Marblehead Posted October 17, 2012 Maybe the first Richard was a jerk? I got nothin' on Margaret. Well, here in the US we had Dick Nixon and Dick Cheney. Go figure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted October 18, 2012 Taomeows post seemed very novel to me. We could use more of that. Stosh I think so too! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
et-thoughts Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) . Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
et-thoughts Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) . Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fū Yue Posted October 18, 2012 if thats the case, its all irrational, then the individual must be rational meaningful expressional beings... and it is possible to have an infinite singular rational meaningful expressional beings each unique... and their singularity both distinguishes them from others and includes them within the set of rational ndividuals... Yeah. I see what you are saying about the 'golden meaning' within the 'chaotic enigma', or 'irrationality of existence' (am I correct in that this is close to what you are implying?) but the irrational I was talking about was more like indivisible, complete and whole, missing nothing - rather than rational as in divisible by something other than itself or 1. Sort of like a diamond, every facet reflects every other facet while retaining it's own particular 'right'ness or view. As opposed to mentally rational or irrational, i.e. driven by 'common sense' as determined from group agreement (you know what I mean) or otherwise. But I see where you're going with this, so I'll through this out there for you. now that I think about it, the only real common sense that we all share is consciousness, right? So the meaning of our existence - that is, what is left when it all 'averages out' is only our particular expression of self-awareness at this moment, which is a work-in-progress result of everyone else's self-awareness at this moment, combined with our particular point-of-view, uniquely influenced by our own set of unrepeatable circumstances. So it's like an exponential thing, the meaning grows with us, and includes us as active participants in that great 'equation' called life. Close to what you were saying? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
et-thoughts Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) . Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
XieJia Posted October 18, 2012 Yeah. I see what you are saying about the 'golden meaning' within the 'chaotic enigma', or 'irrationality of existence' (am I correct in that this is close to what you are implying?) but the irrational I was talking about was more like indivisible, complete and whole, missing nothing - rather than rational as in divisible by something other than itself or 1. Sort of like a diamond, every facet reflects every other facet while retaining it's own particular 'right'ness or view. As opposed to mentally rational or irrational, i.e. driven by 'common sense' as determined from group agreement (you know what I mean) or otherwise. But I see where you're going with this, so I'll through this out there for you. now that I think about it, the only real common sense that we all share is consciousness, right? So the meaning of our existence - that is, what is left when it all 'averages out' is only our particular expression of self-awareness at this moment, which is a work-in-progress result of everyone else's self-awareness at this moment, combined with our particular point-of-view, uniquely influenced by our own set of unrepeatable circumstances. So it's like an exponential thing, the meaning grows with us, and includes us as active participants in that great 'equation' called life. Close to what you were saying? Lovely might be nice if you could express that using a mathematical expressions and notations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fū Yue Posted October 18, 2012 Well actually it was quite far from what I was saying... still... I like particularly the last two sentences of what you posted. I just would add that we choose towards what the meaning grows... hope each and everyone makes it good for themselves and others... My mistake then. Do share. Was the first part of my post close to your intended meaning or did I miss it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
et-thoughts Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) . Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fū Yue Posted October 18, 2012 Well I pray that you feel better tommorow then, enjoy your night's sleep. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites