our world / earth as a simulation

[manitou]

3 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

Why was that?

 

Hard to put it into words, it was more like a deeper intuitive punch in the gut.  I think it is representative of the alignment of past, present, and future.  The seed contains DNA from the past, the physical seed is the present, the blueprint for the tree is the future.  As with many of those intuitive 'punches', there's no explaining it; there is just a ringing assent in our own hearts that it is true.

[Zhongyongdaoist]

23 hours ago, rideforever said:

It seems from what you said, your goal is to be like Plato and understand nothing. 
Well congratulations, why do you bother waking up in the morning ?
This is really insincere and a misuse of your intelligence ... in fact you probably think you are really clever by saying it.   

In fact you seek attention rather than truth and exploration.

 

There is a famous story that Plato giving one of his grand speeches to the right and famous philosophers decided that he himself would define a Man, to finally give a definition of Man.   He announced that a Man could be defined as a "featherless biped".   Diogenese of Sinope, a rebel philosopher, heard this rubbish and bought a dead chicken from the butcher, plucked all the feathers from it and walked into the Symposium and put it ontop of Plato's podium .... here is your "Man".
Later Plato changed the definition to "featherless biped with fingernails" ... something like that I forget exactly.

What it shows was that Plato was very much concerned with retaining his social status as Great Philosopher , and using philosophy as a means to entertain the crowd with pithy statements .... like the Cave.
Which although completely stupid wrong and leading nowhere, nevertheless got the applause, and the whole crowd could then go home feeling that they had done something useful, although they were all completely brainless.

Nobody was going to stake his comfortable life on anything at all.
Except Diogenese of Sinope.

 

Later Socrates staked his life on something, and lost his life.   For what ?   To save face in front of the crowd of morons?
This is also stupid.

Not risking your life is stupid.
And giving your life for the donkeys in the crowd is stupid.

 

A child is too young to be this stupid. (Emphasis mine, ZYD, also I note that rideforever has changed this since I quoted it.)

 

And your familiarity with Plato is what exactly?  Have you read any of the dialogs, or even a competent introduction to Plato's thought?  Or are you limited to quoting polemical rhetoric from rival schools, that you have picked up somewhere?

These are, as far as I am concerned, merely rhetorical questions, I am not interested in your answers because it is obvious that you are already a "born again" worshiper of  Diogenes and have closed your mind to all else, whereas I am not a worshiper of Plato, and in point of act when I first read Plato in my teens I thought it was ridiculous and said so for more than a decade.  During that decade I did a lot of work with spiritual traditions both Chinese and Western, I am not some "academic intellectual" who is contents simply to talk about such things, I have done everything I can to live them, both then and in all the time since.   It was only when I had to look deeper into Plato to understand the thought of others writing centuries later that begrudgingly and over a period of years, during which I read the dialogs and works about Plato and ancient Greek philosophy, and yes even all six volumes of W. K. C. Guthrie's A History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge University Press), that I began to realize that there was actually real value in his work and ideas, and I respect that work and the person who wrote it, and I would respect anyone who had a real and informed criticism of it.

 

Just to show to show yourself and others how much you don't know:
 

Quote

 

Nobody was going to stake his comfortable life on anything at all.
Except Diogenes of Sinope.

 

Later Socrates staked his life on something, and lost his life.   For what ?   To save face in front of the crowd of morons?
This is also stupid.

 

 

Diongenes was a mere child when Socrates was executed in circumstance too complex to detail here, so your chronology is all wrong, and he seems not to have staked his life on anything, except possibly eating tainted octopus, or playing with vicious dogs:

 

Quote

There are conflicting accounts of Diogenes' death. He is alleged variously to have held his breath; to have become ill from eating raw octopus;^[36] or to have suffered an infected dog bite.^[37] When asked how he wished to be buried, he left instructions to be thrown outside the city wall so wild animals could feast on his body. When asked if he minded this, he said, "Not at all, as long as you provide me with a stick to chase the creatures away!" When asked how he could use the stick since he would lack awareness, he replied "If I lack awareness, then why should I care what happens to me when I am dead?"^[38] At the end, Diogenes made fun of people's excessive concern with the "proper" treatment of the dead. The Corinthians erected to his memory a pillar on which rested a dog of Parian marble.^[39] (Wikipedia on the Death of Diongenes, Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

And yes, I do know why the notion that he died of "an infected dog bite" can probably be dismissed as polemical rhetoric from a rival school, and I have the sense to avoid such mistakes, whereas you apparently don't.  Based on what you have said and the mistakes you have made so far I see no reason to respect you or your criticism, either of Plato or of myself, with that in mind I see no point in continuing this discussion.

 

ZYD

 

P. S.,  I had written all of this post before discovering, as I noted above in the first quote above, that the rideforever had changed the ending and maybe other aspects of his post, but I hope that what I have already said makes clear that I am not someone who is merely clinging "to Plato's legs":

 

23 hours ago, rideforever said:

To become intelligent is to begin to exercise a new muscle, and come up with personal ideas, we can't just cling on to Plato's legs and think that's going to make us intelligent.   It is a work to be done.

 

I was a rigorous and independent thinker, as well as spiritual explorer, for several years before I read Plato the first time, when I was "sixteen going on seventeen", and misunderstood him, and practiced as I noted above, for over a decade, before I studied him the second time and gained a better understanding of him.  I was practicing yoga when I was ten and read Aleister Crowley when I was twelve, as well as books on Tibetan Yoga when I was thirteen or so, these and other works including the Tao Teh Ching, as it was called at the time, were all things that I read before I read Plato and they also colored my own interpretation of and subsequent rejection of Plao.  I could say more but I don't see a point in doing so and will draw the matter to a close now.  I have other things to do with my time than comment further and in point of fact must head out to do some of them now.

 

ZYD

 

 

 

Edit: Corrected a spacing problem in the last paragraph of the P. S., I literally had to run out the after posting it door to meet some commitments.

[rideforever]

2 minutes ago, Zhongyongdaoist said:

I am not someone who is merely clinging "to Plato's legs":

 

I have made detailed criticism of the Cave and of Plato's love of his social position and grand-standing.   
Do you have something specific to add, of your own, or some examples from Plato's teachings ?

 

[Nungali]

9 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

I have a version of the Matrix movies on cd's with commentaries by  Cornel West and Colin Wilson. The two philosophers don't take the story literally, but think of the matrix as a metaphor of this world being 'maya', or a mental construction of sorts.

 

Here is a free version that might be of interest to some, even though this is audio only and includes just the first part of the trilogy.

 

 

That's essentially how I am looking at these movies too: They are replete with meaning, but to get at it, you need to dig deep enough. The Wachowski brothers (sorry, sisters by now ) intentionally didn't explain the background to the movies, so you can freely use them as a mirror reflecting your own innate understanding. And you may actually find more and more of that, everytime you watch them again.

 

Have you read the original story, ( I haven't )  ?  I am wondering how far the movie is from it ?  One day on set, 'The Bros' tore strips angrily and loudly, in front of the crew of  Bill Pope (DOP )  for wrecking their story and making the movie something else . - I am sure its similar, they must have meant the artistic vision or something ?   Maybe that's why they dont want to comment ,

 

Plus, ya gotta remember they themselves are not 'real people '  They are  'gamers'      ........   so they are  always ( nearly ) always ) in some artificial reality . 

[Nungali]

9 hours ago, manitou said:

 

 

Realization of this concept, 'the oak is in the acorn', was the very thing that started me on my spiritual journey many years ago.  What a delight it was to see it here...

