XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: invalid@invalid.invalid   
      
   Tang Huyen  wrote:   
   > On 11/7/2016 4:32 PM, {:-]))) wrote:   
   >   
   >> Some so-called individuals may scoff   
   >> and say what they would do to her [Mother Nature?]  if she appeared.   
   >>   
   >> Little do they know her as her True Self.   
   >>   
   >> Given: four nickels = a paradigm shape shifting.   
   >   
   > Kant, The Conflict of Faculties, VII, 63:   
      
      
   > “Because if God   
   > really spoke to man, the latter however could never know   
   > that it is God who speaks to him.   
      
   Exactly stating the "pocket-universe-relative-God" problem.  On the other   
   hand, Kant fails to note there that even if man cannot know that what   
   speaks to him is God, NEITHER can Man know that what speaks to him is not   
   God.   
      
   There are ancient rumors to choose from. or make up from whole cloth; one   
   says there's an active wager ongoing between Gods, as to whether Man can   
   tell shit from shinola.  Another says that when Abraham was being tested,   
   told to kill his son, the two wagering Gods were passing the microphone   
   back and forth; once Abraham got wise to the scam and prepared an identity   
   test, that side-bet was lost and before Abraham could speak they lost   
   interest.   
      
   > It is absolutely   
   > impossible that man should grasp the infinite by his   
   > senses, distinguish it from sensible beings and thereby   
   > recognize it   
      
   This in particular is rumored to be the active wager mentioned above as   
   ancient rumor.  Personally I consider Kant to be in error on this point, or   
   at best, irrelevant.  It is possible to recognize the truth that never   
   deviates from 100% accuracy all the time.  [MDP: Maybe that pertains to the   
   phrase "God which cannot lie", I'm not sure.]  Anyway if something claimed   
   to be true (any claim whatsoever) is in perfect 100% correspondence with   
   the truth of actuality all the time, it's true right up to the point where   
   it is shown to have been false.  Usually that takes about a tenth of a   
   second.  Once in a while, it takes longer.  If it takes longer than the   
   lifetime of the observer, so far as that observer is concerned, it was   
   true.   
      
   > [Denn wenn Gott zum Menschen wirklich   
   > spräche, so kann dieser doch niemals wissen, dass es   
   > Gott sei, der zu ihm spricht. Es ist schlechterdings   
   > unmöglich, dass der Mensch durch seine Sinne den   
   > Unendlichen fassen, ihn von Sinnenwesen unterscheiden,   
   > und ihn woran kennen solle].”   
   >   
   > Dry, intellectual talk, but easy enough to relate to. Just   
   > think of the uncarved whole.   
   >   
   > Tang Huyen   
   >   
      
   What does the uncarved whole have to do with the Kant excerpt you posted?   
   Have I missed the point yet again, was this something to do with   
   asymmetrical titties that I didn't recognize because it was too subtle?   
      
   --   
   email: noname.1234567.abcdef@gmail.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)