Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 We also call carnations 'border pinks', do you? Never heard of the term. Are they poisonous too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 16, 2012 Never heard of the term. Are they poisonous too? You have turned into a boxing chicken ... this is getting confusing. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 Foghorn Leghorn Now that was a cartoon. On the old Huckleberry Hound show. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vmarco Posted December 16, 2012 These are not universal statements but they are not too far from it, based on my observations. What's not too far? The First Commandment is in direct opposition to the 1st Amendment. In fact, the 10 Commandments are contrary to the Constitution as a whole. http://www.nobeliefs.com/commandments.htm "It has often been said that anything may be proved from the Bible; but before anything can be admitted as proved by the Bible, the Bible itself must be proved to be true; for if the Bible be not true, or the truth of it be doubtful, it ceases to have authority and cannot be admitted as proof of anything." Thomas Paine (Father of the America Revolution) "One millionth of 1% false is completely false" Jed McKenna Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) Tom Paine was a ladies corset-stay maker by trade. Amazing how life works out isn't it? One minute you're knocking out bustiers for the female gentry, next minute fomenting revolution. Edited December 16, 2012 by GrandmasterP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 You have turned into a boxing chicken ... this is getting confusing. That's a rooster, not a chicken. Hehehe. I'm a guy, remember? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 Over here a rooster is a hen sitting on her eggs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 What's not too far? The First Commandment is in direct opposition to the 1st Amendment. In fact, the 10 Commandments are contrary to the Constitution as a whole. ... "One millionth of 1% false is completely false" Jed McKenna Well, to this quote, I don't accept that. There is still 99.9~% truth. There are still truths in the Bible. However, I agree that government and religion should be kept totally separate, in any country on this planet. Having politicians lie to us is quite enough, I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 Over here a rooster is a hen sitting on her eggs. Humm. I can see the reasoning there. But you floks apparently got it wrong and that is why we changed it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) Yes but you also call a torch a flashlight. If I took a flashlight to check on my roosters at night in their coop they would become alarmed by the flashing and likely leave the roost, then we'd have no chickens. Edited December 16, 2012 by GrandmasterP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 Yes but you also call a torch a flashlight. If I took a flashlight to check on my roosters at night in their coop they would become alarmed by the flashing and likely leave the roost, then we'd have no chickens. But you would still have the eggs. They came first anyhow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted December 16, 2012 Well, to this quote, I don't accept that. There is still 99.9~% truth. There are still truths in the Bible. However, I agree that government and religion should be kept totally separate, in any country on this planet. Having politicians lie to us is quite enough, I think. Reckon it can be done? IMO best attempt at deliberate culture is to bake it in to the systems of belief founding it. If it takes inventing the ultimate and origin stories and holding them up as absolute truths to do so, well as soon as anyone starts to seek proof, things are likely to go poof. TTC as far as I read states that this is a wrong-headed way to go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vmarco Posted December 16, 2012 Well, to this quote, I don't accept that. There is still 99.9~% truth. There are still truths in the Bible. However, I agree that government and religion should be kept totally separate, in any country on this planet. Having politicians lie to us is quite enough, I think. Regardless,...99.9% true is not fully true,...99.9% true is not enough to be truth realized. I understand that for most, 99.9% is sufficient,...but it is not true,...no matter how you argue it. The Tao is true,...100% true. For me, that is not a guess or belief,...Undivided Light is proof that the Tao exists. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 Reckon it can be done? Yes, I think. I don't want to do the research but I am sure there are countries (besides China) that do not invoke religion into their constitution. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 Regardless,...99.9% true is not fully true,...99.9% true is not enough to be truth realized. I understand that for most, 99.9% is sufficient,...but it is not true,...no matter how you argue it. The Tao is true,...100% true. For me, that is not a guess or belief,...Undivided Light is proof that the Tao exists. Yeah, but we will very rarely get 100% truth even from individuals let alone great institutions. That is why I feel we should be skeptical of what others tell us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobb Posted December 16, 2012 Yes, I think. I don't want to do the research but I am sure there are countries (besides China) that do not invoke religion into their constitution. how did figure that china mandates religion in constitution? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted December 16, 2012 how did figure that china mandates religion in constitution? My suggestion is that they do NOT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 We have a State Church here the Church of England and our dear Queen, who many will know is a woman; is the head of it. In their wisdom they have just voted against permitting women to become Bishops. Go figure! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thelerner Posted December 16, 2012 Regardless,...99.9% true is not fully true,...99.9% true is not enough to be truth realized. I understand that for most, 99.9% is sufficient,...but it is not true,...no matter how you argue it. The Tao is true,...100% true. For me, that is not a guess or belief,...Undivided Light is proof that the Tao exists. The older I get the more I'm willing to settle for lower on the truth scale. I've gotten so low, I'm willing to believe things 5% true if it gives me an accurate working model with good predictability. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 "Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." Alice in Wonderland. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vmarco Posted December 16, 2012 The older I get the more I'm willing to settle for lower on the truth scale. I've gotten so low, I'm willing to believe things 5% true if it gives me an accurate working model with good predictability. If something is not 100% true, it is false,...if a Tao was uncovered, but was only 99.9% true, it is not the Tao. Perhaps a better way to put it,...if something is one-millionth of 1% false, it is totally false. Only the Superior Man is interested in the truth,...Ordinary Man, has little need for truth,...as I've mentioned before, most, like as you mentioned in your post, merely desire dependable descriptions of an objective world that they consider intelligible. The wisdom and reality that arise from certainty would undermine the survival of their object-based beliefs and conceptual imagery. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted December 16, 2012 The older I get the more I'm willing to settle for lower on the truth scale. I've gotten so low, I'm willing to believe things 5% true if it gives me an accurate working model with good predictability. Another old person! Yey for TTB's Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thelerner Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) In the grand halls of philosophy you are probably right, but in the real world, where we eat, sleep, make a living, actively make decisions, if you can't begin to recreate predictive models based on the view, it's all false. Seems to me you'd end up paralyzed, not moving at all. Or you're forced into a semantic games. In the real world there's an 85% chance of rain tomorrow, but you know- its all false- the rain is not in the sky, it is in our minds. That is ridiculous. I may be an ordinary man, but I'll be smart to bring an umbrella and let the superior man get wet. edit: later addon- What I've admired about Taoism is that it states a base person <like myself> is superior to a superior person. That and its comfortability with paradox. comfortability..hmnn, i wonder if i could patent that word, its so useful. Edited December 18, 2012 by thelerner Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/comfortability Too late. ;-) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stosh Posted December 17, 2012 (edited) Jed McKenna is clearly wrong We all use mirrors and other distorted sources of information all the time to come to conclusions which impact our well being and safety ( such as rear view mirrors ) Whereas the opinion of Mr. McKenna in this regard is just speculative and useless noise which sheds no useful light. It isnt surprising that he might have made that claim though considering it comes from a viewpoint that 'all is one and the same' regardless of how preposterous it appears to be... which invites me to take his money and do his spouse.. since were all one big thing anyway so he shouldn't mind. Edited December 17, 2012 by Stosh 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites