Artists & Celebries & Entertainment

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Beliefs

2012-01-31T12:42:00.000-08:00

lol you have a guardian Neil, mine ended up with the name Patches over a long duration, and it put a name it put a name to my companion Patches does not wake my dogs when I am to lazy to d it,, maybe the interation can be more explained like a parent or older sibling guiding you at wha you are doing.

You may notice it when your attention is suddenly drawn an object for what ever reason. If you take the time to understand the faith of a child and not having to know everything your guardian may calm you guiding you in the assembly process.. Forgive me when I say i enjoy the company of my guardian, when I am trying to understand something I talk to patches, what people see is me talking to my self,, that is there problem.
Allan

You might try calling your guardian "Charlie" or something else it doesn't matter

On Jan 31, 2012 5:50 PM, "archytas" <nwterry@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Our dog is upstairs sulking because I'm building a flat-pack wardrobe
> in Sue's room instead of letting him drag me round the block. One is
> in need of several 'Patches' in life to cope with dog detritus
> cunningly placed underfoot and the congeries of flat-pack assembly -
> notably one to cope with my temper on these occasions of hazard!
> On Jan 30, 7:35 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have had both of my knees replaced, I am not complaining as they are
> > what allow me to walk normally, they do come with their share of problems
> > though and they can not take the abuse of a normal healthy knee..
> >
> > This morning I was taking my dog down stairs to go potty, half awake as
> > usual and I over stepped taking three steps at one time. That is not good
> > for me or my artificial knees. The moment before what could have been a
> > serious accident happened I was suddenly brought to being totally
> > alert where I was able to prevent a serious falling accident. I have a
> > Spiritual Guardian whose name is Patches who managed to save my buns from
> > serious injury. Patches is very much part of my life in this physical
> > world, Because of him I know there is order instead of chaos and also there
> > is rank and file.
> >
> > I am very grateful to Patches as he has been my companion though thick an
> > thin. I know he is a very honored guardian, the reason why I prefer not to
> > make public..
> >
> > (NOTE)
> > The occupy movement is required to move to shelters during freezing weather
> > which was to the delight of the Mayor of Den Haag ,, sorry
> > the occupy movement is allowed to be on their site till 10 PM at which time
> > they are required to go to shelters for their safety, The courts have ruled
> > this way and they also ruled that the tents do not have to be removed and
> > when it is safe to return they will to their tents full time.. the
> > emergency shelters are open to all that need them and the homeless are
> > required to go there.. The City is also required to 'post' Police Officers
> > to protect their property and tents while they are in the shelters.
> >
> > It is nice to see protesters dealt with humanly rather than have them beat
> > up at the whim of politicians under the influence of money.
> > Allan
> >
> > --
> > (
> > )
> > |_D Allan
> >
> > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.hel\

Re: Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-31T10:55:00.000-08:00

I do do that kind of speculation RP - but sometimes something 'closer
to home' makes me wonder. Epigenetics closely links our changes in
evolution with climatic changes and the like (good example at PLoS
One, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030226). This adaptability can often
feel built-in by mind. I agree with Dawkins that such spewculation
doesn't seem to help at all with science - but science itself comes up
short in terms of the moral. I'm putting a flat-pack wardrobe
together at the moment to make storing our stuff easier (etc.) - and I
often wonder why this life - I tend to prefer it being for something
and that 'we' may know this in the future.

On Jan 31, 5:40 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we conjecture that infinite space was always there without a beginning
> and infinite number of universes have been born and died we reach some sort
> of an answer. Just before this universe the energy latent in space
> convulsed and formed a cosmic egg , which by its very nature contained the
> entirety of the universe as a hen is contained in an egg , now the energy
> which created the egg had to be guided by something and to me the answer is
> the cosmic mind. Neil, this is my conjecture , but I like the truth to be
> so.

Re: Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-31T09:40:00.001-08:00

If we conjecture that infinite space was always there without a beginning and infinite number of universes have been born and died we reach some sort of an answer. Just before this universe the energy latent in space convulsed and formed a cosmic egg , which by its very nature contained the entirety of the universe as a hen is contained in an egg , now the energy which created the egg had to be guided by something and to me the answer is the cosmic mind. Neil, this is my conjecture , but I like the truth to be so.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-31T09:09:00.001-08:00

The 'making sense of things later' seems true even in the split second
in brain research. I regard all strategy as retrospectively devised!
There's a book just out by Hill and Myatt (economists) on just how
facile economics teaching is in universities - but this contains
nothing on how this has happened. Some of this seems to me connected
with a lack of movement beyond identity Molly.

On Jan 31, 1:30 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Part of human nature is to identify with people, thoughts, ideas
> around us. Being able to witness your identification, and moving
> beyond it is the real treasure.
>
> On Jan 29, 9:10 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Molly your question has my mind running around its dust bins. Most my
> > thoughts are not original but more composites of other ideas. They are like
> > hand me downs,, like the 3D image comes from watching how people search
> > for treasure on sunken vessels, it is rags from a different ?idea?.
>
> > My world is a world of rags in the form of other ideas.
> > Allan
> > On Jan 29, 2012 8:21 PM, "Allan H" <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone.
>
> > > it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced As I have
> > > very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a lot..which is
> > > no problem as I am never really alone,.
> > > Allan
>
> > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?
>
> > >> On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> > >> > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> > >> > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> > >> > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> > >> > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > The paramount paradox.
>
> > >> > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > >> > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > >> > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I
> > >> could
> > >> > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > >> > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > >> > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > >> > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > >> > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > >> > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > >> > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth
> > >> around
> > >> > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close
> > >> to
> > >> > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real
> > >> time,
> > >> > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > >> > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > >> > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam
> > >> says,
> > >> > > > > looking within.
>
> > >> > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating
> > >> what
> > >> > > > > > already exists.
>
> > >> > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs
> > >> to prove
> > >> > > > > > that it has.
>
> > >> > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were
> > >> oral and
> > >> > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One
> > >> also
> > >> > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > >> > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous
> > >> because
> > >> > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and
> > >> distain
> > >> > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its
> > >> citizens- it
> > >> > > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > >> > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > >> > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an
> > >> 'entourage'
> > >> > > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than
> > >> you and
> > >> > > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some
> > >> rough
> > >> > > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name.
> > >> When I
> > >> > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the
> > >> chance to
> > >> > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few)
> > >> should
> > >> > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been
> > >> done
> > >> > > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the
> > >> shoulders of
> > >> > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish
> > >> stature).
> > >> > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal
> > >> in
> > >> > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never
> > >> produced a
> > >> > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown
> > >> being
> > >> > > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute
> > >> 'relativity'
> > >> > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The
> > >> chattering
> > >> > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > >> > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown
> > >> in such
> > >> > > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > >> > > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would
> > >> have us
> > >> > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is
> > >> sensible.
> > >> > > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to
> > >> that! (Oscar
> > >> > > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is
> > >> that which
> > >> > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > >> > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > > > Earth.
>
> > >> > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our
> > >> capacity to
> > >> > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective
> > >> manner,
> > >> > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative
> > >> of
> > >> > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable
> > >> memory
> > >> > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain -
> > >> perhaps
> > >> > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can
> > >> pervert into
> > >> > > > > > > its support.
>
> > >> > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit
> > >> concerns a
> > >> > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > >> > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism
> > >> easy to
> > >> > > > > > > rule).
>
> > >> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic
> > >> multidimensional mind
> > >> > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view
> > >> at least as
> > >> > > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > >> > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up
> > >> at it is
> > >> > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I
> > >> found his view
> > >> > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > >> > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his
> > >> discourse
> > >> > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also
> > >> my
> > >> > > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What
> > >> damned
> > >> > > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to
> > >> give
> > >> > > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If
> > >> it's not
> > >> > > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > >> > > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are
> > >> libraries
> > >> > > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I
> > >> wish to put
> > >> > > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be
> > >> everyone's, of
> > >> > > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The
> > >> search for
> > >> > > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without
> > >> fear, free
> > >> > > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take
> > >> away from
> > >> > > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > >> > > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on
> > >> a " home "
> > >> > > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body...
> > >> house or
> > >> > > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst
> > >> us come to
> > >> > > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the "
> > >> home " to
> > >> > > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their
> > >> happiness
> > >> > > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > >> > > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or
> > >> pet,
> > >> > > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their
> > >> emotion-thought-identity where,
> > >> > > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our
> > >> thought is
> > >> > > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to
> > >> focus on
> > >> > > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of
> > >> delicacies,
> > >> > > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our
> > >> purposes and
>
> ...
>
> read more »

