other means of achieving a kind of nirvana through intense pleasure
and drugs. Anyway, why not a dash or two of disallusionment when one
reads human history? I will start a new post on happiness.
On Aug 31, 5:49 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "I suspected as much! Would we need an eternity if life were happier-
> but I guess if it exists, our happiness doesn't matter, does it? " –
> rigsy
>
> Actually, when residing in 'the kingdom' of eternity, happiness is the
> natural state. Some call it nirvana. Regardless, being driven by
> memories, the phantoms of the past and/or by projections into the
> future…when such things are driven by passions, dissatisfactions and
> the like, most philosophies and even religions know the natural result
> is suffering. So, with this wisdom in mind, living in the eternal
> present can and does exist with a resultant state that includes
> happiness. The experience of this state certainly does matter
> especially when contrasted with a state of disillusionment.
>
> On Aug 30, 9:22 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I suspected as much! Would we need an eternity if life were happier-
> > but I guess if it exists, our happiness doesn't matter, does it?
>
> > On Aug 30, 12:35 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > "...What is an "ultimate sense"?" - rigsy
>
> > > In this context, ultimate sense implies eternal/eternity.
>
> > > On Aug 30, 6:36 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Never fear! By last evening I considered that the ego could be viewed
> > > > as the "husk" of the soul! :-) Yes- I think in day-to-day terms though
> > > > I can stretch, if forced. For instance, we cease to exist because we
> > > > are forgotten and really only a grain of sand in an historical sense.
> > > > I am thinking that birth and death and their mystery started the
> > > > rituals- religions- philosophies- arts. What is an "ultimate sense"?
>
> > > > On Aug 29, 7:08 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > "Yes it is as I distinguish you from all others. Why? Because you
> > > > > have
> > > > > projected your ego driven self into words." – rigsy
>
> > > > > In the way you are looking at it rigsy, yes, ego does exist. Having
> > > > > had numerous and long discussions about this topic with Vam in the
> > > > > past, it is my understanding that when he (and I to some degree) say
> > > > > that ego isn't real we are talking in more of an ultimate sense, not a
> > > > > day to day interaction way. It is more in the line that anything that
> > > > > is 'real' is something that is permanent. And, I think it is clear
> > > > > that all of us, or most of us at least, hold that ego does cease to
> > > > > exist at some point.
>
> > > > > On Aug 29, 4:25 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Yes it is as I distinguish you from all others. Why? Because you have
> > > > > > projected your ego driven self into words.
>
> > > > > > On Aug 28, 11:16 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Vam, we are in agreement. The ego isn't real.
>
> > > > > > > On Aug 28, 12:27 pm, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Just continuing this discussion...
>
> > > > > > > > - The ego is NOT a living being in truth, in reality. It, in truth,
> > > > > > > > does not exist, is non-existent, is absent. If we still feel it as
> > > > > > > > something real, as some "thing" that must die, it is only because we
> > > > > > > > are ignorance itself, we are a lie, as in opposed to truth, we are
> > > > > > > > living in non-existence !
>
> > > > > > > > So, the only meaning that "...the death of the ego" has is " awakening
> > > > > > > > in truth, in existence, in reality," and resuming something very
> > > > > > > > ordinary, natural, and true. It is wholly strange being, but only
> > > > > > > > because we have been living in non-being so far.
>
> > > > > > > > But we have staked so much, our everything, in this non-existence and
> > > > > > > > untrue... that, indeed, it is not easy, herculean for most, and
> > > > > > > > impossible for the rest. Only because we simply not leave these
> > > > > > > > paradigms of untruth and non-being !
>
> > > > > > > > On Aug 28, 11:07 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Yes Vam, as one continues to move up the scale, the point above
> > > > > > > > > disillusionment is the death of ego itself. This more commonly is
> > > > > > > > > known as the dark night of the soul.
>
> > > > > > > > > The path isn't easy…but is knowable.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Aug 27, 7:42 pm, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Agree with everything you said here...
>
> > > > > > > > > > What I must emphasise however, as I believe you would too, is that '
> > > > > > > > > > violent ' nauseating experience of emptiness is not the last word on
> > > > > > > > > > it. Without this perspective, and caveat I may say, despair and
> > > > > > > > > > depression is inevitable... the background to the well known and
> > > > > > > > > > extended debate between Sartre and Camus aired publicly !
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Aug 28, 4:54 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > "Complexity is never a reason to shut our eyes, i wouldn't have
> > > > > > > > > > > thought... " – paradox
>
> > > > > > > > > > > IF you somehow interpreted my having said "Relativism and
> > > > > > > > > > > deconstructionism do lead one into the depths of the well of
> > > > > > > > > > > disillusionment." as a call for blindness, nothing could be further
> > > > > > > > > > > from the truth.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it is the semantics involved with the term 'disillusionment'.
> > > > > > > > > > > If so, in an attempt at clarification, this term to me is fairly high
> > > > > > > > > > > up the ladder of levels of consciousness. In fact, it is very close to
> > > > > > > > > > > where one begins to see things as they actually are. The term itself
> > > > > > > > > > > means that one is no longer held by the trance of illusions. And, in
> > > > > > > > > > > this context, such a realization compared to how most people apprehend
> > > > > > > > > > > the world before reaching being disillusioned, can be quite painful –
> > > > > > > > > > > thus the reference to depths of a well. Here, even though such pain
> > > > > > > > > > > has always been part of the psyche; at this level, one who is 'waking
> > > > > > > > > > > up' is no longer anesthetized to their ego (illusion) pain… it is
> > > > > > > > > > > being felt quite strongly consciously for the first time.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > So here, with the awareness of pain, one actually is able to begin to
> > > > > > > > > > > open one's eyes metaphorically.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > As an aside, Sartre's novel, "Nausea", is an example of the psyche
> > > > > > > > > > > reaching this particular level of consciousness. And, as most are
> > > > > > > > > > > aware, Jean-Paul was opening his eyes rather than closing them. Thus
> > > > > > > > > > > it can be said that this level of transition is where the awareness of
> > > > > > > > > > > the emptiness of life is quite acute.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 27, 10:57 am, paradox <eadohe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Complexity is never a reason to shut our eyes, i wouldn't have
> > > > > > > > > > > > thought...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 27, 3:13 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Relativism and deconstructionism do lead one into the depths of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > well of disillusionment.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 26, 10:50 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nietzsche argued (in front of the bourgeois) that bourgeois morality
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > was all based on the ability to use violence to recover debt. I take
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > it his play was ironic, much as Kierkegaard on Xtianity. To abandon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > morality and ethics in order to do the best we can in practical
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > circumstances is a move from generality to particularism and 'low and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > behold' the matter is somewhat ironic as we discover morality and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ethics in the particular. We might, for instance, be generally
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > against abortion, but leave this generality aside in considering a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rape victim wanting one - indeed we should go further and wonder what
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > role morality and ethics play in the decision that we have any 'right'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be considering a decision many of us think the woman concerned
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be able to make and expect only our support in it - that is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > help with her distress.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > In German philosophy after Hegel, there was much attempt to 'free
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought' from Geist and what we might call 'socially approved
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > epistemic authority' (which we might corrupt to 'moralising') - one
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > can draw the line through Fichte, Feuerbach, Nietzsche and on to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stirner - the problem always being how there could ever be an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > association of individuals free of morals and ethics - the answer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > usually being that some subjective awareness-analysis could replace
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > social authority. This is not exactly new to those of us with some
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > notion of self-discipline, and notions of govern-mentality or the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > creation of 'docile bodies' worry on just hoe 'subjective' we can be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in this sense.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > The question is probably about how we can get into meaningful review
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of what is deeply and potentially wrongly held. A good example would
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > be that
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário