Taking Responsibility

[Marblehead]

Nice reply. Let's see what I have to offer.

 

Are you sure? If there were such a thing as the science of the actual, I would think it is quantum physics. Which suggests that duality is not a real thing in the world, but is a projection, created by expectations. A plant doesn't care whether a photon is a wave or a particle, but it is our projection (according to the double slit experiment) that forces "reality" into dualism.

 

Especially saying "X is real" and "Y is not real" is assuming a rather omniscient point of view, one that can distinguish between the two. If quantum physics can't always decide what is real, then it seems unlikely that our mundane view of the world can.

 

I'm not ready to accept quantum physics yet so basically that doesn't apply to my life. I am a particle, not a wave.

 

But we must make determinations as to what is real and what is not. If you stand on the sidewalk while I am standing in the street and there is a car headed directly toward me and you say that the car is not real and I accept what you say I suggest that I won't be around much longer.

 

On the other hand, if you tell me that I can fly, you escort me to the top of a twenty story building to test my ability to fly and I listen to everything you tell me I suggest that I won't be around much longer.

 

No, there is reality and there are things we imagine. These are our illusions and delusions.

 

Do you mean that at least 50% of the time?

 

Plus or minus 53 with a probability of .000764.

 

Ah, but tigers rarely eat humans. So humans create an image of the world in which some threats are real, and some not, but it's very hard to ascertain (especially without statistical analysis) how accurate our assumptions are.

 

Tell that to those people who live in India next to the wildlife reserve that is home to many tigers. Last I heard was that a tiger is allowed to kill around a dozen people before the wildlife people will go out looking for the man eating tiger.

 

Now true, I don't live in India. But then I don't go walking down the middle of a very busy three lane highway either.

 

However. I do agree with you that making assumptions is dangerous. But then sometimes we just don't have and cannot get enough information to make a sound decision so we assume and go for it, or not.

 

But is this really so? I think that most people live life according to assumptions, not "what is knowable". Do you know that the driver beside you is going to stay in their lane? Do you know what your lady friend is feeling, at any particular time? Do you know how your mutual fund is going to perform? No, all you have are assumptions, and managed risks.

 

All true and valid. Yeah, I don't know many things. Let's see, I know very few things. But, nearly all my actions or inactions are based on what I do know. Those things I don't know I will go with my best guess. Hopefully I use a little bit of logic in forming my intent.

 

So, we all live in the unknown. The question is: are we willing to drop our illusion of knowing, and surrender into the "I don't know", which happens to be true all the time?

 

No, I live in the known universe. True that is only 4.6% of everything that should be. But that doesn't matter because apparently the other 95.4% doesn't effect my reality.

 

I will never surrender!!! And "Power to the people" too.

 

Haha! Like "edited".

 

I spell it that way all the time. At least I am consistent.

[rene]

... non-Self is, in my understanding, is us when we are fully immersed in the state of 'wu'. But there we have no self so how could we define a non-self?

 

Hehehe. Are you sure I am not totally 'yo'? Perhaps I am one of Wayne's 'lost souls'?

 

 

 

Because of the unboundaried nature, even when fully immersed in the state of 'wu'... yo is still present. From what I've seen, even at the core of traditional paths, a final step is to (re)integrate all states; ending the 'either/or' mindset.

 

Boundarilessness means both, same time, all.

 

And yeah, I'm sure. Even you cant escape the nature of Tao.

 

warm regards

[Otis]

No, I live in the known universe. True that is only 4.6% of everything that should be. But that doesn't matter because apparently the other 95.4% doesn't effect my reality.

You live in the assumed universe. "True" is unknowable. "Reality" is subjective.

 

What is actually true is what's pointed at by Relativity, Quantum Physics and string theory. That's the closest that humans have gotten to ascertaining "the true nature of things". And, of course, none of it makes any sense, according to the rules of our mundane reality.

 

In other words, "reality" is anything but. It is just an experience. What we think we know are just inferences to the truth that is unknowable, and forever out of reach. Even with science, the best model so far is all we can ever hope to achieve.

 

Of course I believe there is an actual world. But what that actual world is, I cannot say. What I observe is what I observe, not what is real. What I am told is what I am told, not what is real. Real is just something I make up, a cobbling together of stories that seem to fit together, or which are emotionally appealing, to explain it all to myself, to make it easier not to be worried about the fact that I don't really know anything. Not for sure.

Edited July 21, 2011 by Otis

[Marblehead]

You live in the assumed universe. "True" is unknowable. "Reality" is subjective.

 

What is actually true is what's pointed at by Relativity, Quantum Physics and string theory.

 

Ha! Just talked about that in a different thread. When we break a thing down into its various parts and give those parts names we lose the reality of that thing - we lose its "thusness".

 

We cannot break the world down into its smallest parts and then say we have found reality. All we have found is the parts but we have lost reality.

 

If I look at only the land massed of the planet earth and say "This is all there is." I would be totally wrong and would be missing so much of reality.

 

Remember, reality for me is what I can observe and point to. If I cannot detect it in any way then for me that is not reality. I cannot detect, on my own, all that stuff they talk about in quantum physics and string theory. Those are nothing to me just as talk of ghosts is nothing to me.

 

My chair has always been there when I wanted to sit in it. That's reality. The monster under the bed disappeared many years ago - it was an illusion.

 

To think that we are close to finding the "God particle" is insane. Like looking for the Loch Ness Monster.

 

If any aspect of my reality proves true every time I test it then I am satisfied with my understanding. You, or anyone else, can call my chair anything they wish to but as long as it is there for me to use as its intended purpose then it is "chair" to me. This is my reality. And yes, I will put 100% reliance in this understanding. Never a doubt. "I know this."

 

And yes, I take full responsibility for my understandings and opinions. Hehehe. When I was younger many of my opinions and understandings were those of other people. That condition no longer exists.

[Otis]

Ha! Just talked about that in a different thread. When we break a thing down into its various parts and give those parts names we lose the reality of that thing - we lose its "thusness".

 

We cannot break the world down into its smallest parts and then say we have found reality. All we have found is the parts but we have lost reality.

 

If I look at only the land massed of the planet earth and say "This is all there is." I would be totally wrong and would be missing so much of reality.

 

Remember, reality for me is what I can observe and point to. If I cannot detect it in any way then for me that is not reality. I cannot detect, on my own, all that stuff they talk about in quantum physics and string theory. Those are nothing to me just as talk of ghosts is nothing to me.

 

My chair has always been there when I wanted to sit in it. That's reality. The monster under the bed disappeared many years ago - it was an illusion.

 

To think that we are close to finding the "God particle" is insane. Like looking for the Loch Ness Monster.

 

If any aspect of my reality proves true every time I test it then I am satisfied with my understanding. You, or anyone else, can call my chair anything they wish to but as long as it is there for me to use as its intended purpose then it is "chair" to me. This is my reality. And yes, I will put 100% reliance in this understanding. Never a doubt. "I know this."

 

And yes, I take full responsibility for my understandings and opinions. Hehehe. When I was younger many of my opinions and understandings were those of other people. That condition no longer exists.

I agree that the science of the very small is not "the truth", in exclusion of the science of the human scale. But the science of the very small shows clearly that the human scale is mere approximations. None of our electronic and digital revolution would be possible, without quantum physics. It is very very real (i.e. accurate to the real), even if it is not directly knowable to the senses.

 

You find certainty in your chair, Marblehead, but how far does that certainty get you? You won't find that same kind of certainty in the plants in your garden, in the weather, in other people, or even in yourself. Claiming to "know" the chair ignores all the more tenuous stuff, the phenomena of change, like life. The chair is theoretically unknowable, but it doesn't really matter, as long as it doesn't collapse.

 

However, if I pretend to know the inner being of a girl I like, then I bring chaos into my life, because my "knowledge" is a fantasy, and eclipses my willingness and ability to listen. Only if I am willing to be in the mystery, can I allow her to be who she is, at this very moment, and not have it be in conflict with my interior model.

 

p.s. Of course I am not saying to believe in the monster under your bed, but rather that it behooves us all to re-examine what beliefs we do cling to, and make sure that we are not too very certain about our claims of "knowledge". Also, that we recognize that "knowledge" is merely a subset of opinion, that we give extra emotional weight (certainty) to. Knowledge is an illusion of the mind that wants to be in control.

Edited July 21, 2011 by Otis

[Marblehead]

You find certainty in your chair, Marblehead, but how far does that certainty get you? You won't find that same kind of certainty in the plants in your garden, in the weather, in other people, or even in yourself. Claiming to "know" the chair ignores all the more tenuous stuff, the phenomena of change, like life. The chair is theoretically unknowable, but it doesn't really matter, as long as it doesn't collapse.

 

Yep. There are different levels of certainty in the various aspects of my life. I am not afraid to say "I have no idea."

 

There are some things in my life that are absolute givens. Other things in my life I might not have a clue of.

 

I know some things that form the stability in my life. Other thing are just guess work and oftentimes bring great excitement into my life. I like surprises as long as they don't cost me a couple thousand dollars.

 

I am listening to my recorded music here at the computer. I held great certainty that when I turned the amp on and open the player and clicked the file that I was going to have music. This is because I assumed 100% that everything was going to work properly. If I didn't get music I would have been certain, 100%, that something was wrong.

 

A bit of stability in life is important. When things fall apart we need to have a place to go where things are what we expect them to be. In Taoist philosophy that is the valley of Yin. (There nothing else matters because everything there is exactly as it is supposed to be. We all need to have our valley of Yin.)