Religion is the poison of Spirituality

[Marblehead]

You know the veracity of what I stated... whether you accept it or reject it is another matter...

anyone who chooses to ignore the truth... when the truth exposes the truth... simply chooses to live a delusion of ignorance...

 

You said: "... least you simply continue to live a delusion full od ignorance ..."

 

That is totally freakin' rediculous. How do you feel qualified in stating that I am living a delusion full of ignorance? You have absolutely no qualifications for judging my ignorance or knowledge. You have no idea if I am living in reality or in delusion. You are totally unqualified to suggest you know anything about me except for what I have typed on this keyboard and it is even possible that everything I have typed on this keyboard is a lie.

 

Don't even pretend that you know the truth as seen through my eyes. You can't even walk in my shoes.

 

Thank you!

Edited December 3, 2012 by Marblehead

[zerostao]

the simulacrum is never that which conceals the truth- it is the truth that conceals that there is none.

the simulacrum is true.

ecclesiastes

 

http://en.wikipedia...._and_Simulation

 

what does it mean? not sure if it is off topic or not, or if this thread had already gone off topic?

seems like we had already gone over this b4

 

Edited December 3, 2012 by zerostao

[Aaron]

You're welcome

 

Now you just need to clear up your belief in the religion of Atheism

 

Maybe you guys need to start a new thread, rather than derail this one any further?

 

Aaron

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Aaron]

the simulacrum is never that which conceals the truth- it is the truth that conceals that there is none.

the simulacrum is true.

ecclesiastes

 

http://en.wikipedia...._and_Simulation

 

what does it mean? not sure if it is off topic or not, or if this thread had already gone off topic?

seems like we had already gone over this b4

 

 

At first I thought this was an off-topic discussion, but I think it has it's place if we discuss it within the context of religion and spirituality. Simulacra and Simulation actually play an important part in why we rely on religions in the first part, at least in my opinion.

 

Aaron

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[zerostao]

Simulacra and Simulation actually play an important part in why we rely on religions in the first part, at least in my opinion.

i agree aaron

Did you notice the four level of simulacra... and how each level moves a bit farther away from the reality?

kinda like the poison, right?

 

i wonder if this abstraction works here; (we are familiar with faust and mephistopheles?)

concerning the disconnect between the signifier and the signified. when faust attempts to explain his spiritual beliefs to a skeptical gretchen, he tells her that he can find no name for what it is he believes. some might call it god, while others call it nature or love. becoz faust is not able to truly name what he believes, gretchen is likewise unable to believe in fausts spirituality. this is the result of the disconnect between words and the concepts or objects that they signify. goethe is asking a deeply philosophical and theological question: if humanity cannot adequately name god, does god actually exist for humanity? faust’s own subjective experience of this problem destroys his faith and leads him to an extreme nihilism and the verge of suicide

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Protector]

Simulacra and Simulation actually play an important part in why we rely on religions in the first part, at least in my opinion.

i agree aaron

Did you notice the four level of simulacra... and how each level moves a bit farther away from the reality?

kinda like the poison, right?

 

i wonder if this abstraction works here; (we are familiar with faust and mephistopheles?)

concerning the disconnect between the signifier and the signified. when faust attempts to explain his spiritual beliefs to a skeptical gretchen, he tells her that he can find no name for what it is he believes. some might call it god, while others call it nature or love. becoz faust is not able to truly name what he believes, gretchen is likewise unable to believe in fausts spirituality. this is the result of the disconnect between words and the concepts or objects that they signify. goethe is asking a deeply philosophical and theological question: if humanity cannot adequately name god, does god actually exist for humanity? faust’s own subjective experience of this problem destroys his faith and leads him to an extreme nihilism and the verge of suicide

 

Then I guess that Tao is the only exception

[gatito]

Then I guess that Tao is the only exception

 

Not really: -

 

"The Name that can be named is not the eternal Name"

[gatito]

You said: "... least you simply continue to live a delusion full od ignorance ..."

 

That is totally freakin' rediculous. How do you feel qualified in stating that I am living a delusion full of ignorance? You have absolutely no qualifications for judging my ignorance or knowledge. You have no idea if I am living in reality or in delusion. You are totally unqualified to suggest you know anything about me except for what I have typed on this keyboard and it is even possible that everything I have typed on this keyboard is a lie.

 

Don't even pretend that you know the truth as seen through my eyes. You can't even walk in my shoes.

 

Thank you!

 

At last Marblehead, you're talking sense!

 

You may indeed be living in delusion.

 

It is even possible that everything that you have typed on your keyboard is a lie.

 

So you may not be a Materialistic Atheist and we all need to be agnostic to these possibilities.

 

You may even be a figment of our imagination.

 

You may be a figment of your own imagination.

 

You may not even exist.

[Protector]

Not really: -

 

"The Name that can be named is not the eternal Name"

 

That's why it's an exception

[gatito]

[Aaron]

At last Marblehead, you're talking sense!

 

You may indeed be living in delusion.

 

It is even possible that everything that you have typed on your keyboard is a lie.

 

So you may not be a Materialistic Atheist and we all need to be agnostic to these possibilities.

 

You may even be a figment of our imagination.

 

You may be a figment of your own imagination.

 

You may not even exist.

 

And you may be talking BS. You really aren't a meet in the middle of the road kind of guy are you? Someone holds out an olive branch, you take the branch and the hand holding it. My advice, remember that one of the three jewels of the Tao Te Ching is not competing with others to be first. Don't think of your debates with others as something you must win, but something you must do you best at. There's a significant difference there.

 

Aaron

[Eskrimador]

Olive branch no good. Hard but not strait.

Rattan best with skin on. Very sharp and fast.

Everybody compete, how you win else?

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Stosh]

1. 
   

   The mirror causes not

   
   

   whats right ,and left being confused ,

   
   

   but that which prods the heart

   
   

   moves the soul to defense of walls unbested

   
   

   and rightly that.

   
    
   

   So each in our own way ,we stand our ground ,

   
   

   to posture to our contents measure.

   
   

   Even that which ,I would choose not be ,

   
   

   Id defend ,were it deemed truth by faith or fact.

   
   

   Perhaps secure midst self righteous folly

   
   

   ,the contest is decided ,or not.

   
   

[Marblehead]

I'll see Y'all in some of the other threads. I have distracted from the topic here in this thread quite enough.

Edited December 3, 2012 by Marblehead

[zerostao]

It not something I must win at, rather its something I happens to win at... there's a significant difference there...

when where and what did you win?

 

BTW the signified exists independent of the existence of the signifier... it is just known with a different signifier...

is this an example of your winning?

speaking of difference or differance whichever

http://web.utk.edu/~...Derrida376.html

 

i have no interest in winning , just arriving at the truth. seems et's goals are quite the opposite

Edited December 3, 2012 by zerostao

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Eskrimador]

Anybody wont compete they dont win.

Dont mean you are loser if you dont compete you just not competitor, you in the audience.

Jus looking.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[zerostao]

et , then if there is a truth you want to share with a construction that will withstand any deconstruction

feel free to procede

earlier i mispoke when i said arrive at the truth, approach it is better,

edit> wil o the wisp(ers

 

Edited December 3, 2012 by zerostao