What We Think We Know

[manitou]

4 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

And this, as a practice, is entirely humbling...

 

 

And that would be the point 

[manitou]

10 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

As for myself I am willing to expand my concept of what constitutes a legitimate argument, but only when it is demonstrated that the kind of argument in question indeed (in all probability) leads to new knowledge. 

 

The funny thing is that when you take a step back and realize (prior to engaging in argument) that the other person's conditioning and genetic make-up render it impossible for him to see things as you do, it becomes less of an argument and more of an honest inquiry.  Does any argument convince anyone of anything?

[Everything]

10 hours ago, ilumairen said:

Pointed and pertinent imo.

You don't have to create the answers those questions, because it is not the job of your physical being to create the answer to those questions. Your greater non-physical consciousness, a small part of which is focused here through you, creates answers those questions. Furthermore so, they BECOME the ever MORENESS of those answer that you are seeking, so those answers are actually becoming more and more. Your job as a physical being, is to find a way to allow those answers to be received/realised by you, more fully here and now, flowing fully through you, that feels very good. Your job as a physical being is to enter the receiving mode, so that you can realise the answer to all questions you or anyone has. You are a vital part of the reason why they exist, it is your own greater non-physical consciousness, but if the physical being doesn't practice their ability to allow (wei wu wei) themselves to receive their greater knowing, the greater knowing goes unnoticed by you. It is never realised by you. So you have to place yourself into a state of being where you are receiving the answers to all questions you have and even sometimes those around you have, because sometimes the answer to a question you have is your FULL realisation of you answering a question that someone else has. Do you understand this? You are not doing this alone. You got your full greater non-physical consciousness of ever expanding intelligence and wisdom at your full disposal.

 

There is nothing wrong with asking a question, but you gotta understand that the energy of a question and that of the answer are very different frequencies. You cannot ask a question and receive an answer at the same time. Someone has to allow the answer to come into full realisation. And they allow it, by tapping into their own greater non-physical consciousness, into their own source of being, to flow the answers they will be receiving more fully through them. And if you wanna answer your own questions, you gotta write them down, let them go, and practice the allowing of your greater non-physical consciousness to flow more fully through you, so that you receive the answer to any and all questions you seek. Maybe you wanna record it. But first make sure you know how to enter the receiving mode, that feels very good. And flowing that fully through you and allowing yourself to flow your greater non-physical consciousness's knowing more fully through you always feels very good. As your emotions are literally always perfectly indicating the degree of your here and now allowance / resistance of your here and now relativity between you and your greater non-physical consciousness. Feel very good? You are allowing it to flow more fully through you here and now. Cause that's the point of all of existance. The rest just naturally flows from that. And meditation is one of the easiest way to enter the receiving mode which feels very good. Someone has to do it however. Otherwise all those answers will just go unnoticed by everyone. Forever and ever and ever. And trust me, we are all suppose to flow answers after answers evermore. Not self contradictory thought forms, but I'm talking about pure positive being and becoming. The kind of statements you can make, that will literally be like thoughts, turning to things. They will expand evermore, because they come from the Source of All Creation, and they will be and become evermore. And your fully allowed realisation of them evermore is what the point of life is all about.

 

And so you physical, and You non-physical, hand in hand, that is who you really are, a total fully realised being and becoming, in full joy. A whole person. Wholely realised. A full witt. Not a half witt, a full witt. Physical and Non-Physical hand in hand, in full joy, love and greater freedom evermore.

 

And again, it's not possible to have a question, and offer a thought form which is self contradictory in nature, and then receive the answer at the same time. You have to find a way to let go of the question to allow the answer to be more fully realised by you. And meditation is a great wonderful easy technique to help you do that. To feel very good, to flow the answers through you more fully, more consciously, more fully realised by you, ongoingly, evermore. Effortlessly, joyfully. Satisfactionally. It just feels good to allow yourself to receive all the answers you and/or everyone/anyone ever seeks evermore, ongoingly. In full joy and freedom evermore. And you always got acces to that, unconditionally, under any and all conditions, regardless of any and all conditions. You can allow the answers. Most people want other people to do it for them, but you were never ment to be a replacement for the source of all creation. We all have the ability to tap into our own source of evermore being and becoming. But again, nothing wrong with being of service aswell. It always feels very good ofcourse.