Re: Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-31T09:00:00.001-08:00

This is at it seems to me RP. The maths of tomorrow being rather like
today is famously complicated though. One cannot be sure about
designing mind and I can think of other possibilities, though none
resolve the beginning conundrum.

On Jan 30, 2:14 am, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The orderly way our body is formed and works throughout life , the
> effects of food and the environment on it - shows that there is some
> Mind behind it and which by its very name denotes order and not chaos.
> We can see order everywhere and where we don't we will find so in
> times to come as life cannot be explained by human caprice. Neil , the
> spiritual and the material is mixed up and no spiritual activity can
> override its physical or material background. You will still need this
> physical body and brain for all your spiritual controls. And the
> physical , you will admit , is very much controlled by laws of biology
> etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 4:36 AM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure we are that certain of the trajectories of celestial
> > bodies RP. We need fractals even for that. I'm not sure determinism
> > matters as we attempt to understand what is determining us and whether
> > we can exert some other (spiritual) 'control'. It may all be for
> > nothing by such is the nature of the quest.
>
> > On Jan 29, 6:44 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If you read my posts in continuum you will find that I have been
> >> saying the same thing , although not thus rudely.
>
> >> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:55 PM, pol.science kid <r.freeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > but sometimes you know .. you say something completely different..
>
> >> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:51 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the Creation which
> >> >> emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you have choice , but
> >> >> whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the trajectory of the
> >> >> celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is bound by laws and
> >> >> everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of God".
>
> >> > --
> >> > EverComing

Mind's Eye Re: Beliefs

2012-01-31T08:50:00.000-08:00

Our dog is upstairs sulking because I'm building a flat-pack wardrobe
in Sue's room instead of letting him drag me round the block. One is
in need of several 'Patches' in life to cope with dog detritus
cunningly placed underfoot and the congeries of flat-pack assembly -
notably one to cope with my temper on these occasions of hazard!

On Jan 30, 7:35 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have had both of my knees replaced, I am not complaining as they are
> what allow me to walk normally, they do come with their share of problems
> though and they can not take the abuse of a normal healthy knee..
>
> This morning I was taking my dog down stairs to go potty, half awake as
> usual and I over stepped taking three steps at one time. That is not good
> for me or my artificial knees. The moment before what could have been a
> serious accident happened I was suddenly brought to being totally
> alert where I was able to prevent a serious falling accident. I have a
> Spiritual Guardian whose name is Patches who managed to save my buns from
> serious injury. Patches is very much part of my life in this physical
> world, Because of him I know there is order instead of chaos and also there
> is rank and file.
>
> I am very grateful to Patches as he has been my companion though thick an
> thin. I know he is a very honored guardian, the reason why I prefer not to
> make public..
>
> (NOTE)
> The occupy movement is required to move to shelters during freezing weather
> which was to the delight of the Mayor of Den Haag ,, sorry
> the occupy movement is allowed to be on their site till 10 PM at which time
> they are required to go to shelters for their safety, The courts have ruled
> this way and they also ruled that the tents do not have to be removed and
> when it is safe to return they will to their tents full time.. the
> emergency shelters are open to all that need them and the homeless are
> required to go there.. The City is also required to 'post' Police Officers
> to protect their property and tents while they are in the shelters.
>
> It is nice to see protesters dealt with humanly rather than have them beat
> up at the whim of politicians under the influence of money.
> Allan
>
> --
> (
> )
> |_D Allan
>
> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-31T05:30:00.001-08:00

Part of human nature is to identify with people, thoughts, ideas
around us. Being able to witness your identification, and moving
beyond it is the real treasure.

On Jan 29, 9:10 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Molly your question has my mind running around its dust bins. Most my
> thoughts are not original but more composites of other ideas. They are like
> hand me downs,, like the 3D image comes from watching how people search
> for treasure on sunken vessels, it is rags from a different ?idea?.
>
> My world is a world of rags in the form of other ideas.
> Allan
> On Jan 29, 2012 8:21 PM, "Allan H" <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone.
>
> > it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced As I have
> > very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a lot..which is
> > no problem as I am never really alone,.
> > Allan
>
> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?
>
> >> On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> >> > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> >> > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> >> > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> >> > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > The paramount paradox.
>
> >> > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> >> > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> >> > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I
> >> could
> >> > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> >> > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> >> > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> >> > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> >> > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> >> > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> >> > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth
> >> around
> >> > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close
> >> to
> >> > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real
> >> time,
> >> > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> >> > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> >> > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam
> >> says,
> >> > > > > looking within.
>
> >> > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating
> >> what
> >> > > > > > already exists.
>
> >> > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs
> >> to prove
> >> > > > > > that it has.
>
> >> > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were
> >> oral and
> >> > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One
> >> also
> >> > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> >> > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous
> >> because
> >> > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and
> >> distain
> >> > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its
> >> citizens- it
> >> > > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> >> > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> >> > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an
> >> 'entourage'
> >> > > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than
> >> you and
> >> > > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some
> >> rough
> >> > > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name.
> >> When I
> >> > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the
> >> chance to
> >> > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few)
> >> should
> >> > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been
> >> done
> >> > > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the
> >> shoulders of
> >> > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish
> >> stature).
> >> > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal
> >> in
> >> > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never
> >> produced a
> >> > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown
> >> being
> >> > > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute
> >> 'relativity'
> >> > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The
> >> chattering
> >> > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> >> > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown
> >> in such
> >> > > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> >> > > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would
> >> have us
> >> > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is
> >> sensible.
> >> > > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to
> >> the
> >> > > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to
> >> that! (Oscar
> >> > > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is
> >> that which
> >> > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> >> > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of
> >> the
> >> > > > > > > Earth.
>
> >> > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our
> >> capacity to
> >> > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective
> >> manner,
> >> > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative
> >> of
> >> > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable
> >> memory
> >> > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain -
> >> perhaps
> >> > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer
> >> the
> >> > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can
> >> pervert into
> >> > > > > > > its support.
>
> >> > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit
> >> concerns a
> >> > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> >> > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism
> >> easy to
> >> > > > > > > rule).
>
> >> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic
> >> multidimensional mind
> >> > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view
> >> at least as
> >> > > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> >> > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up
> >> at it is
> >> > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I
> >> found his view
> >> > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> >> > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his
> >> discourse
> >> > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also
> >> my
> >> > > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What
> >> damned
> >> > > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to
> >> give
> >> > > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If
> >> it's not
> >> > > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> >> > > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are
> >> libraries
> >> > > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I
> >> wish to put
> >> > > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be
> >> everyone's, of
> >> > > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The
> >> search for
> >> > > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without
> >> fear, free
> >> > > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take
> >> away from
> >> > > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> >> > > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on
> >> a " home "
> >> > > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body...
> >> house or
> >> > > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst
> >> us come to
> >> > > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the "
> >> home " to
> >> > > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their
> >> happiness
> >> > > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> >> > > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or
> >> pet,
> >> > > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their
> >> emotion-thought-identity where,
> >> > > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our
> >> thought is
> >> > > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to
> >> focus on
> >> > > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of
> >> delicacies,
> >> > > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our
> >> purposes and
> >> > > > > > > > what does not.
>
> >> > > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is
> >> also there
> >> > > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is
> >> consciously or
> >> > > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion
> >> as well.
> >> > > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate,
> >> decide and
> >> > > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material
> >> home-object in
> >> > > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes,
> >> encompasses
> >> > > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is
> >> outside the
> >> > > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after
> >> our aim.
>
> >> > > > > > > > What is concurrent within,
>
> ...
>
> read more »

" " Sun Is The Great Lamp " "

2012-01-31T01:50:00.000-08:00

BISMILLAHIR RAHMANIR RAHEEM

ASSALAM ALAIKUM WA RAHMATH ULLAHI WA BARKATAHU

Ya Allah !
surely we have heard a preacher calling to the faith,
saying: Believe in your Lord, so we did believe;

Ya Allah !
forgive us therefore our faults,
and cover our evil deeds and make us die with the righteous.

