Stosh

That depends on who you talk to.

You were offering criticisms of the family structure and the questionable attitudes that might be bred by the non-traditional (Hitler-youth) way of raising kids. Isn't a collective responsibility for raising kids properly more effective in ensuring a level playing field for all? Every individual leaves the same starting gate at the same time in a race to the top. maybe it is , so what?

All organizations are of no individuals. YOU don’t count. How many roads does a man walk down, before you call him a dumbass? How many social revolutions does it take? Organization are an abstraction open to perspective. I dont have to call him a dumbass but I CAN call him one even if he doesnt take a road at all. How many social revolutions does it take to do what? Just this morning, I had to listen to some nutty professor blaming minimum wage on American capitalism Im not sure what you mean. Social deviants exempt themselves? How do they do that? The organization either exists or it doesn’t. If dad cheats on mom, he doesn’t have a marriage. If mom isn’t devoted to her kids, she doesn’t have a family. They choose other than to conform with expectations of others or to rules they want obeyed by others,,,thereby they exempt themselves. The organization doesnt exist materially its just an abstraction, just as marriage is ,as well as the 'posession or relationship with her children" Let’s keep the organization’s concept simple to avoid bifurcation and forked tongues. My opinions are mine , collective societies opinions are collectively arrived at and consented to by individuals , but that doesnt make any of the opinions anything other than abstractions" We may agree on some things but that doesnt mean that the thing we argeed on has some kind of truth based on that concordance. We are still two different entities each on our own coming to that conclusion. We agree on Manson needing his head to be checked ( or removed) The nuclear family , probably doesnt happen as much as anyone ever thought, but it is one of many workable models. I dont know what Hitler was aiming toward, but I like the idea of the autobahn. I understand what you are theorizing but it is not the way organizations work in the real world. Your theory works only for a collective comprising you and yourself provided you don't have DID (dissociative identity disorder) like Norman Bates. Wake up sree! There are no organizations ! PS ther isnt any Santa Claus either. sorry

No we don't go anywhere when we die than come from somewhere at conception. Life thought experience etc are all inherent possibilities on the universal stage . Assemble the parts correctly and the higher order possibilities are manifest.

That many people think They need a god Doesn't make the god real It is a crutch or a shortcut To meaning in their life One can be dedicated to families or nations or work or charity etc. These things are the things that most people find meaning in on a day to day basis anyway. But I admit that it may not be easy to accept , especially when it has been so strongly derided as heretical. Its far easier to go to a church or do some sanctioned thing and then Abandon the significance in private. Frankly I don't see much harm in taking the god route Its just one more abstraction to entertain.

To need a replacement for a godBegs the question What does one need a god for? When one notices that they don't need one They are free to assign meaning and purpose for themselves Free will ! Yes constrained still by the material properties of it all But freed to work within those constraints Essentially little demigods I thought the ponds of marble gardens were already covered?? The pond is usefull because it is full

Enjoy your tofu.

That people can have a meditative experience or non-experience while eyes are open or closed or while walking around or in a moment that everyone else is missing out on....fine So what? Really ! I am asking. Share this wisdom. SO WHAT? In so many threads folks testify about the experience, they say it changes their worldview So what.....it still has no significance any greater or lesser than other experience because it has no contex either. Which is why one 'returns from it' and still chops wood. You still chop wood.

Its up to you Seph , to decide if I am being of any help in fleshing out the conceptry you are working on. Here I fade into the background so you can proceed with your thread.

Because we humans have such huge brains, we learn all sorts of stuff, the brain doesn't know what it is absorbing , as long as data fits with precedent it is accepted. There are many issues that establish precedents not just one, what crops up eventually are internal conflicts. What then must be the judge? Some of these things never get resolved internally so it makes sense to try to find the place where thereis no internal conflict, downgrade the importance of the constructs which are in conflictand then coceivably recreate a unified approach. I'm just tossing this stuff out there to see what sticks. Non verbally it all works together for me , it is the deconstruction into text which is the hard part.

I'm thinking as well, there is no destination either That's why they call it a path in the first place. Folks need to have something to do If a wise dude was of an opinion that there was no afterlife Because there was no indication of one He might also be suspect about where we we arose from Like an eddy or vortex within the greater context we arise play out a life and then Ease back from whence we came. What would meaning be, what would bestow it? What would rightness be, what would judge it? One can either invent humanlike gods to answer that, or they must Look to themselves to define these things. If one man decides a thing will be right, and another deems it to be wrong Who is it that could judge between them fairly? Their authority on the matter is equal. Could one look to nature to decide the rightness of one or the other? It has no bias. Since he laws of nature are never breakable, consequence , can be the judge and motivator. So without the anchor of gods , there is a set of conceptry that can anchor and motivate one through their life...the path .

Tao is nothing if not ironic Forget completely the dissappointments of the past You will be refreshed Look inward Don't look for crazy items of proof that you won't believe Dont look for any crutch Trust nothing but distrust nothing Do that which you deem a reasonable person would do And lastly just accept those things that you can't change I bet you never heard a religion say that!

What if it is my inborn nature be a sarcastic know it all? Should I 'run with it?'

That reminds me, I have to take a whiz

I figure that means its a good clean restaurant and I'll leave it there.

Someone has to hire the handicapped

Yeah Im just joshing The universal thump goes round and round ,just as You and Ishmael said . Not telling though

Its the "healthy circle of life" You eat pork chops - a high protien, low glycemic food - to be smart and you can eat pork chops because you are smart and the "emperor" doesnt eat regularly enough to have a vigorous libido.

One doesnt ordinarily pay slaves nowadays do we? Ill have to check with my accountant.. time passes Yep , they tell me I do pay them! Imagine that!

Thanks , and ,yes its an abstract ,,like so many we operate with many many of them , the majority of what we deal with probably and not off-the- wall "hypothetical" like the big bang, atoms , and such ones as that.

Its just -projection of blame -, is it not? a rejection of the idea that ones self, both conscious and unconscious, is responsible for the ugliness or beauty one sees. In this case its blaming food and blaming perceived 'hussies'. Wanting to 'breed with them' is an interesting turn of phrase though.

Often easier said than done , but to the extent you can carry it foward , its probably a 'good' thing. Why is it that everyone else isnt doing just the same I have no idea.

Anyone who doesnt want thier evil money any more should post me, so I can tell them where to send it. Money is a medium of exchange , a means of trading skills and efforts so one can promote that which they want promoted and to focus efforts on tasks that need to be done for the benefit of society. Chickens could be money, carrots could be money, sweat equity could be money,, its just easier to hand paper back and forth.

How can you be in non-differentiation mode if I am in a rats nest mode and you are not? Ha

Sree, ,--Then, individuals don’t count. They are like bees that populate the hive which is the organization, the abstract entity. To whom , would they not count? What is the organization of no-individuals? Deviants are individuals, within the organization, who cannot measure up to the expected norm. Basically true in conventional terminology. (maybe they dont want to, or exempt themselves) Evil done by members is not arbitrarily judged to be so. Evil is a direct cause of the demise of the organization. Evil is an arbitrary term , if I consider something OK , its not evil to me. You need somebody to judge a thing evil , (and though many people are ready to point fingers , they dont usually point them at themselves..likewise, Society creates a collective morality , and deems some individuals behaviors as evil,.. its like when Nixon said 'its not illegal when its done by the president'.) An organization can fail because of decisions-judgements it deems fine (not evil) , like pooping in their own source of drinking water. Such expectation, as in keeping the faith, is the foundation of social relationship in organizations. Dads are supposed to be faithful to moms, moms are supposed to be devoted to kids, and kids are supposed to be filial to parents. Well they often arent ,and it depends on the judgement of a given society or individual whether the supposition is "right" to have. For instance ,Kids have been raised by relatives , communes , foster parents , to be independent Spartan thieves, loyal slaves and Hitler youth. (loyalty was expected to go to the state or party rather than family) And some places are just fine with concubines. It is not individuals’ opinions but the stability of the organization that determines right and wrong. Collectively Individuals are the organization , and the collective will determines the collective 'right and wrong' usually codified into law, (to impose and enforce it). But each individual, has and promotes, what they have concluded is right or wrong,, this may be in accord with the collective view, or it may not. When a cop lets you off on a violation, that’s mercy. If he doesn’t and you pay the fine, that’s justice. Justice depends on 'to whom a thing happens' and it again is based on subjective expectations Try this out for a hardassed opinion',,, Mercy is a burden reshouldered !!