Edited August 12, 2019 by Everything

[Jadespear]

...i think the world of human civilization is in a state of permanent evolution or change.  This permanent "evolution" is driven or made to be what it is by the constancy of both definite truth and also of relative values.  What I mean by definite truth are the basics of every normal thinking person - they want to survive and be happy doing what they choose to do.  What I mean by relative values is that every person and every group and every nation - in short everyone everywhere has their own values, not just personal beliefs - i mean decisions that are made from a base of what is valued; like what to buy and what to sell.  Hence - human society is always struggling to cope and deal with this in how to organize everything- enter politics and all the rest of it. 

 

...How we know what we know?  What's so hard about this...?  facts are facts, lies are lies, truth is truth.  It's a branch of defined philosophy called logical positivism.  Asking for the basis of knowledge has been answered by science. 

 

...is there some-kind of knowledge that you are referring to specifically?  

[manitou]

Just now, Jadespear said:

...i think the world of human civilization is in a state of permanent evolution or change.  This permanent "evolution" is driven or made to be what it is by the constancy of both definite truth and also of relative values.  What I mean by definite truth are the basics of every normal thinking person - they want to survive and be happy doing what they choose to do.  What I mean by relative values is that every person and every group and every nation - in short everyone everywhere has their own values, not just personal beliefs - i mean decisions that are made from a base of what is valued; like what to buy and what to sell.  Hence - human society is always struggling to cope and deal with this in how to organize everything- enter politics and all the rest of it. 

 

...How we know what we know?  What's so hard about this...?  facts are facts, lies are lies, truth is truth.  It's a branch of defined philosophy called logical positivism.  Asking for the basis of knowledge has been answered by science. 

 

...is there some-kind of knowledge that you are referring to specifically?  

 

The concept of definite truth, I don't think, is the same as the fact that we want to survive or be happy.  The defined philosophy you're speaking of isn't the same as the Truth as is found in every human being, if one takes the trouble.  The perspective you're describing is predominately "left brained" (not a perfect descriptor, I know), and much of what is sought  on these threads is not accessed through externally obtained data.  They are obtained in a journey into self.

  There are underlying spiritual principles that appear to meet in a hub, once the trappings of any 'religion' are transcended.  It is these principles, very well described in the Tao te Ching, that are the focus of many here.  I think the knowledge spoken of in your question pertains to this type, more specifically.

[Everything]

9 minutes ago, Jadespear said:

...i think the world of human civilization is in a state of permanent evolution or change.  This permanent "evolution" is driven or made to be what it is by the constancy of both definite truth and also of relative values.  What I mean by definite truth are the basics of every normal thinking person - they want to survive and be happy doing what they choose to do.  What I mean by relative values is that every person and every group and every nation - in short everyone everywhere has their own values, not just personal beliefs - i mean decisions that are made from a base of what is valued; like what to buy and what to sell.  Hence - human society is always struggling to cope and deal with this in how to organize everything- enter politics and all the rest of it. 

 

...How we know what we know?  What's so hard about this...?  facts are facts, lies are lies, truth is truth.  It's a branch of defined philosophy called logical positivism.  Asking for the basis of knowledge has been answered by science. 

 

...is there some-kind of knowledge that you are referring to specifically?  

True knowing. Is being and becoming evermore. It is the Source of All Creation. It is actually who you truely are, as a total fully realised being and becoming evermore. How do you know you are allowing all that you truely are being and becoming to flow more fully here and now for your personal individual satisfaction of your very own evermore greater realisation of all that you truely are being and becoming evermore? You feel very good. It is a state of being, where the physical you and your greater non-physical consciousness is co-blending co-harmonizing. This alignment of you and You, is indicated by your positive emotions. That is how you know you are truely realising, here and now, who and what you truely are being and becoming evermore. It feels like full joy, expansive, free, light, all those things you call good feeling emotions.

[Jadespear]

2 minutes ago, Everything said:

True knowing. Is being and becoming evermore. It is the Source of All Creation. It is actually who you truely are, as a total fully realised being and becoming evermore. How do you know you are allowing all that you truely are being and becoming to flow more fully here and now for your personal individual satisfaction of your very own evermore greater realisation of all that you truely are being and becoming evermore? You feel very good. It is a state of being, where the physical you and your greater non-physical consciousness is co-blending co-harmonizing. This alignment of you and You, is indicated by your positive emotions. That is how you know you are truely realising, here and now, who and what you truely are being and becoming evermore. It feels like full joy, expansive, free, light, all those things you call good feeling emotions.

