Stosh

Yep it does look something like a mental game during a misguided physical encounter, ( and a word cloud ). Pass.

I wasnt complaining , that would be a plea for you to do something for me. It was a statement depicting my view of your post in an effort to get you to look at the obviously conflicting motivations you were expressing. Worry about kittens when youre ready to fix that issue. I dont feel thats true ,no, its not a feat , its a folly. I didnt turn anything on its head . You dont know my situation except that Im not presenting it for consideration so you cant make any comparison ... and yes ,, thats solely my opinion, no more , no less. Buddhists can come to stupid decisions as well. Yes it is illusion , you just dont seem to undeerstand what that implies vs doesnt imply. Dont you wish to see it that way ? Well the validation on your spiritual self mastery would be premature if you need someone else to validate you. Like I suggested , forget about the diploma, it would be intermediary to validation , and theres nothing wrong with validation per se. But the downside is that the desire for it from such a source ,puts ones heart on a sleeve , exposing ones wellbeing to the whimsical vagaries of someone elses caprice whether it would be stroked or not.

Ok , yes, If you want to include some of the subjective aspect of experience to sensation fine , Im just saying we rely on our data collection as a basis for coming to conclusions about matter energy etc. but,, there are two platforms from which one can point at things (figuratively) and say that the target is "real" or 'unreal" One can start from the idea that experience of the thing is directly 'known' , and all the other stuff relies on non-direct suppositions, inference , and fault ridden data gathering. ( so that would be unreal in comparison) Or one can start from the platform that what is real , is the inferential , supposition based , stuff that can be corroborated by someone else. So we really arent far from the awareness subject, since awareness plays a role in both platforms for deciding what is real OR the reality of awareness is being investigated. You are speaking from the platform which relies on corroboration and inference to determine what is 'real' here. Its not incorrect except for the first word rejecting the reality of subjective phenomena. Normal speech tends to presuppose this very platform. So , I pose directly at you what I mentioned elsewhere,, If a baby is in misery , (say ,,,Momma went away) , is his misery 'real' ? It takes up no space. You do not feel it directly. Would you not try to mitigate the sorrow and fear? My guess is youd say of course youd try to do something about the situation so , WHY? if it isnt 'real' and folowing up ....WHY does the baby cry at all if his misery is not real to him?. This is from the standpoint of direct personal experience as self validating ones existance. Notice if you will , that you are bouncing around between the platforms which describe what you are calling real.. and I am saying they both constitute a format for considering reality and they individually are perspective based.

Thats just the other side of the coin which I already conceeded was just an inverse perspective. Yes again , its just the inverse perspective again. Im not sure if either experience itself , nor inferential conjecture itself , are clearly 'senses' or not -by definition. Im meaning senses in the vein of organs of data collection - sources of data. Nor do I think that the limitations of our sense organs are correctly said to be limitations of our own devise.. they merely ARE limited , you cant see ultraviolet nor the dark side of the moon , it has nothing to do with attitude or decision. I basically agree with that but the twist is that , the I ( in I think therefore I am) is a subjective truth from the perspective of direct experience , and objective truth as a matter of conjcture by someone else.

Well Mh, since the thing says, when he's dreaming about being the butterfly , he is , as I see it , taking the position that from his perspective that the butterfly state is not , objectively true , that it is but a dream. And vice versa if he looks at the situation from being a butterfly. From a third person philosophical perspective , you or me , we could deny the verifiable factualness of both , or neither , or either. . but as it seems to me ,, the butterfly is what would normally be considered to be a subjective stance , since it has no material substance , and objectively , he was a man , since he was material , provable because he could write about it and therefore has opposable thumbs. Im just using conventional standards for the meanings of the words to say something about the importance of perspective as relates to what gets called REAL. Youre already aware that any evidence that we have about things we consider real , requires a concession to our subjective state - essentially that we infer based on our senses , senses which are limited. The only thing we directly know as real - is the I part - and thats subjective. Hence.. the paradox of the parable.

What object? But anyway , if there is differentiation between awareness and unawareness , then which would be which, is a matter of perspective ,, ( as in being a man dreaming he was a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming he was a man) Your turn.

