XPost: alt.atheism, alt.philosophy   
   From: brianf88@bigpond.net.au   
      
   "Joseph H"  wrote in message   
   news:1159650000.267361.69110@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...   
   >   
   > Brian Fletcher wrote:   
   >> "Joseph H"  wrote in message   
   >> news:1159546999.993404.19840@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...   
   >> >   
   >> > Brian Fletcher wrote:   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Biblically the "I am that which I am" resounds very differently than   
   >> >> "we   
   >> >> are   
   >> >> that which we are" :-)>   
   >> > I have to say - in all honesty and with the greatest respect - that I   
   >> > am lost.   
   >>   
   >> Thats a huge step from an oft repeated mantra "we are lost"....   
   >   
   > I actually meant that I didn't understand what you were telling me.   
      
   I usually know what people mean, but I attempt to point out why they dont   
   ask  in the first person. Those that refuse to, can only find "group   
   answers". Not my field.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> >Biblically, I am wanderiing in the wilderness. I am well   
   >> > aware of the dangers of solipsism - and well aware that the solipsist   
   >> > is incapable of seeing his situation.   
   >>   
   >> Then the term solipsist needs re-defining.With an increasing awareness of   
   >> seeing my situation (and more importantly, how I have created it), I have   
   >> a   
   >> great excitement of venturing into the "unseen".   
   >   
   > Mmmm...?   
      
   How about "the world is full of solipsists working eagerly through group   
   neurosis on the journey to discover their authentic nature".   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> > But I ask myself which of the   
   >> > following observations entitles me to be charged with solipsism:   
   >> >   
   >> > !:Our intelligence brings a  new dimension to life.   
   >>   
   >> Group consciousness.   
   >>   
   >> > 2: We have spent the last 50,000, or more, years inhabiting all the   
   >> > corners of our planet.   
   >>   
   >> ditto   
   >>   
   >> > 3: During this time, in the absence of or in the limited presence of   
   >> > knowledge,  we have conceived of a multitude of attitudes to the   
   >> > experience of living.   
   >>   
   >> Yet some individual "masters", well recorded, have been able to   
   >> illustrate   
   >> the meaningful journey of the individual, over eons demonstrating a   
   >> priori   
   >> knowledge.The multitude of attitudes to which we be become exposed,   
   >> facilitates growth of  individuality, in fact, the more out of synch we   
   >> become with external events, the more we seek (and find) our true   
   >> individual   
   >> nature.   
   >   
   >   
   > Demonstating "a priori knowledge"? How can we have any such thing?   
      
   Firstly you have to ask "do we" befor you can find out "how".   
      
   Those masters I mentioned, didnt learn their timeless wisdom from others.   
      
   If that was the case, we would all be equal in our awareness.(not to be   
   confused with group consciousness).   
      
   Today's science illustrates perfectly the sequence of the opening of such   
   knowledge.We can actually observe the brain adapting biologically to   
   thought.Add that to quantum reality, and still Socrates wisdom is validated   
   .   
      
   >And   
   > surely, if anything, I am out of synch...so how come my discoveries,   
   > such as they are, aren't expressive of my "true individual nature"?   
      
   But they are. Your "authentic nature" is multi layered. I know things I dont   
   believe, and believe things that I dont know.   
      
   Every step is the correct step, even if it is a step of 'elimination'. Eg,   
   you have to talk to a rich man to hear the valid view of the meaning "money   
   cant buy you peace and tranquility", then to validate, go and get rich.   
      
   I'll even be your business coach ..hehehehehehe...   
   >>   
   >> > 4: The exigiencies of control and the lack of a global agreement on   
   >> > rights etc led to much repression during this time.   
   >> > 5: In the last 500 years Europe led the way in fashioning a form of   
   >> > society where freedom was promised to all.   
   >> > 6: During this time Europe also dominated other populations.   
   >> > 7: The discovery of the uses of oil little more than a century ago led   
   >> > to an acceleration in many of the foregoing trends - population   
   >> > increased; likewise wealth; likwise freedom; likewise opposition to   
   >> > reprerssion; likewise knowledge; likewise tension between the old and   
   >> > the new worlds.   
   >> > 8: This new age requires a new ideology - one based not on belief nor   
   >> > the quest for freedom. It requires an ideology founded on the knowledge   
   >> > we have gained, the knowledge of our privileged place in the universe.   
   >>   
   >> I would say the same, but replacing "I" for "we"  and "mine" for "our" in   
   >> the last sentence.   
   >>   
   >> > AND our perilous place on this planet.   
   >> > 9: Until we acquire this ideology we will not meet adequately or   
   >> > successfully the challenges we now face.   
   >>   
   >> That works for "I" and "we", although from where "I" am looking,   
   >> everything   
   >> is "on track"   
   > ?   
   >> >   
   >> > Tendentious, yes; maybe totally wrong....But hardly solipsistic   
   >> >   
   >> > Ciao   
   >>   
   >> Again, depending on the definition.You points are analogous with a young   
   >> person going through various rites of passage, where he emerges from a   
   >> "group entity" towards his individuality . My ref of  "that which we are"   
   >> could be seen as "circumstantial facilitation" to the journey of the   
   >> individual, through which, an essential aspect of ones nature emerges,   
   >> being   
   >> that of empathy.   
   >   
   > Sorry, Brian, I simply don't understand.   
      
   Apologies not acceptable or necessary (I know...often a figure of speach.Old   
   habits die hard :-)   
      
   >i think empathy plays a large   
   > part in my life. I also sense that I actually don't understand, don't   
   > fundamentally "grasp", a lot of what other people take for granted.   
      
   Taking something for granted is not "to be grasped". Empathy means "I   
   undertstand why they would feel that way"...like the rich guy talking to the   
   poor guy trying to buy fulfillment.   
      
   > This is, of course, a weakness.   
      
   Not if you re look at the above definition.   
      
   >But I also sense that it has forced me   
   > to see things in a manner others don't see them.   
      
   The process of individualisation. "Seek ye first the kingdom of heaven" is a   
   good biblical analogy.   
      
   > I think most of us   
   > inhabit a particular "wavelength" of understanding. We take on  board   
   > belief and local and national loyalties, basic components of human   
   > existence, for thousands of years. I don't go down that road.   
      
   More examples of "priori knowledge". You refer to "group think", where there   
   is no priori kowledge. See why the confusion?   
      
   > Lacking   
   > those loyalties - which are generally affirming and life-suporting - I   
   > have been forced to conceive of another stratum of support, one based   
   > not on creativity and tradition but on an assessment of what I feel to   
   > be true about our situation on the planet.   
      
   Again, see what I mean when I say "external chaos stimulates the need to   
   search for inner reality.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)