Stosh

Funny thing, I google searched a phrase from it , to see who the author was and got redirected to my own post earlier in this thread!

I know what my epitaph will read. Here lies Stosh, we had no idea what the heck he was talking about. Dona eis requiem.

I'd bet money , that the second to last line is backwards since conventional ideas about leadership vs menial labors bestows virtue on the leader, and so the hidden virtue ,would have to be that of the butcher, who isn't claiming the honors. So I am agreeing this translation may have been made by a person with conventional 'christian' attitudes.

Things that happen around me, also look chaotic, im finding that accepting the way those things are, may just be the best folks can do individually and collectively. Since my sentiments are mine,,or in me ,,or due to my so called illusion of self, the extent that I can be at ease with it all,,,,well ,,,the easier I am with it. Everything seems so damn important ! But if you can ,step outside your own opinion for a second. Tao doesnt give a sht , its ok if the cat eats the mouse ,or its ok if the mouse gets away. My distress arises if I take sides, and things dont go the way I want. I dont think the classical authors were suggesting we should sit in place rotting while the world turned. But in order to move we have to make decisions,those depend on our ideas. Whats right and whats wrong, as well as what is easiest comes into play. If one aligns their ideas with that which is harmonious, well then our lives should work out to be the best we can make them. Some of those wise decisions, may be generally true. We want other folks to like us, we want to be comfortable and healthy, we want to fulfil our roles ,care for others , and so forth. I think they felt that it was best for everyone ,for an individual to be able to accept easily the slings and arrows of living, accept themselves and others for the somewhat ignorant meatbags ,I am, maybe we , are. if we get drawn into the chaos ,freak out and get upset ,even though we feel we know what is good, we stop being the force of harmony ,we are then taking sides, which may not be all that bad ...we may restore a better balance.. but it also may be working uphill, or just make things worse. Your life ,your call, its all Ok as far as Tao is unconcerned.

Stumbling lurching and reeling,sounds off balance, sucky, stupid ,and conventionly normal. I couldnt tell you if it was worth it, one could rationalize that they must like a life like that, or,one could actually like it. I dont think the op is clear on that, so I would assume you are conflicted on the issue. What kind of a response would you prefer? Do you care about my opinion? Whos advice could direct you? Provacative post hmmmm. Food for thought, for me.

Status quo, dynamic equilibrium, homeostasis, preservation of paradigm, balance, reciprocation, peaceful coexistance , harmony ...you can add your favorites. Of the many bright guys that put their two cents on the issue, there is not concensus! So logically , they could all be wrong, they could all be right, or some right and some wrong,,statistically though if any single person was right, that person would be heavily outnumbered. Now if I or thou, were to place ourselves as judge of which one was right, then it would be the student picking the example to fit the answer supplied. I am willing to do that ,but do see the upside down nature of the act. So anyway the most humble and reasonable answer encompasses the broad array of perceptions rather than expects a single meaning of www. There may actually BE no precise definition ,and one needs to feel their way along trying to keep to the basic overall principle ,I see as equilibrium or balance.

Is that really a helpful question?

Im actually toying with the ol idea that after one learns the ropes one doesnt need to remember the guidelines. and rephrasing that turns into, once you get the gist , just forget the theories. If you think about the moves , you lose speed, if you are keeping the ideas as philosophy, well then they dont feel like they are being generated by yourself, they feel artificial. Asking oneself the questions is part of a learning process, but at some point one needs to trust that they have the stuff down pat , and find out what it really all amounts to. Yeah one may need to go back , and revisit issues , but one also needs to trust themselves. Folks born into a system feel like they belong , us New Yorkers rarely visit the Empire state building. Most of us ,We take it for granted, so if someone wanted to feel like they fit in ,they go to a movie, or central park, or Coney Island, instead. Now for sure I havent done this much myself, let go of the theory, and trust that I really meant everything I said on a deeper level, and Im giving it a roll now, because I just dont believe in the great big specific transformative event, but instead think that there are pivot points in our fate, we ride a wave or create a milestone, but the tide was shifting anyway, and we really just need to stay in touch with that subtle creeping of the moon.

Hmm why did he post that if you disagree, why did you post that if you dont care about the answer? why did I post this if i think it comes down to petty bickering?

Yeah, thats a fair point, but if one does happen to get a case of the ummm loose stools, or agita its an answer.(good enough for parrots)

Some folks eat clay, it can neutralize acids, correct bowel issues, but im thinking that calorically eating inorganic material would represent a net loss, and not be feasible as a diet. A diet of pure protein is similar for humans , beyond about 1500 calories per day.

What do I do now? Yes you said that one. But its the biggest one. The important one.

The human diet is a very complicated thing. There was a time when I didnt think so. Ive read many statements and suggestions,most unproven, and contradictory. I find it odd and troubling,that such a basic thingie we really really need to understand well,, is not. You and I have had different information related to us, maybe all of it has been correct but context is variable. To me, it seems we are designed to exploit-eat just about anything. Its our "big talent". Specialist animals may be more efficient at some things, like digesting bones, but we specialize in being generalists. Our ambulatory modes get us almost anywhere, our metabolism lets us fuel on almost anything with enough calorie density, our liver lets us remove many toxins, for our size we are fuel efficient, we can mobilize when it is both hot or cold or dark or bright or wet or dry. And for all the situations we cant bodily adapt to , we have the big brain and opposable thumbs. These let us cook and smash bones prepare for seasonal or temporary opportunity or shortage. So thats how this soft slow clawless crazy creature ,makes its way. Our variable personalities habits mores and traditions slot us into all those niches. The minds of cats likewise ,helps them make their way.

well I will have to take your word for it. My blood chemistry really dictates that I need to eat a meat and dairy diet. Yes its unusual, maybe six people in all the US match me in two of my blood factors in But for me its a reality, and I need certain kinds of food. Yes I diverge from that perscription but physically I pay a price.

Quite right. I was just using the math approach because Gatito was moving in that direction ,and if thats how he feels the issue best understandable, ill try to accommodate. But I am not really a big fan of math.

I think you guys get yourself into some moral dilemma if you dont prioritize in favor of the human. I perhaps wrongly or unfairly,, think that you would , and do, already, discern people as having the higher status. You dont perceive the regular butcher shop, same as if it were cannibal style.

im starting to get confused, are we staying hollywood,or gettin real? Theres a good chance I might punch. But if my choice was to say ,clobber them with a section of pipe, I would withold. Whats your play ?

I should add that this square, is just for determing the number of possibilities. The way an individual may express their beliefs may not match my wording.

The iterative function describes all the iterations of its function. The answers may intersect with other functions, but when all is said and done, the function still covers all its iterations. Tao, may have many iterations, all are covered by the function Tao. But if we are talking about theism we arent looking at the full spectrum of possibilities under Tao, just the possibilities of two juxtaposed variables. N to the second power yeilds four possibilities. One of the is self nullifying, so viable choices regarding belief in a god, yes or no, ,,,and positive assertion or not ,about that god ,are three. These are the full set Asserting there is a god Asserting there is no god Not asserting the belief there is a god Not asserting the belief there is no god Not asserting the existance of god implies no non asserted assumption, and no asserted assumption. not asserting there is no god Imo does implicitly suggest there is the non asserted, assumption that there is a god.

Well, for better or ill, I think the man is my responsibility foremost. I love my cat, and dont know Lth at all but I couldnt put her ahead of a person. Such choices might be hollywood, but if the real world was that clear I would shoulder the karma, and hope I didnt f up.

Well, im not making any post about authorities , im just saying that there is no alternative to the positions that were already posted Whether your sages adopt lines of reasoning they do not believe in to affect others is beside the point. I am not judging the deception. If your description of their attitudes is correct, they are atheist. If they lied to you, no conclusion can be drawn.

Skipping the gnostic issue, still leaves atheism to cover your sages. Atheism has both the positive or hard form, which positively asserts there is no god. But there is also the soft or negative form of atheism which doesnt make any positive assertion regarding the issue. It it is a passive non-assertion that they do have no acceptance of gods. Its essentially an abdication of assertion on the issue, but its still atheist. I can provide the quotations or source monday, its a pain to do on this phone.

Yes I have , gnos·tic adjective of or relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge noun an adherent of Gnosticism. I already told you enough for you to recognize that gnostics have a faith with includes deities which they presumably believe in , that is why they are theists. If you have one who for some reason doesnt really fit the norm, and doesnt believe in the deities, well then they would be either agnostic or atheist ,( though affilliating themselves with Gnosticism anyway). I really dont care whether the individual considers themselves nominally , atheist or theist or agnostic, there are only these three realistic options , thats it , three. There are no others , no matter how you twirl and spin so as to not have to admit you were wrong on this one tiny little issue , you are still wrong. Even getting insulting and haughty so as t tick me off, still wont change that you were ,and are, wrong on this one. Just admit it , it will make you feel better. It will remove the egoic need to be right all the time ,and you find out I will still think highly of you anyway.

Actually I mentioned earlier , uncontested that the activities of Shanlungs bird , can easily be seen as an indicator of imagination and preconscious. Since its the preconscious which folks are wrongly calling ego , the bird is not free of this trait either. It will know if it is treated poorly , and that indicates its 'ego' includes an 'I'. A person can SAY that they have no more worth than another life form , but realistically , if I was given a choice between saving your life or that of my cat , I would have to pick you. AND you would agree I made the right choice about which was worth more. If I had picked my cat , you would deem me a crazed villain. As a member of the human race, there are some privileges , perks , you are entitled to , and one of these is the basic assumption that you are more important than a rat.

Im not conflating the terms , the gnostic then falls into the atheist camp, and is still not a fourth option.