Wow thats a rich ,revealing, and ...daunting post...( because theres a lot tied up together in there) Some sarcasm would have been fine , even so , but forgive me for reading it so .. with exasperation umm its not a strange means of communicating . Starting just somewhere,, You said that you feel this way .. "Once you're aware that all your motivations for acting is based on your own illusions, there's really no point to acting, so when you act anyway, you know that it will create a conflict somehow" I dont agree with that , and Ill give you my reasoning,, First of all , like you said later ,, Life is supposed to DO something. I agree that we are made in such a fashion that we have a role to play.. some folks feel that our role is decided by a god , society or a creator , OR as I do, that we self define the role we will play . But even if thats not the case, its a bummer to have nothing to do..and so committing to a bummer situation- that you can opt out of by definining a role for yourself -would be stupid, would it not? Regarding illusions, when most people are told about illusions , they are thinking of magicians or liars or mistakes. But If one looks at what these things have in common , to define illusion, you may see that there is some kind of expectation which is not fulfilled and by not fulfilled , I mean that material evidence which would support said expectation is not to be found after the fact. The 'illusion' is not supported by objective evidence. The experience of living is also not provable to anyone else ,others can form conjecture , they may even be able to predict what you will do under certain circumstance but neither they nor I , can directly experience your life , and the only testimony I we could have about it , is that which you convey to us. Otherwise worded,, subjective experience constitutes illusion. All the intellectual considerations , even the evidence of the existence of matter energy and time has a degree of subjectivity as well , and these also are illusion,, for the same reason , but thats another whole thread. Anyway , though all is illusionary , that does NOT mean all deserves disregard disparagement etc If a baby was in pain , would it not be spiritually fitting to try to alleviate this pain ? even if it was all in the babys mind? If you are sad or happy or fulfilled or at peace, ,is that not important because it is subjective? The idea that all actions create conflict , if everything is illusion anyhow , would mean that the conflict is also illusion. The idea of conflict is based on some kind of relationship between things. So your non-action ,done to avoid operating on an illusion based paradigm , would serve only to avoid another illusion based paradigm! and yes there is are terms in regular psychology for existential dillemmas , life roles etc But Pick one thing at a time , I still think youre juggling too many things at once here. If you bought something like umm a camera, or a dinner , or a medicine,, youd recognize it would be rash to immediately throw it in a closet without looking at it , or in the trash without testing its merits , etc without getting any return on your investment! Likewise ,of the spiritual teachings , youve exposed yourself to, at least SOME have quality , and you could wisely slow down and give them a thorough run. Get the value out of them , because dismissing everything as pointless illusion and all actions doomed to inevitable conflict .. IS A BUMMER ! and no one has been trying to send you the message that your life is supposed to suck. Forget the diploma , you can print one up at Kinkos AFTER the game is won. Ironically though , you wont need it then , will you?

Im glad you like my concise demonstration concerning the meaning of awareness. It is rather wizardly if I do say so myself and so I congratulate my random idea generator.

Well , Ill assume theres some light hearted sarcasm , RE my post, and it would indicate that what I said might be simplistic , and obvious, ..... and yes , it is simplistic and obvious ,,, therefore you should be noticing that it is basically true as well.. and then still further on that its actually sound advice. Now if you want me to refine to some more precise answer , I might not be able to give it, since I dont know the exactitudes of your circumstances. You seem bright, do you really want someone picking your life apart and telling you what to do as if you were a small child? I doubt it.. because I dont care for that either. Im just suggesting where it is that I think your obstacle is , rather than tell you where some piece of paper can be acquired. I understand the value of milestones, and so I agree it would be nice to get a diploma , because then you could wave that around and it would really simplify establishing credibility as a foundation for relating to various folks. I do however doubt you put much stock in the diplomas of other people , and would continue to prod for validation even If I had one to wave. SO thats why I pointed at something simplistic and obvious there , and leave it to you whether you want to grab it or not.

You have some conflicting motivations , it seems , resolve them and then take the path it suggests No?

If the imagination has that kind of power ,then we all have just become much more likely to lose our wallets.

65 bucks still sounds pretty pricey for a legal bus ride going nowhere, but the stigma of naughtiness probably pushes it up there for now.

This is the meaning Im using for the word in post 15 I am using it as a noun. pres·ent 1 (prĕz′ənt) n.1. A moment or period in time perceptible as intermediate between past and future; now. 2. Grammara. The present tense. b. A verb form in the present tense. 3. presents Law The document or instrument in question: Be it known by these presents. adj.1. Existing or happening now; current: the present leader; present trends. 2. a. Being at hand or in attendance: Thirty guests were present at the ceremony. b. Existing in something specified: Oxygen is present in the bloodstream. 3. Now being considered; actually here or involved: the present subject; present company excepted. 4. Grammar Designating a verb tense or form that expresses current time. 5. Archaic Readily available; immediate. 6. Obsolete Alert to circumstances; attentive. Idioms: at presentAt the present time; right now. for the presentFor the time being; temporarily. This term ( green) seems to better fit the idea , does it not? or does it? Present-Oriented Person: This person focuses on concrete factors in the immediate, sensory present (physical salience, sensory qualities, current social pressures) while ignoring or minimizing the abstract qualities relevant to the decision that exist only in an anticipated future context or a remembered past context. Such people tend to be narrowly focused on what is rather than what might be, or used to be. Their thinking is more concrete, less abstract ( a bird in the hand is worth at least two in an uncertain bush), they use more present-tense verbs and references to events and things in the present. It is difficult for them to delay gratification, especially when it is salient and pressing. They give in easily to temptation, can be distracted from task performance by a host of physical and social stimuli. Their focus is less on instrumental activities designed to achieve future goals than it is on consummatory activities that bring pleasure or avoid immediate pain. Of great importance is the evidence we are accumulating that they tend not to be influenced by educational or persuasive messages, either written or oral, in which the necessary action to take or refrain from taking is in some future context. Having the relevant knowledge does not translate into the appropriate action, as it does for the future-oriented, and often the past-oriented person.

