Stosh

Dmt is making a reasonable synopsis on the history of the church. I've heard much the same data. There is however a second issue needing consideration. Is unifying -making harmonious- the social dynamic a bad thing? Do you think society could exist at the level it does without control? Nowadays law has become a controlling influence, are the arbitrary dictates of judges so much better than the dictates of a church? It is a difficult thing to recognize, if one has never been there the need to control people. How dangerous would the trip to school or work be without it? Is it really bad to have health inspectors for restaurants? There is a great big upside to religions in general, it is a means to get everyone on the same page. Its just that individuals want a free hand for themselves whereas the needs of society are often in contention with that

Villian become righteous citizen Is it still everyone else's fault? And he who felt like they were getting An unfair shake, proclaims to the sheeple That he wants to continue with a dynamic Of repression-just, ,, from the other side Rather than just give it a rest

How can one possibly insult the people of Finland?

Just joking on the name , maybe it doesnt translate.

Ill make it even simpler for you. I drive up to a streetlight and it is red At some short while later it turns green This allows me to proceed on my way safely. So I conclude there is a loving god concerned With the wellbeing of humanity. After all- I can't see anything regulating that streetlight. No mechanism , no way to understand what made it happen No mechanism , no science No dependable laws of physics, the world is rendered an unknowable chaos and you can't be sure gravity is going to keep your car keys on the table. Anyway , I think youve got your 'five posts' so you can go beyond the lobby

Where I was going with i t wasthst accupuncture was your reason to believe in qi , but you don't know what its mechanism is. If you don't know what the mechanism is you haven't got any reason to expect the scope of it goes beyond yourself indicating a property of the universe. It could justcas easily mean, that even if the practice of sticking needles in people works it doesn't mean that accupuncturists really know what they are actually doing. Its really very simple, The fact that various people do not agree, on the principle of qi , is no proof at all that they are talking about the same idea. And if I have no idea what I am doing, then again there is no proof that I understand anything ! Especially to defy or contest scientifically derived fact. The whole action of the scientific process , is to separate good information from hooey. The term science , as you used it ,"western science" is an oxymoron. Since its founding principle is that the rules apply everywhere for everyone always ( so they can be verfied AS facts. Rather than fantasy) 2500 years ago they didnt know what electricity and oxygen and cellular biology were, but they wanted to explain things as best they could--so you end up with ideas like qi that need to pared down in light of what has been learned since then.

That's an interesting argument! Though I don't think accupuncture proves qi is some Binding energy of universe , that is just one huge unsubstantiated claim. How would poking needles in the body affect an unfindable force? Needles are just physical things. The mechanism of thorazine and antibiotics are understood Why should one not conclude similarly that stimulation of nerves Or psychosomatic responses or even immuno responses Was not the mechanism of accpuncture?

I am told that chi is breath. A pysical function understood but having ramifications. If it is thought as an energy special to living things, one needs to delineate just what they think is the difference between inorganic and organic. (Since organisms are assemblages of inorganic materials. I inhale the breath of julius caesar And exhale a tree.

I don't know what you mean. If it is breath..what is there to believe about it? That you can blow it at people? Things called living , are merely arrangements of things called non-living-- as in co2 o2 and cellular membranes.

The 'morality' of Lao ? that there .. may depend on your definition and the interp of the lingo that you read about it in. My personal take, is that what was being discussed is more akin to expediency than -goodness or behavioral conformity. but to salve consciences ... Id just point out that the end results , harmony , "karma" of either property morality or expedience ,,can be quite similar and often identical Its just the motivations that differ. I personally dont go for the Noosphere or chi things mentioned but entropy is a good simile for the yin principle.

The garden is meant to be viewed from a seated position on the veranda of the hōjō, the residence of the abbott of the monastery.[10] The stones are placed so that the entire composition cannot be seen at once from the veranda. They are also arranged so that when looking at the garden from any angle (other than from above) only fourteen of the boulders are visible at one time. It is traditionally said that only through attaining enlightenment would one be able to view the fifteenth boulder.

I think I heard of his dad , Phuc Vietnamese dude right?

Apparently folks can get away with being delusional , so either way it works out to have been , Youre fine. I once asked several people this question, What climate or weather condition would you say most matches your personality? Every person said 'A sunny day', and maybe they feel they are, maybe they dont, but would rather not say otherwise. It could be just like you seem to have said , a re-work of time worn blather , not worthy of notice. and agree that it can be way oversimplified "Hey fred , You Ok?" "Yep." "Am I Ok?" "Yep ." "Glad we got that all handled."

It seems your issue is really the "badness" and "artificiality" of human impact , I can crush that too, but dont want to clog up this thread since its intent is more gentle. Start a thread on it and I will be happy to respond, but right now I need to get to work have a nice morning.

Im not sure who you are in dissagreement with ,, this was in the links The report, “The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States,” unfortunately relies on the agenda-driven analysis of its authors and is devoid of any critical assessment of source material or common-sense implications of its claims. And I said this I watched one squirrel eat a nestfull of cardinal chicks And its easy to find testimony like this As rats began an invasion its important to know that they will eat living things in their search for food. What living things will they eat? Well, for one they will eat birds and their eggs. this is a reasonable point by you Birds fly here from thousands of miles away and each species is vulnerable to not surviving due to a lot of other conditions - forest fragmentation, cowbirds, birds hitting windows. rats live all over the place, and yes get out of hand in semirural and urbanized environment (which I presume where your sister and the cat are) and when they have no predators ( like cats ). Broad winged hawks eat birds too as in They also eat frogs, lizards and nesting birds during the summer. Essentially my point here, is that I think you are laughing at me for having silly ideas about squirrels and birds. But I dont think I am out on a limb on any of it. I didnt believe the squirrel thing either till I literally watched one pull , one by one ,every one of the chicks out of the nest and eat them like they were burritos. The reason why knowing- that cats do kill birds isnt enough- , is because its close to impossible to know what the relative impact of it is. Some birds are at the end of thier reproductive period,some ill, and destined not to go much further , some get replaced in the same season ( second brood) and lots of other reasons such as , you dont know what the total number of bird is OR the number of birds eaten by other critters (so youd never see the corpses). So quite frankly you have no foundation to say CATS ARE THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH OF BIRDS even though they clearly do kill some and it cant clearly be said that the killing habits of cats are "bad" because then hawks and squirrels and storms are bad too. So there.

Yeah cats can be a problem , but then again so can squirrels and rats , and possums and ants and raccoons and....... I watched one squirrel eat a nestfull of cardinal chicks. I keep my cat indoors for her own wellbeing but what the law allows, it just allows, (even though I like the birdies a lot too) Folks just have more concern about some creatures than others and I dont think that will changing anytime soon.

Tough tough thing to do IMO to learn the birds by song , but I have no musical ear I cant remember which is which even though I can tell the differences ( if that makes any sense) did you listen to birdjam's recordings ? they sound super accurate to me, but I didnt want to spend the cash right now ,maybe after attending to better camera gear.

You are, Im not I erroneously thought I did know what I was talking about Thanks for the reminder , I sometimes require help to re-find my humility THE EXISTENTIAL POSITION. In the process of developing an identity people define for themselves, early in life, what the meaning of their life or existence is. Some people decide they are OK and are going to have a good life; but many others decide they are not OK and will fail in some way. That expectation based on a decision of how life will be is their existential position. People can feel OK or not OK about themselves and others so that there are four main existential positions: “I'm OK, you're OK,” “I'm OK you're not OK,” “I'm not OK you're OK” and finally, “I'm not OK you're not OK.” For instance in the game of “Why Don’t You; Yes But” Jane’s existential position is that “nothing ever works out” so that every time the game is played it reinforces that position and justifies further depression. Games are always played with responsibility and interest by everyone involved in them. In order to maintain her existential position Jane will find people who will play the game with her. All the players’ parts in the game are equally important and they all derive a pay-off from it as well. When they participate in the game they too believe it will end in failure. They want strokes as well but are not surprised when Jane rejects all advice and everyone is depressed or angry as a consequence proving that you can’t really help people or that people don’t want to be helped and justifying their bad feelings as a consequenc

I was talking about a different existential thng Nevermind

I would have discussed your existential stance but didn't want to go there in case it was private.

As I read it , Lao and Chuang would've told you to mind your own business. Leaving folks to their own ways can be considered quite charitable and harmonious Folks often ask for it by name as in butt out ! and more commonly fxxx-off axxhxxx regardless of your good intent. I read in eskimo-inuit cultures is is considered the height of intrusion to tell someone else what they should do. If they ask thats a different thing , but even then, you might not have a slam dunk because 'asking' only requests your input it hardly ever changes anyones mind about things to the extent that they will heed the advice Its highly likely that all it will do is make the person feel rejected just that much more. But thats just my hardaxxed opinion... which I rightly figure will be ignored exactly like I just described.

I bet you a million bucks DON'T smell like fresh flowers. You probably need the comfort of your own smell- like Flo said or have a desire to keep others at an arms length. Either way it doesnt sound like a 'healthy' indicator. ( I was wondering just how lazy a person can get -and now I know) I agree with Luke , a hot shower is simple and wonderful thing to treat yourself to DAILY.

Agreed , but I guess I explained myself poorly I was getting at 'existential life position' I dont know whether its a popular consideration , that you're already familiar with.. but I found it interesting long ago, and only thought of it again , just now, when I read that post you wrote. The idea is that folks develop a life script for themselves as kids its the basic paradigm one expects in relationships ( to people and the world ) they go like this , Im Ok youre not ... Im Ok and youre Ok ...Im ok and Im not sure about you ..Im Not Ok and youre Ok .. etc Get it ? Its akin to optimism and pessimism I guess. Personally ,,I figure the way the things are actually manifest is more individually specific than written above. ( but those are categories which encompass the spectrum) I havent decided about my own existential position yet ( meaning I havent figured out what it is already exactly) and I want to read up on interpreting what others positions are. ( and get a handle on what is meant by Ok-ness) I think is applied in sociology , but I was wondering how it plays as a factor in eastern and western style belief systems.

What about accepting everything we arent? thats to say , everything else, and, how that all is. I have that first part down,, I think , its just that other part that has me vexed.

I think life as a coral colony ,or humbolt squid , would be just about as different as there could be from human experience either basking in tropical waters or gliding invisible through the abyss. What a potentially revealing thing to experience at least one life as! But as a mantis shrimp, could really be psychedelic man!