 

lol..... thanks for your "opinion".

[Everything]

15 minutes ago, Jadespear said:

 

lol..... thanks for your "opinion".

Wow thank you for recognizing it aswell and thank you for your appreciation, that was a pretty good realisation.

[Jadespear]

5 minutes ago, manitou said:

 

The concept of definite truth, I don't think, is the same as the fact that we want to survive or be happy.  The defined philosophy you're speaking of isn't the same as the Truth as is found in every human being, if one takes the trouble.  The perspective you're describing is predominately "left brained" (not a perfect descriptor, I know), and much of what is sought  on these threads is not accessed through externally obtained data.  They are obtained in a journey into self.

  There are underlying spiritual principles that appear to meet in a hub, once the trappings of any 'religion' are transcended.  It is these principles, very well described in the Tao te Ching, that are the focus of many here.  I think the knowledge spoken of in your question pertains to this type, more specifically.

 

...maybe not for abnormal people.  That's why I said normal people.  Balanced people.  Show me a person on this planet that wants to die and be miserable who is actually alive.  I was just illustrating a point that there are both absolute unchangeable things about life as well as things that do change based upon our choices.  The concept of absolute truth is not a nebulous idea, as it can easily be illustrated in any way- water boils at and only at a certain temperature; no one can change this. 

 

...ok - well the "knowledge" of what mystical concept that can't be described or spoken?  No matter what it is - its a potential truth, or fact, that can be expressed conceptually and in a significantly meaningfully enough way to be understood.  Such is the beauty of words of course.  The normally unseen world and everything "spiritual" is a world of things just like the material world that we see is, in so far that it exists and operates through specific parameters and is subject to absolute truths; i.e. like it takes time to read, to walk places, etc.  The same method of knowing how you know something applies to both worlds... 

 

...I think that the mysterious stigma that can be attached to the concept of spirituality should really be done away with.  It really only creates doubt and confusion.

 

How does one know what they fundamentally are?  they simply see it, just like when one sees a tree, or another person.  

[wandelaar]

14 hours ago, ilumairen said:

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but does this indicate the answer received actually clarified very little for you?

 

On the basis of your latest posts I have to conclude that we largely agree. So no problem there.

 

For your information, I have been greatly influenced by Karl Popper in finding a way out of the traditionalism-criticism dilemma.

 

My ironic post about "impressive" was directed to CT who is hiding behind overly abstract language as a way to escape criticism. It's exactly by using simple (or at least well defined) words with a relatively "rigid meaning" that one can expose oneself to possibly meaningful and useful criticism. That's the way I follow. Not hiding or obfuscating, but sticking out one's position as clear as possible.

 

And by the way, I don't consider my own personality as in any way great or superior. I'm only trying to make good use of its peculiarities.

Edited August 12, 2019 by wandelaar

[C T]

3 hours ago, Jadespear said:

 

...maybe not for abnormal people.  That's why I said normal people.  Balanced people.  Show me a person on this planet that wants to die and be miserable who is actually alive.  I was just illustrating a point that there are both absolute unchangeable things about life as well as things that do change based upon our choices.  The concept of absolute truth is not a nebulous idea, as it can easily be illustrated in any way- water boils at and only at a certain temperature; no one can change this. 

 

...ok - well the "knowledge" of what mystical concept that can't be described or spoken?  No matter what it is - its a potential truth, or fact, that can be expressed conceptually and in a significantly meaningfully enough way to be understood.  Such is the beauty of words of course.  The normally unseen world and everything "spiritual" is a world of things just like the material world that we see is, in so far that it exists and operates through specific parameters and is subject to absolute truths; i.e. like it takes time to read, to walk places, etc.  The same method of knowing how you know something applies to both worlds... 

 

...I think that the mysterious stigma that can be attached to the concept of spirituality should really be done away with.  It really only creates doubt and confusion.

 

How does one know what they fundamentally are?  they simply see it, just like when one sees a tree, or another person.  

 

Good points, except that a tree is much more than a tree, and a person.... infinitely more so. 

It would be quite a waste if one looking at a magnificent sunset and simply offer a cursory passing remark, "Oh another sunset." 