Ya Allah !
grant us good in this world and good in the hereafter,
and save us from the chastisement of the fire.

Ya Allah !
Accept From Us ;
Surely Thou Art The Hearing, The Knowing

=========================

AAPKI DUA KI TALIB

Mrs Rubina Yasmeen
============================

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ENGLISH Documents" group.
To post to this group, send email to englishdocuments@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to englishdocuments+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/englishdocuments?hl=en.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-31T01:48:00.001-08:00

Now I try to avoid judgement, yet it is becoming more and more difficult to avoid, along with the economic whoa -

I started this just before one of the wife's appointments and I was in one of my notoris discussions with my self.

Conclusion:

One of the greatest problems today is the ability to make a sound judgement, it seems this ability has eroded away especially in the stock market. I remember when you studied stoc performance over the years in order to make the judgement would the company goup in value or down.. a process that was serious as it cost quite a bit of money to buy the shares and you had to recoup that costs .. this was based off the preformance of a company over a 1, 2, 5, 10, or 15 year period depending on how you were investing ,, whether it was for short term or long term investment,

Today well it is based or so it seems strickly on how much you think a stock will go up over the next two minutes or maximum of ten days.. listening to the stock report on TV I am not an investor,, you watch the fluctuation going wild,, because I work with precious metal,, I remember the news headline report that Gold was over $2,026.oo to be exact Ah I see it went up since I last looked it was $1632. then now it is $1740 it has gone up.. but if I look at the long term market it has lost money,, You can not say something has gone up in value when it has lost money.. worse yet they hid the highest values it was selling for to hide the poor judgement.

People have lost the the ability to make sound judgement and exchanged the standard for one of greed instead.

Allan

On Jan 31, 2012 7:34 AM, "rigsy03" <rigsy03@yahoo.com> wrote:

" " A Mouse Trap " " Story

2012-01-31T01:47:00.000-08:00

A Story of a mouse Trap

With A Moral At The End

This Is Excelent

A Mouse Looked Through The Crack

in The Wall To See The Farmer And

His Wife Open A Packege

What Food Might This Contain

The Mouse Wondered

He Was Devastated To Discover

It Was A Mouse Trap

Retreating To The Farmyard

The Mouse Proclaimed The Warning

There is A MouseTrap in The House !

There is A Mousetrap in The House !

The Chicken

Clucked And Scratched

Raised Her Head And Said

Mr Mouse

i Can Tell This Is A Grave Concern

To You, But it is Of No Consequence To Me, i Cannot Be Bothered By It

The Mouse Turned To

The Goat ...........

And Told Him,

There is A Mousetrap in The House!

The Goat Sympathized, But Said

i Am So Very Sorry

Mr Mouse. But There is Nothing i Can Do About it, But Pray.

Be Assured You Are in My Prayers

The Mouse Turned To

The Cow .....

There is A Mousetrap in The House !

There is A Mousetrap in The House!

The Cow Said :

Wow Mr Mouse

I Am Sorry For You

But it's No Skin Off My Nose.

So, The Mouse Returned To The House,

Head Down And Dejected

To Face The Farmer's Moustrap

Alone.......

That Very Night A Sound Was Heard

Throughout The House

Like The Sound Of A Mousetrap

Catching Its Prey.

The Farmer's Wife Rushed To See

What Was Caught...

In The Darkness

She Did Not See A Venomous

Snake Whose Tail Tha Trap Had Caught

The Snake Bit The Farmer's Wife

The Farmer Rushed Her To The Hospital......

And She Returned Home

With A Fever

Everyone Knows You Treat A Fever

With Fresh Chicken Soup,

So The Farmer Took His Hatchet

To The Farmyard For The Soup's

Main Ingredient.