 

 

 

I can't conceive the nucleus of all
Begins inside a tiny seed
And what we see as insignificant
Provides the purest air we breathe

 

 

 

 

[sustainablefarm86]

On those matrix websites they seem to like talking about implants, sabotage mechanisms of the matrix, etheric robot surveilance, sucky sucky of your energy and all other sort of matrix control mechanisms. For you experienced sit down and shuttupers, how much of that is true and how much is imagined and how much is paranoia?

 

 

Edited December 24, 2018 by King Jade

[manitou]

21 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

 

I can't conceive the nucleus of all
Begins inside a tiny seed
And what we see as insignificant
Provides the purest air we breathe

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't remember the strange little pamphlet I found somewhere - I just looked for it and cant find it.  But it was the teachings of the Nazarene, wherein he talked about the magic of the blades of grass.  How the secrets of life were contained therein.  Wish I could find it.  Thanks so much for that wonderful song, Nungali.  I hadn't heard it before.

[thelerner]

1 hour ago, manitou said:

I can't remember the strange little pamphlet I found somewhere - I just looked for it and cant find it.  But it was the teachings of the Nazarene, wherein he talked about the magic of the blades of grass.  How the secrets of life were contained therein.  Wish I could find it.  Thanks so much for that wonderful song, Nungali.  I hadn't heard it before.

That reminds me of a Talmudic saying: “Every blade of grass has its Angel that bends over it and whispers, "Grow, grow." - The Talmud (w/ a new age-ish translation)

 

dig deeper (Bereshit Rabbah 10.6) and maybe its not exactly grass but every herb, and not so much whispers as 'strikes it' and says grow grow.  Striking might be more painful then a whisper but often growth comes with a certain amount of discomfort.   course dig deeper then that and is it Angels?  or is it the stars/contellations in heaven?  or is it meaning destiny? 

 

 

or maybe its this one (Niddah (30b), also from the Talmud.  While in the womb, an angel whispers in your ear, all the secrets of life, then just before you're born, they touch just under the nose, which gives you little indentation and you forget all that knowledge.  So, your mission is to re-learn.  Which, after all is easier, because its partly remembering. 

 

 

 

[manitou]

1 hour ago, thelerner said:

 its this one (Niddah (30b), also from the Talmud.  While in the womb, an angel whispers in your ear, all the secrets of life, then just before you're born, they touch just under the nose, which gives you little indentation and you forget all that knowledge.  So, your mission is to re-learn.  Which, after all is easier, because its partly remembering. 

 

 

 

 

…..which is a way of explaining those Aha! moments when we perceive that a truth is self-evident; it is in alignment with something that is already known to us but suddenly brought to consciousness.  Like tumblers in a lock falling into place.

[Zen Pig]

On 12/23/2018 at 12:28 PM, rideforever said:

Do you seek truth and exploration or ... entertainment ?

This for me, is a very deep question, and in my experience the two are not mutually exclusive. 

I have met my fair share of so called "awakened or enlightened" people who had huge sticks up there asses,  thought way to  much of themselves,   sat on little thrones in white silk pontificating there "Truth', while there high paying followers threw money, and many times there own bodies at these folks.

But I have also seen just a few folks who did not do this, but lived simple happy lives.  The one commonality with this very small group who I feel are the "real deals", is there profound sense of humor.  They laugh at themselves, at life,  and almost constantly have a gleam in there eyes, when they talk.  A few wear rags, but one cannot help being drawn to there simple wisdom.  Just my two cents.

[rideforever]

2 minutes ago, Zen Pig said:

But I have also seen just a few folks who did not do this, but lived simple happy lives.  The one commonality with this very small group who I feel are the "real deals", is there profound sense of humor.  They laugh at themselves, at life,  and almost constantly have a gleam in there eyes, when they talk.  A few wear rags, but one cannot help being drawn to there simple wisdom.  Just my two cents.

 

Yes I love such people also.   
I wish I had been as good as them, and perhaps one day shall be.
The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.

 

[kondensation]

I liked the idea of living in a simulation for a long time. The website, not so much. The author seemed too excited, as if pitching a product.