XPost: alt.atheism, alt.philosophy   
   From: brianf88@bigpond.net.au   
      
   "Joseph H"  wrote in message   
   news:1159465899.878778.100140@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...   
   >   
   > Sean wrote:   
   >> "Joseph H"  wrote in message   
   >> news:1159382770.371279.19030@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...   
   >> >   
   >> > ralph wrote:   
   >> >> In message <1159294349.429981.271530@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,   
   >> >> Joseph H  writes   
   >> >>   
   >> >> >We sure do. My contention is that it is time we paid more attention   
   >> >> >to   
   >> >> >observable reality and less to the creation of it. I suggest that the   
   >> >> >sum total of known observable reality is now sufficient to provide   
   >> >> >all   
   >> >> >the meaning we seek.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Absolutely, Joseph. Everything.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Except, maybe, the structure of the Universe?   
   >> > Hallo, Ralphie, still stirring it up, you ol dawg...!   
   >> >   
   >> > The structure of the universe? We seem to be gathering information on   
   >> > that as we speak. But in any case I never said that we already know   
   >> > EVERYTHING. I said we know enough to provide meaning. It's a fine   
   >> > point. But you missed it, baby.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Oh, and life ...   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Oh, and consciousness ...   
   >> >>   
   >> >> And the possibility of life elsewhere ...   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Yes, and how to run a globalised society that is sustainable for all   
   >> >> ...   
   >> >>   
   >> >> As you say, all the meaning we seek.   
   >> >   
   >> > Maybe you should check out the difference between meaning and   
   >> > knowledge. Meaning provides a valued basis for existence. I believe we   
   >> > know enough to be able to say that we have such.   
   >> > Joseph H   
   >>   
   >> Maybe Joseph you could check out the difference between *I* and *We* ....   
   >> then check out your own self-dialogue for some meaning into what you're   
   >> saying and thinking.   
   >>   
   >> In psychology there's a concept called "projection". In metaphysics   
   >> there;s   
   >> thing called "group think". cheers   
   >   
   > Thank you for your gnomic observations. I'm agog. Doubtless, I have any   
   > amount of blind spots. Actually, I think I have a blind-spot for my   
   > blind-spots. But I would have thought that the tradition of someone   
   > saying "I think we should do this..or that" is as old as we are - or   
   > certainly as old as the beginning of language.   
   >   
   > Maybe you could elaborate?   
   >   
   > Joseph h   
      
   You are obviously a very smart cookie Joseph.   
      
   What's remarkable to me is that inspite of intelligence,( I dont consider   
   myself high in that particular arena), the understanding of what Sean is   
   talking about is extermely significant in the "consciousness" stakes and is   
   second nature to me.   
      
   When I first considered this aspect of "self dialogue" many years ago, the   
   penny dropped. It was life changing.   
      
   Thats one thing Sean and I have in common.   
      
   Biblically the "I am that which I am" resounds very differently than "we are   
   that which we are" :-)   
      
   BOfL   
      
      
      
      
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)