But His Wife's Sickness Continued

So Friends And Neighbors Came

To Sit With Her Around The Clock..

The Farmer TO Feed Them

Butchered The Goat

The Farmer's Wife Did Not Get Well

She Died.............

So Many People Came For Her Funeral

The Farmer Had The Cow

Slaughtered To Provide

Enough Meat For All Of Them

The Mouse Looked Upon it All From His Crack in The Wall With Great Sadness

So, The Next Time You Hear

Someone Is Facing A Problem

And Think it Doesn't Concern You

Remember.....

When One Of Us is Threatened

We Are All At Risk.

We Are All Involved in This Journey

Called..LIFE

We Must Keep An Eye Out For

One Another And Make An Extra

Efforts To Encourage One Another

======================

Thanks & Regards

Mrs rubina yasmeen

=======================

Pakistan ! Stop using leather accessories - "it might scare you".

2012-01-30T23:04:00.001-08:00

Stop using leather accessories

Stop using leather accessories - "it might scare you"

Where our bags come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--
Shahzad Shameem

The Story of Rags to Riches : billgate n chums...the beginning...

2012-01-30T22:50:00.000-08:00

The Microsoft Gang of 1978

WHERE ARE THEY NOW?

What Happened To The People In Microsoft's Iconic 1978 Company Photo?

Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">

It's one of the most iconic photos in American business.
A ragtag group of bearded weirdos assembled for a family portrait in Albuquerque.
Usually, there's a question above the photo: "Would you have invested?"
It's a trick question. You're supposed to answer no â€" because well, look at those people â€" but then you learn it's a company portrait of Microsoft from 1978.
It was taken just before the then startup left Albuquerque for Seattle. (Microsoft couldn't find anyone willing to move to New Mexico.)
Early employee Bob Greenberg, pictured in the middle, won the free portrait after calling in a radio show and guessing the name of an assassinated president. The gang reluctantly gathered together in some of their finest attire, and American business legend was made.
We all know what happened with the two guys in the bottom left and bottom right corners -- Bill Gates, and Paul Allen.

But what about the rest? The question pop up on Hacker News recently, and they decided to find out.

---------------------
Bill Gates is now giving away the billions he made from Microsoft Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft

We all know what happened with this guy. Bill Gates founded and built Microsoft from nothing into the most valuable technology company in the world. Along the way he amassed a fortune, which he's now giving away to all sorts of good causes.
--------------------- Andrea Lewis became a fiction writer and freelance journalist
Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">

