Stosh

For the purposes of discussion I think I agree with Chidragon today in that one can say as you see it .. ..either what Taoism is what it is not You could be vague or precise , whichever you want you could be very inclusive or exclusive etc But there ARE meanings for the word and the practice There are folks who consider themselves Taoist and I for one consider myself to exist and I consider my practice to exist. Disagreements arising ?, sure, that happens. If the your book takes a stance as undefined as your post here... I dont think I will be reading it since it seems you are reluctant to stand up and make your point. Stosh

I'd answer yin yan theory and even more so 5 element theory is an ideal way to view the world. It allows the mind to come up with real world solutions to real world problems. Its a way of strategic thinking that works well. It's not be chemically correct, but if studied gives a dynamic way of looking at and solving problems. thelerner... Ok , possibly , Ill test you out on it. I push a ball up a hill It gains potential energy it rolls down the other side gathering speed there is transition from potential energy to kinetic energy (forget friction for now) But there is no energy loss in the system. I see an issue with the ball getting more active powerful-yang as it speeds up while becoming lower-weaker-yin, and at the same time it is entirely passive to gravity throughout. One can calculate a value for the energy of the ball due to position and speed using science. How do you discuss the system in terms of yin and yang ? How is yin yang view equally or more informative about the energies involved? Stosh

Twinner My writing might be considered better as informal speech. You probably read one or two of my posts and you should know by now that I dont think tao is a thing that can laugh it is called an anthropomorhism. It is figurative language. You know darn well that the Big Apple isnt considered by anyone to be a piece of fruit. Taoism as a practice holds no injunction against any behavior you engage in. And the big universe doesnt either except that you will endure the consequences of what you do. But Ive read several of the texts and I understand that they do promote some things as virtues. They are subjective assessments by humans for humans which suggest behaviors that will help you get along with the world. Yes I do have my own take on what things mean,, as do you, as does Chidragon as does Marblehead and Gatito etc. Ill repeat that,, AS DO YOU ! So equating me with other folks you dislike is just an unfair insult. Ultimately one cannot describe what reality is or the eternal Tao, at some point,shallow or deep , all will run out of answers. But in the frame of reference we operate in there are things that can be described and I just go ahead and do so. If you really wanted to address just Hindus or Buddhists you could have mentioned it. But I dont know why you'd ask for the opinions of particular groups unless you wanted to limit the responses you would get. Repressed or expressed anger against you?? Ill just tell you I dont have it. Just take my word for it. I told you a long time ago , even when you were attacking me fiercely I thought we had a good bit in common and I wasnt hostile about your views. But my post here did not pat you on the back. I did not vindicate your violence nor did I chide you about it. I started with laying out my preconceptions about why you might post and I followed through with my response about it. I just dont think that in the situation you delineated that your action of punching the dude in the face says much about your convictions. Its not impressive nor is it disgrace , neither do you need me to tell you how I think you are horrible or wonderful regarding what happened. Your actions are not mine to judge nor does the universe judge them. You have to decide whether it was the right thing for you to do. Thats a pretty harmonious stance I think I already am presenting. Stosh

I figure you posted about it for three possible reasons Youre proud of knocking him down Youre ashamed over it Youre not sure how it fits with your philosophical Taoism Justification is subjective , I dont know the circumstances, and you couldnt explain them thorough enough ,with enough lack of bias that I can judge your behavior accurately. The eternal Tao , the big one , the one that laughs at us doesnt give a hoot one way or another You just have to live with the consequences hoping you chose correctly. Which includes how you see yourself, and how you will relate to folks going forward, are you more at peace etc ?. Most folks find it rather easy to be nice to the nice and find it difficult to work things out with someone being obnoxious At the first sign of trouble they dive for the gutter and drink a bellyful of filthy water.. claiming they are 'justified' and then sometimes they let it build a bit first and THEN they say they are justified. It doesnt say much in favor of your personal convictions What does say something about our personal convictions is what we do when we have options. But then again The eternal Tao laughs at all of us while we write our stories. Stosh

In the tradition of the west coast... Dye your hair get a suntan wear colored contacts get a perm why do you need it to be magic when you can do it for real? Stosh

