless. I took a leap of faith when i decided to approach my practices from a ”blank slate” knowledge base without discarding my innate observational senses and their relevance, i’m still not on the verge of finding THE BRIDGE between the paradigms. I went native for the sole purpose of actually giving the work a chance to prove itself by its own standards when a firm ground was established. Twelve years later i’m approaching a half cluelessness with regards to understanding and refining my basics is still highest priority because i mustnt let NA/perennialism fertilize this soil and lead me to ignorant statements such as ”oh i get it, this thing is the same as this other completely unrelated thing because i found all my understanding on a soft, sticky ad-hoc tautology”. I’m anal like that, i’ve seen far too much dismissal of valid stuff from ”science”-believers as a consequence of ignorant wannabe-gurus who spouting toxic woo while they wouldnt be able to tell the different traditions apart enough to say whats what and whats been made up by themselves because they ”just get it maan”. Yuck. Wether or not it’s even remotely insteresting for someone otoh is a completeley different thing of course. Sorry if i’m bugging you with this, i was merely hoping to point towards a possible way of delving deeper without compromising your sound reasoning.

I’d like to adress the Wandelaars statements of qi and such being pure unfonded esoterics. The thing with qi within the context of a given tradition and/or the field it is from is that it’s neither esoterica nor unfounded, i think it could be useful for you Wandelaar to observe the concept of qi and such as part of a explanation model or a paradigm of understanding. From the point of view of the model where qi is used to describe and refer to different specifics and mechanisms it is both thoroughly researched and found to be useful and conductive to development of theories and practices within that paradigm. When it comes to chakras my hears withdraw easily from listening since i find that particular word and definition to be part of a different paradigm that holds little interest for me and i’m very careful when the contexts are mixed, it sets of my NAAWS (New Age Alert Warning System) and my bias switches from as neutral as possible to fairly skeptical immediately. I’m pretty much allergic to crossbreeding practices and lineages since few of those who do so have a lifetime of experience in testing the validity and functionality of it. Crossover stuff needs a few generations of systematic and coherence-directed research before its reached a point i feel it could be offered up to other experienced practicioners for feedback and development. Sure, there is a lot of hogwash and stupidity floating around but modern science has its own mass of the same. Lets not forget flogiston or the aether, that stuff isn’t very old and it’s regarded as ridiculus. Sure, the theory and language are not founded on the theoretical ground of modern empirical science, from where the periodic table was formed for instance, but the basic method of research is still empirical in both the qualitative and quantitative sense. Trial and error, falsification and corroboration, testing and recording results and using a fairly stringent terminology to describe the above. It’s all there. It wont fit the current dominant paradigm of science but it has not survived and kept its relevance without dedicated work that requires diligent study and a critical approach. It’s not all that esoteric, especially if compared to a dedicated field of study within modern science where the foundational work has already been laid down. Learning it needs 101, 201 and 301 etc and this brings a freshman student closer to specialist research knowledge. Comparing it meaningfully to scientific acedmia focused on research and development is not a stretch or a leap of immagination in my humble opinion. Classic styles of qigong, neigong and internal martial arts can be approached thusly with good success by a student whose critical thinking is switched on, but not in the sense of comparing it strictly to a fully different and well developed scientifical paradigm, as the two do not share the same conclusions about their materia prima even if the most successful developments have been based on and continued with the same stringent empirical approach. I’m not looking to criticize your skepticism the least, i share it, but i found the underlying thinking on which i base my observations above to be a way to stay in the field without stumbling over my own limited understanding and ending up throwing everything out with the bath water out of frustration. There is some pretty interesting and beneficial stuff in the so called esoteric aspects of taoist practice, but it will do little good if you approach it as a student wanting to become a medicial research scientist to have access to all the incredible mutagens in there because they want to become superman. They’ll be dissappointed as fuck if not quickly diagnosed with cancer or toxicity. Sorry about the wall of text here, xmas times with the family has this part of me understimulated like hell I also noticed a seeming interchangeability between the words awareness and attention, correct me if i’m wrong. I think that both Rara and I share the idea that the two are separated, where awareness is exactly what it means and attention is a focused and directed form of observational awarness and inquiry. Attention is needed at times, but awareness in meditation is equal to observing the broad spectrum of process and results, while attention is a tool to evaluate the experiments and the lab for any need of correction in either tools or method. Hope any of it is useful for you, if not rejoice that i finally found the words to describe these thoughts. Happy holidays!