From: nospam@example.net
On Wed, 1 May 2024, oldernow wrote:
>> Haha, brilliant! Well, this is why these types of
>> conversations, like the one on transcendence, tend
>> to end. If there is not common ground or truth,
>> there's little to be gained by talking. =/
>
> I still lean (LOL.. originally typed 'learn'..) more toward
> transcendence implying, in part, rising above The Problem
> (I know, I know... *what* "rises"...?), which Problem
> is seeing (i.e. re-presenting) ineffable reality as
> though a being isolated from it, which seemingly
> requires conceptuality / reality to negotiate /
> manipulate. In that context, words are
> evidence of still being stuck in The
> Dream also known as The Problem.
Sorry, I do not understand.
> Which is a long-winded way of saying that what is
> *potentially* gained by not talking is the possibility
> of realizing how words are an impediment to transcending
> The Problem, because using them reinforces the sense of
> being a being (lol) separate from ineffable reality....
> ;-)
Hmm, I think you're saying what I am saying. Let's not talk about it
anymore. ;)
> See how useless words are but for chasing their own
> mutually defined tails? ;-)
It depends on the topic. On transcendence, I will not continue to talk.
=)
> I dunno. I'm often accused of using "word salad", but to
> me it's just attempting to be rigorous about "heading
> confusion off at the pass". In a way I want to add even
> more code-like notation (, I love curly braces!).
> But it turns out that only makes things worse because it
> requires an audience that's practiced being that rigorous,
> or else it looks like word salad to them.... :-)
>
> So... AGAIN... the uselessness of words, *not* for their
> being inherently bad/evil, but for the implications /
> assumptions about ineffable reality that using them
> implies (aka "seemingly makes seemingly real").
>
>>>>> I don't think it needs to be eliminated, nor could it be
>>>>
>>>> There are religions and goals of meditation where the I
>>>> definitely should be extinguished.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And Buddha is his name!
>
> Heh, now you've got me wondering if we could make a fire
> extinguisher icon "stick" in online Buddhist circles? :-)
Why not? =)
>>>> That's another way to spin it.
>>>
>>> Words == Spin!
>>
>> Spin... as in spinning a yarn?
>
> Yes! Perhaps - to attempt to drive "it" (the meaning)
> home even more starkly - spinning a (seeming) *reality*....
>
> Despite my considering words mostly useless for anything
> "underlying-ly important", there's still the comedy aspect,
> which to me is generally about exposing our predicament.
> We generally do that with a sort of resignation, as though
> there's no way out. But even merely acknowledging the
> predicament humorous like seems a degree of at least
> not ignoring it.
>
> Of course, "liberals" are making haste to destroy comedy,
> which I believe I heard Jerry Seinfeld waxing eloquently
> on a few days ago. To me, their underlying impetus is
> taking the so-called self not only seriously, but far too
> seriously, which is completely at odds with ever seeing
> how that notion of a self is at the very heart of The
> Problem. All selves are so real that they must be boringly
> equal, to *never* be made fun of regardless how ridiculous
> they become, etc.
Amen! Thank god for the fedivese where non-politically correct humour
still fourishes! =)
> Violate that reality view, and yo ass is *cancelled*, baby!
Would that be your black ass? Or rather... your african-american ass?
> (See how my salvation - aka my black woman identification -
> is bearing verbiage fruit even as I type? ;-) )
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