 

Jadedness and cynicism leads to ignorance and dismissive attitudes, which in turn lead to all sorts of blockages. The beauty of things that can be described, or have a name, i think, arise from the nuances around each of those things. But there is also a formless kind of beauty that is quite subtle and tender, and in trying to ascribe names to such exquisiteness  can, in some circles, be seen as a letdown to both the observer and the observed. The mystery is not just in trying to make sense of and attempting to understand why formless wonders exist, but how such wonders unfailingly inspire curiosity, creativity, and artistic expressions. 

 

 

Edited August 12, 2019 by C T

[C T]

8 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

On the basis of your latest posts I have to conclude that we large agree. So no problem there.

 

For your information, I have been greatly influenced by Karl Popper in finding a way out of the traditionalism-criticism dilemma.

 

My ironic post about "impressive" was directed to CT who is hiding behind overly abstract language as a way to escape criticism. It's exactly by using simple (or at least well defined) words with a relatively "rigid meaning" that one can expose oneself to possibly meaningful and useful criticism. That's way I follow. Not hiding or obfuscating, but sticking out one's position as clear as possible.

 

And by the way, I don't consider my own personality as in any way great or superior. I'm only trying to make good use of its peculiarities.

 

Me hiding? lol never... 

You reacted sarcastically because thats exactly how you have been wired to respond. 

My point about making attempts to get intimate with our reference points is precisely for the reason of understanding why we respond to things the way we do, and whether loosening the wires will lead to expanding one's perspective on things. 

[wandelaar]

4 hours ago, manitou said:

The funny thing is that when you take a step back and realize (prior to engaging in argument) that the other person's conditioning and genetic make-up render it impossible for him to see things as you do, it becomes less of an argument and more of an honest inquiry.  Does any argument convince anyone of anything?

 

It seldom happens that people are convinced by arguments. When I was young I loved participating in debates. But not any more. However - the compulsion to correct what I think is wrong dies hard.

[wandelaar]

@C T

 

So I'm acting as a robot, while you are partly free?

 

Following the advice of manitou I will quit this non-discussion. Good luck.

Edited August 12, 2019 by wandelaar

[C T]

23 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@C T

 

So I'm acting as a robot, while you are partly free?

 

Following the advice of manitou I will quit this non-discussion. Good luck.

 

What we think we know, we act accordingly. 

 

Timely discussion, and definitely one that's vitally highlighted by such demanding displays of wanting the rules of engagement to fit snugly within the comfort of one's dictates. Too bad the world doesn't always yield to our demands. 

 

Thanks, bye. 

[OldDog]

14 hours ago, wandelaar said:

... but we cannot throw away everything all at once, even if we wanted to. Critical evaluation is always a piecewise process.

 

Yes, I believe you are right ... But possibly for different reasons.

 

One, if as individuals we are over invested in one set of values, then a reboot represents an existential threat. We risk putting ourselves into a place where we lack direction and are overwhelmed by a sense of vulnerability. In that condition we are likely to grasp at the next thing to come along.

 

Also, if there are multiple overlapping spheres of influence, we might not be able to distinguish between them ... especially if they contain a lot of false information.

 

So, yeah, piecework. You have to start somewhere when dismantling complex structures.

 

When I look back into my youth to my earliest recollection of questioning something I had been told, I may not be able to recall the exact details but will never forget the feeling. It was one of being on the inside looking out. Pretty uncanny. The point being though that was not a reasoned response ... It was visceral ... intuitive. It was like an alarm that was saying ... Hold on, this is something that needs to be looked at more closely. It focused the intellect. Since my youth, this has happened countless times ... and still does. Once felt, anything that is related to the thing thst triggers the feeling become subject to scrutiny ... critical review. And the fog of confusion begins to lift.

[manitou]

2 hours ago, OldDog said:

 

Yes, I believe you are right ... But possibly for different reasons.

 

One, if as individuals we are over invested in one set of values, then a reboot represents an existential threat. We risk putting ourselves into a place where we lack direction and are overwhelmed by a sense of vulnerability. In that condition we are likely to grasp at the next thing to come along.

 

Also, if there are multiple overlapping spheres of influence, we might not be able to distinguish between them ... especially if they contain a lot of false information.

 

So, yeah, piecework. You have to start somewhere when dismantling complex structures.