I dont know much about thorium , but agree there are all sorts of wonderful ideas which languish about partly because you cant follow them all,partly due to lack of leadership. and partly because 'true competion is an eroding situation for big business. Hopefully at some point the less developed nations will notice that they can bypass the tech that we are stubbornly sticking with. Stosh

How do you think, considering yin and yang as 'forces' sheds light on objective reality? Yes things are defined to exist in part because they have limitations. (if x then not y) But folks group women with lakes and the moon etc etc and there is no "force". Its just a substitute paradigm for "good and bad" . Science has not reached its zenith and pretending a 2300 year old attempt at it was 'true' and everyone since then is deluded,,, well it boggles me! Im sure you already know the ancients of the west also had a similar stage of development with their ideas of elements and virtues and the foundations of reason. Its not like the east stumbled on some unusual jewels nobody else found.It is a stepping stone toward greater civilization thatn these subjects are encountered. .but in the east there was more emphasis on looking inward to the mind rather than outward to a humanlike god. Stosh

I feel sorry for the dude! but at the same time ... Stosh

"As children we are told/conditioned from very young age to dismiss our fantasies-to grow out of and grow up from such illusions and get with the "real world" (whose world?).' My world and yours is the same objective reality. You dont get one of your own to re-write. Your subjective impression of it , however , is your own personal representation of it and you can drag it as far away from objective reality as you care to. I do not see that escapism as indicative of acceptance. But even if you prefer to not believe the physical constraints of the objective world , you are still subject to them. Stosh

Id simplify it to ,"badly argued doesnt mean the point attempted is false" The thing is, that it requires the "opponent" to help himself lose the point. I would be willing to play the game of 'fallacy naming' but I dont currently think the subject matter covered here will allow it to work because so much is subjective. Stosh

I wouldnt change it 1 because I couldnt know the ramifications of my decision 2 because its fine the way it is, it provides challenges and the means to address them already IMHO desiring to change the world into ones own vision isnt exactly Taoism Stosh

I know what you are saying, I agree many amazing things are possible but when it comes down to the established laws of physics I go with the addage that the rules of the Tao cannot be broken what it allows is allowed and what it doesnt allow never ever! happens. It is fundamentally good that this is so the natural laws must hold true or the universe would be chaotic Depending on what laws you render inconstant... You couldnt put your keys down and expect them to remain in place you couldnt rely on buildings to stand you couldnt have expectations of privacy etc etc Society as it is, could not function without the expectation that natural laws would hold true today tomorrow and everywhere. Accepting the laws of the universe as constant and unavoidable is a big leap toward general acceptance and personal peace, far more beneficial than believing in bigfoots. PS. I dont believe in gods either (for the same reason more-or-less they cant interfere lest the world be rendered chaotic) Stosh

Yin and yang are not forces. Wood is not an element. A person cannot make themselves literally invisible one cannot astrally project themselves anywhere a person cant throw chi around like a weapon Nobody can levitate Nobody can do telekinesis Nobody is immortal Science moved on in 2300 years , it is the way that folks found to ascertain ,what is true from what is false ,in the objective realm of the world. It doesnt work for the subjective realm of the mind nor is it good at making spiritual conclusions very well at all, but it does decribe the behavior of masses and energies very well in the scenario of our daily lives. And just because folks want to benefit from the wisdom made available to them by their ancestors regarding their spiritual paths doesnt mean they should ignore the progress of physics chemistry psychology sociology etc that has marched onward in other venues. Stosh

I admitted I slipped up on something I was trying to correct. I see that as intellectual honesty a thing I employ out of respect for myself and for others. Its more about honesty to me, than guilt. Why should I fake being perfect? It is as much a concession of 'loss' on a point to evade truth ,or to not admit the truth , as it is to outwardly decieve. ( so as to seem to persevere in a discussion.) ...in a case such as this. If I cant hold my own truthfully in an argumental discussion and I try some ploy to get a 'leg up' or I have to spin the facts.. or hide things.. ..then ,I have abandoned the objective facts... the objective facts ,as I see them myself! , do not support me. It doesnt matter to me then whether I am convincing to anybody else ..If I had to fake it to save face.. I lost. The same goes for anybody I am talking to once they fake it , they conceded in their own mind that the facts didnt support them. They lost. I dont like to lose , I dont like to err and I am willing to fess up when I legitimately do screw up. It is still a strong motivation to be honest. If folks only had guilt about those things they really should feel guilty about and didnt have guilt otherwise then guilt would have a strong argument going for it But it doesnt work that way, and we dont need it so I dont think well of guilt. Stosh