Huh?

The easiest way to be in the present is to pause. The idea of living in the present spans more than just the present , but future 'presents' as well. I was reading about correct effort in correct speech , and it said , to consider what you will say , are saying and just said. That doesnt sound like living in the present to me , unless the idea of "present" spans to both future and past, and then some other phrase might be more appropriate.

.

Thanks , I made a silly comment , feeling a little silly this morning , but figured it would just constitute a distraction and walked away from it . Making comments about what other people think ,, is fraught with suppositions ( yep we all do it) Considering the random thought generators we have,..

.

You can only ever be a master of you , (and everyone has some mastery in that regard). Even the granddaddyest Grand master has only that.

One need not choose negative vs positive illusion based attitudes, about such things,, the paradigm has an opt-out clause. To embrace and accept all that there is which includes traffic laws, taxes, mother-in-laws, rattlesnakes, and rain .. as well as sunny days ,apple pie, social justice and insincerity. One could also refute it all , refute that there is reality , refute distinctions between things, refute meaning, purpose, life, and free will. But thats a bummer. The balanced true view ,which is not a bummer,, is that while the external objective material world ( for lack of better terms) doesnt have bias nor sincerity nor mercy or love .. humans do. Get quotes daily Sign in with Facebook Sign inoptions Join Goodreads “Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.”― Terry Pratchett, Hogfather “All right," said Susan. "I'm not stupid. You're saying humans need... fantasies to make life bearable." REALLY? AS IF IT WAS SOME KIND OF PINK PILL? NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE. "Tooth fairies? Hogfathers? Little—" YES. AS PRACTICE. YOU HAVE TO START OUT LEARNING TO BELIEVE THE LITTLE LIES. "So we can believe the big ones?" YES. JUSTICE. MERCY. DUTY. THAT SORT OF THING. "They're not the same at all!" YOU THINK SO? THEN TAKE THE UNIVERSE AND GRIND IT DOWN TO THE FINEST POWDER AND SIEVE IT THROUGH THE FINEST SIEVE AND THEN SHOW ME ONE ATOM OF JUSTICE, ONE MOLECULE OF MERCY. AND YET—Death waved a hand. AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED. "Yes, but people have got to believe that, or what's the point—" MY POINT EXACTLY.”

Well truth just IS , so what are the labels for , if not so people can feel they fit in a category that they approve of? Wanting to have such labels , or trying to live up to them , or judging others regarding their possession of such labels.. 1 biases ones behaviors away from what they would have done without the labels 2 incurrs negative judgements and attitudes about others who may not fit those labels 3 indicates a potential dissatisfaction about oneself or lack of tolerance for the behaviors they might exhibit. Comparatively , my cat , a completely natural thing , doesnt care at all for integrity , sincerity , authenticity ,, and yet could justifiably be said by someone exhibiting a dualistic worldview , to be inpossession of all three traits. but she just IS. This is typical of the ironic spiritual lesson , as I see it , of taoism. But I dont think its the tyical view of buddhist or shamanistic taoism , which is highly dualistic IMPO.

Well , that which is true , isnt really funny , nor is it biased for pleasant. The self congratulatory ideas about integrity and sincerity are fabrications that people like , but dont exist outside of that. It isnt stupid to embrace feel good things at the expense of dry truth , but that doesnt make an understanding of truth to be wrong either. I dont know what the redirect is supplying , something in particular?

More proof of the pudding my pleasant man, smart funny pleasant wrong.

Related to INTEGRITY Synonyms character, decency, goodness, honesty, morality, probity, rectitude, righteousness, rightness, uprightness, virtue, virtuousness Antonyms badness, evil, evildoing, immorality, iniquity, sin, villainy, wickedness Related Words high-mindedness, honor, incorruptibility, irreproachability, irreproachableness, right-mindedness, scrupulosity, scrupulousness; appropriateness, correctness, decorousness, decorum, etiquette, fitness, propriety, seemliness; ethics, morals Near Antonyms impropriety, indecency, indecorum, indiscretion; debauchery, degeneracy, degradation, depravity, perversion, pervertedness, sinfulness; crookedness, dishonesty, underhandedness, unscrupulousness; lowness, meanness, viciousness, vileness; corruption These things are all fabrications of a human egoic-mind , they depend upon a dualistic view of the world., and so therefore I dont see them as appropriate associations ( either in a positive or inversely so manner ) to the theme of Tao. The abstraction of good brings its attendant logical inverse ,,evil ,, such dualism is denounced by the philosophy. You also cant spell hate without t and e , ,or destroy without d and e , and t e and d arent chinese characters ... so associating those terms with characteristics of Taoist thought may be witty and fun ,, but really constitutes a bogus logical process. IMO So the reader is left with a choice , smart funny pleasant and completely wrong , VS , smart dry difficult and actually correct.

So it tastes like Moms cooking?