XPost: alt.atheism, alt.philosophy
From: brianf88@bigpond.net.au
"Joseph H" wrote in message
news:1159816240.603019.135260@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Brian Fletcher wrote:
>> "Joseph H" wrote in message
>> news:1159731629.041935.78520@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Brian Fletcher wrote:
>> >> "Joseph H" wrote in message
>> >> news:1159696306.983405.62040@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Brian Fletcher wrote:
>> >> >> >> Yet some individual "masters", well recorded, have been able to
>> >> >> >> illustrate
>> >> >> >> the meaningful journey of the individual, over eons
>> >> >> >> demonstrating a
>> >> >> >> priori
>> >> >> >> knowledge.> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Demonstating "a priori knowledge"? How can we have any such
>> >> >> > thing?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Firstly you have to ask "do we" befor you can find out "how".
>> >>
>> >> > Do we? No.
>> >>
>> >> Then what is the question? Do we, or how do we ? If your pov is "we
>> >> dont"
>> >> then asking "how do we" becomes irrelevant.
>> >
>> > My "how do we" is more a "How can we?" I don't think we can - but maybe
>> > you can put me right.
>>
>> Part of the actual process of discovering ones "priori" is to modify
>> one's
>> questions.
>
> It seems to me that "modify" here means to "limit the scope of". I
> can't do that. I can't allow illusions linger. Must tell it like I see
> it.
Great. Some say "tell it like I see it, but actually mean "tell it like we
see it"...
>>
>> Once again, intrinsic in your comments is the "group expectation"..ie
>> "how
>> can we". Very different platform of how can I".....
>>
>> This may sound trivial, but it is absolutely not. If you talk "we" you
>> will
>> be limited by the lowest common denominator.
>>
>> The more you "tune yourself in" , the easier the answers come....and they
>> do.
>
> I thought the main charge against me was that I projected my self onto
> exterior events. Now, it seems as if I'm not sufficiently assertive.
> Tis odd!
No charges, just discussion on the effect of self dialouge, and the
relevence of the words used
Recognising different realities, ie "group think" vs "individual perception"
can appear to 'groupies' to be an example of assertiveness.
BOfL
>>
>> BOfL
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Those masters I mentioned, didnt learn their timeless wisdom from
>> >> >> others.
>> >> > They conceived, created, fabricated, fashioned...their "timeless
>> >> > wisdom". We have that capacity. You have it. I have it. What's the
>> >> > mystery? There is none. We make it up.
>> >> >
>> >> >> >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?
>> >> >
>> >> > A priori BELIEF - not necessarily knowledge.
>> >>
>> >> A belief is made up of more than one person's pov, forming a mutual
>> >> support
>> >> for that limited commonality. Knowing/wisdom comes from
>> >> within"one"where
>> >> beliefs are transended.
>> >
>> > What's a "pov"?
>>
>> Pardon my presumption. We live in a world slowly collapsing under the
>> burder
>> of acronyms iykwim :-).........point of view.
>> >>
>> >> BOfL
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > 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.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> At least you are , what I refer to as "zooming out" to have a look.
>> >> >> Ironically, that also means "zooming in" to the true nature of the
>> >> >> observer.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You will be surprised at what you will see, which is why it is so
>> >> >> important
>> >> >> to keep in check the self dialouge "They" are always out to get
>> >> >> "you"
>> >> >> hehehehe..
>> >> >>
>> >> >> BOfL
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Joseph H
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> BOfL
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