Yep, I slipped. Stosh

I think its untrue altogether, you cant throw energy bolts. (Science has come a long way in 2300 years.) But I might cooperate with an 'old man' because I didnt want to endanger my grandfather. Stosh

Im just of an opinion that grouping things as yin or yang,is a false grouping. Saying a man is part feminine is the idea I think confused. Some men are aggressive, that doesnt make them more manlike. Some women are aggressive, it doesnt make them more manlike either. Men collectively , in the entire spectrum they span define what manlikeness is, which includes gay , transgender, kind ,passive , nurturing men. Leaders tend to be aggressive types, even if the leadership is matriarchal. Yes, women as a whole (in the situation they hold now) tend to be less violent, but again non-violent men are not womanly. By telling folks that 'manliness is violent' then you perpetuate the aggressive behavior of men who do not want to be labelled feminine. Let women express thier true natures and you free them from subservience (where that pervades ,, it aint here in the US!) Drop the stereotypes and promote better behaviors. Drop the lumping of yin things and yang things and you get a clearer idea of what actually IS true. If you did that ,, I am not sure what your conceptry would look like, I might even agree with it. Stosh

I did , 'The maniacal assualt on women and the feminine' You did say that right? "You've seen a desperate and dire attempt on the part of men to eradicate woman, the symbol and the actuality of the energy of woman, as being the origin of creation." and that. The reality is that you didnt read my short post not that I didnt read your long post. The stereotypes about what is male and female are inherent in your views of yin and yang.(and they are false) Stosh

The intro you wrote, told me enough that I didnt watch the presentation. Lazy? Yes. (Sorry, I dont chase links all over the web) I think a person has limited control over their thoughts, they exist as data points and you can amp them up in importance or tune them down, and you can write some fresh stuff from imagination, (that is relatively weak ) But I dont think a person can wholesale rewrite their thoughts at whim. Maybe over time. But the reasons why folks actually do things ,is more under emotional guidance than rational (therefore much harder to affect with precision) Thats just my personal opinion. Stosh

I think you are operating out of an incorrect stereotype view that women are nurturing and men are not. Some folks think that yin and yang are 'virtues' that belong to other things that are labeled yin or yang. It is misleading. I like the fox avatar though. Stosh

I don't think its that easy. Stosh

It still doesnt hurt none. But I can't see why they think they need to explain it. And don't see what good it is supposed to do. Stosh

Hmmmmm,, I don't know if that is subtly aimed at me as well, but you're right I shouldnt be joking about other folks beliefs, Im too harsh sounding. Stosh

The idea of living up on that block of rock is interesting. I see folks living out in the middle of nowhere off some highway in the woods, It seems appealing but at the same time , Thats a long drive anywhere! I was curious about the sources of the pics because I take some ,and quite a few of the ones yall showed just blow my attempts out of the water (but not all:)) and authorship is more interesting than stuff grabbed off the web from anonymous folks. Stosh

I dont really know why you are contesting Apech on the 'depravity' angle. Yes animals are animals but, applied to humans, the behavior lends itself to that descriptive very easily. Unless you are just fine with murder+rape , sex with the young or dead etc and would choose to include all of that in a childrens flick about penguins,,, You essentially agree. It would be refreshing to find someone here who felt that morality , right and wrongness were subjective illusions, (and so the pursuit of 'virtue' is on shakey ground) but I dont think that is the case. Is it? Stosh PS: as far as the language thing goes I figure that the huge size of English points to ready acceptance to new ideas ( an attitude of acceptance and adaptation rather than a linguistic flexibility per se' ) I dont know which of yalls argument I am in support of regarding that.