 

When I look back into my youth to my earliest recollection of questioning something I had been told, I may not be able to recall the exact details but will never forget the feeling. It was one of being on the inside looking out. Pretty uncanny. The point being though that was not a reasoned response ... It was visceral ... intuitive. It was like an alarm that was saying ... Hold on, this is something that needs to be looked at more closely. It focused the intellect. Since my youth, this has happened countless times ... and still does. Once felt, anything that is related to the thing thst triggers the feeling become subject to scrutiny ... critical review. And the fog of confusion begins to lift.

 

I agree on the over investment of one set of values - and I would say that's generally our default perspective; those things that we were conditioned with.  I think there's a different reason that we're reluctant to give up our conditioning, where we feel safe.  I think it is because We Really Are The Intelligence that knows everything.  At the basis of who we are, we Know.  It is our conditioning that prevents us from clarity; the contortions have been inserted into us by lots of well meaning folks.

 

The reboot is miraculous.  The whole field shifts.

[Jadespear]

16 hours ago, C T said:

 

Good points, except that a tree is much more than a tree, and a person.... infinitely more so. 

It would be quite a waste if one looking at a magnificent sunset and simply offer a cursory passing remark, "Oh another sunset." 

 

Jadedness and cynicism leads to ignorance and dismissive attitudes, which in turn lead to all sorts of blockages. The beauty of things that can be described, or have a name, i think, arise from the nuances around each of those things. But there is also a formless kind of beauty that is quite subtle and tender, and in trying to ascribe names to such exquisiteness  can, in some circles, be seen as a letdown to both the observer and the observed. The mystery is not just in trying to make sense of and attempting to understand why formless wonders exist, but how such wonders unfailingly inspire curiosity, creativity, and artistic expressions. 

 

 

 

...obviously a tree is just a word.  Care to elaborate on what makes it so much more? 

 

The light that is actually everywhere and in everything is what I tend to see...  i actually understand trees and all life to be more or less the same fundamentally so - it's all forms of life existing by virtue of the innate light that is in actually everything... so however complex something can be or seem, it ultimately is not.  Hence my simplistic point of view and obvious candor for real resolve.  I have not found a single thing that does not contain that light.  I think Patanjali called it, the "purusha" - absolute consciousness, that is actually what everything really is on the inside.  

 

 

[ilumairen]

On 8/11/2019 at 11:59 PM, manitou said:

 

 

And that would be the point 

 

As it relates to the topic..

 

When I was a child rolling eyes would earn a slap to the face. It was considered quite rude.

 

This instruction from parents, grandparents, and friend's parents remains a "reference point."  With some more reference points, it can be understood as "playful yet dismissive" and more like a "no shit" in the language of emoticon.

 

*****

 

Regarding the sentence I wrote however, there was more implied than simple agreement, and imo such expansion of reference points can lead to what a friend long ago referred to as paralysis by analysis. This isn't always such a bad thing - except when it is (stifling).

[manitou]

2 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

 

 

When I was a child rolling eyes would earn a slap to the face. It was considered quite rude.

 

 

 

So sorry, my friend.  I didn't intend to be rude.  Please give me a break on this one

[ilumairen]

8 minutes ago, manitou said:

 

So sorry, my friend.  I didn't intend to be rude.  Please give me a break on this one

 

The concept of eye rolling being rude was formulated by the authority figures in my life when I was young. And as such, I figured our short interaction could serve to illustrate what's brought up in the article, and CT's additional reference points. 

 

If the only reference points I held were those of parents and grandparents, I would not have been able to avoid sensing "rudeness." With more reference points, there are other possible storylines, lending to more openness, and less reactivity. 

[manitou]

Please understand that I didn't even intend to eye roll.  I just think that little emoji is cute, that's all.  I intended no sarcasm.

[thelerner]

I like the Ninja emoji,  people should know it doesn't always mean I'll be dressed in black and attacking them soon. 

Not always.  

 

 

{{\\//}}

Edited August 13, 2019 by thelerner

[liminal_luke]

Is  a Ninja?  I´ve always used it for when I want to say something that I feel might get me attacked or something that I feel sheepish about.  To me, it looks like the figure is hiding.  Maybe playfully hiding.  If I want to say something playful and mischevious that might get me booed off the Daobums stage, I might end my statement with a .  

 

Am I the only one who uses this emoji like this?  Shows how much I know!

Edited August 13, 2019 by liminal_luke

[escott]

What do we know? - Emoji's mean different things to different people.

 

Reminds me of asking 10 witnesses to an event to describe what they saw and getting 10 versions.

 

What do we know...?