Image: Business Insider, Microsoft

Andrea Lewis was the only person at the company that was from Albuquerque. She was a technical writer for Microsoft, which meant she wrote documents explaining Microsoft's software. She left Microsoft in 1983, eventually becoming a freelance journalist and fiction writer. Thanks in part to her Microsoft options, her net worth was estimated at $2 million by the AP.
--------------------- Maria Wood sued Microsoft just 2 years later Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Maria Wood was a book keeper for Microsoft, and married to another one of the early Microsofties in the picture. She left the company just two years later, suing it for sexual discrimination. Microsoft settled the case. After that, it doesn't look like she did much else. She raised her children and became a volunteer.
---------------------
Paul Allen has spent his billions on sports teams, startups, and much more Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
After Bill Gates, Paul Allen is the most famous guy in the group. Allen, the other Microsoft cofounder, is the 37th richest person in the world according to Forbes. He's the owner of the Portland Trailblazers, the Seattle Seahawks, one of the biggest yachts in the world, and much more.
---------------------
Bob O'Rear went onto be a cattle rancher Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Bob O'Rear was one of the oldest employees at Microsoft. He was at NASA in Mission Control when we landed on the moon. At Microsoft he was a chief mathematician, and is credited with reworking code in DOS, and getting it onto IBM PCs. He left the company in 1983, moved back to his home state of Texas, and did some cattle ranching. His worth is estimated at $100 million, and he sits on the board of a few local businesses. --------------------- Bob Greenberg left Microsoft, then worked on the Cabbage Patch Kids Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Bob Greenberg was the guy that won a radio call-in contest to get the photo. He left Microsoft in 1981, after helping the company develop a new version of BASIC. When he left he went on to help his family's company, Coleco, develop the Cabbage Patch Kid dolls, which became a huge hit. More recently, he's said to have worked on golf course software. --------------------- Marc McDonald left Microsoft because it was getting big, but ended up back at the company, anyway Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Marc McDonald was the first salaried employee, and when he left in 1984, it was because he didn't like how big the company was getting. After leaving Microsoft he went to another Paul Allen company, Asymetrix. He then went to Seattle design company Design Intelligence, which was acquired by Microsoft in 2000. So, he ended up back at Microsoft! According to the AP, he has said he is worth less than $1 million.
---------------------
Gordon Letwin stayed with Microsoft longer than anyone other than Bill Gates Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Gordon Letwin was with the company until 1993, the second longest run of all the employees pictured (Gates is first). He was a programmer at Microsoft, and quit when he wanted a break from the grind of the company. He has a ranch in Arizona, and has donated money to some environmental causes. His worth is estimated at $20 million or so.
---------------------
Steve Wood went on to found Wireless Services Corp. Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Steve Wood is the husband of Maria Wood, who eventually left Microsoft under bad circumstances. Steve left in 1980, but worked with Paul Allen on a few companies. He founded Wireless Services Corp., a mobile messaging company, in 1996. It's been renamed SinglePoint, and he's now the chairman. He and his wife's net worth is pegged at $15 million now.
---------------------
Late Bob Wallace researched on psychedelic drugs and founded a software company after Microsoft Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Bob Wallace seems like he was one of the most far out early Microsoft employees. He spent time and money researching psychedelic drugs after leaving the company. He also founded a software company called Quicksoft. He died in 2002 from pneumonia.
---------------------
Jim Lane went on to do his own software company Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Business Insider, Microsoft
Jim Lane was a project manager who left in 1985 reportedly saying, Microsoft "beat the enthusiasm out of me." He went on to start his own software company. At Microsoft he helped with the early partnership with Intel. (Something that's been pretty useful for Microsoft so far.) --------------------- Here's one more look at the gang from 1978 ... Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image: Microsoft
... And here's a photo of them from 2008 that Microsoft put together when Bill Gates was leaving the company Infotainment" href="http://keralites.net/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Image:Microsoft

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-30T22:34:00.001-08:00

This is an interesting topic, Allan. I think there is humor as well as
the serious in looking at one's interior conversations. The mind is a
busy place for ideas and judgements. And what role does emotion play-
or health- or dozens of other influences upon the state of one's
thinking? An open mind could get drafty- a closed mind could be a
prison. I suppose the mind is an endless debate of thoughts- I find
this to be healthy and a form of freedom.

We could develop a pill...was reading an essay on developing a
morality pill which the reader comments objected to (NYTimes)- so why
not a thought pill to relieve our struggles? :-)

On Jan 30, 8:16 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hoi Rigsy
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:22 PM, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > It's often easier to talk to oneself- either way thoughts go, you
> > win! :-)
>
> That is really not true,, I find hearing what I have to say often
> times clarifies what i want to say and at times find the idea or thought
> full of shit.. but any discussion of philosophy is beneficial
>
> But there well what was it I was saying?
> Allan
>
>
>
> > On Jan 29, 1:21 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone.
>
> > > it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced As I have
> > > very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a lot..which
> > is
> > > no problem as I am never really alone,.
> > > Allan
>
> > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?
>
> > > > On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> > > > > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious.
> > I
> > > > > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> > > > > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> > > > > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > The paramount paradox.
>
> > > > > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In
> > fact, I
> > > > > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God
> > series
> > > > > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I
> > > > could
> > > > > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read
> > so
> > > > > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > > > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > > > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I
> > consider
> > > > > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and
> > yet
> > > > > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth
> > > > around
> > > > > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something
> > close
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real
> > time,
> > > > > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may
> > tell us
> > > > > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam
> > says,
> > > > > > > > looking within.
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply
> > explicating
> > > > what
> > > > > > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or
> > needs to
> > > > prove
> > > > > > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were
> > > > oral and
> > > > > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors.
> > One
> > > > also
> > > > > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep
> > communication.
>
> > > > > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous
> > > > because
> > > > > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and
> > > > distain
> > > > > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its
> > > > citizens- it
> > > > > > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an
> > > > 'entourage'
> > > > > > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more
> > than
> > > > you and
> > > > > > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use
> > some
> > > > rough
> > > > > > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name.
> > > > When I
> > > > > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the
> > > > chance to
> > > > > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably
> > few)
> > > > should
> > > > > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have
> > been
> > > > done
> > > > > > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the
> > > > shoulders of
> > > > > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish
> > > > stature).
> > > > > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war
> > criminal
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never
> > produced
> > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John
> > Brown
> > > > being
> > > > > > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute
> > > > 'relativity'
> > > > > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The
> > > > chattering
> > > > > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have
> > grown in
> > > > such
> > > > > > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda
> > would
> > > > have us
> > > > > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is
> > > > sensible.
> > > > > > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to
> > that!
> > > > (Oscar
> > > > > > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is
> > > > that which
> > > > > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth
> > was an
> > > > > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our
> > > > capacity to
> > > > > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective
> > manner,
> > > > > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.)
> > narrative
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is
> > reliable
> > > > memory
> > > > > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain -
> > > > perhaps
> > > > > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always
> > prefer
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can
> > > > pervert into
> > > > > > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit
> > > > concerns a
> > > > > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and
> > animal
> > > > > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism
> > > > easy to
> > > > > > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic
> > > > multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this
> > view at
> > > > least as
> > > > > > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending
> > up
> > > > at it is
> > > > > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I
> > found
> > > > his view
> > > > > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his
> > > > discourse
> > > > > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is
> > also my
> > > > > > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights.
> > What
> > > > damned
> > > > > > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have
> > to
> > > > give
> > > > > > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If
> > > > it's not
> > > > > > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There
> > are
> > > > libraries
> > > > > > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that
> > I
> > > > wish to put
> > > > > > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be
> > > > everyone's, of
> > > > > > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The
> > > > search for
> > > > > > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without
> > > > fear, free
> > > > > > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can
> > take
> > > > away from
> > > > > > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and
> > on a
> > > > " home "
> > > > > > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body...
> > > > house or
> > > > > > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes
> > amongst
> > > > us come to
> > > > > > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the "
> > home
> > > > " to
> > > > > > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and
> > their
> > > > happiness
> > > > > > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or
> > pet,
> > > > > > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their
> > emotion-thought-identity
> > > > where,
> > > > > > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our
> > > > thought is
> > > > > > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used
> > to
> > > > focus on
> > > > > > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of
> > > > delicacies,
> > > > > > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our
> > > > purposes and
> > > > > > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance...
> > is
> > > > also there
> > > > > > > > > > > in our
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Man O Man!

2012-01-30T11:16:00.000-08:00

----- Forwarded Message -----

Man O Man !

When he is without money,

He eats vegetables at home;
When he has money,

He eats vegetables in a fine restaurant.

When he is without money,

He rides bicycle to work;
When he has money,

He rides bicycle to exercise.

When he is without money,

He walks to eat food;
When he has money,

He walks to burn food.

When he is without money,

He wishes to get married;
When he has money,

He wishes to get divorced.

When he is without money,

His wife becomes secretary;
When he has money,

His secretary becomes wife.

Man O Man !

Pearls of wisdom

2012-01-30T11:08:00.000-08:00

----- Forwarded Message -----

--
Shahzad Shameem

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-30T06:16:00.001-08:00

hoi Rigsy

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:22 PM, rigsy03 <rigsy03@yahoo.com> wrote:

It's often easier to talk to oneself- either way thoughts go, you
win! :-)

That is really not true,, I find hearing what I have to say often times clarifies what i want to say and at times find the idea or thought full of shit.. but any discussion of philosophy is beneficial

But there well what was it I was saying?

Allan

On Jan 29, 1:21 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone.
>
> it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced As I have
> very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a lot..which is
> no problem as I am never really alone,.
> Allan
>
>
>

> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?
>
> > On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> > > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> > > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> > > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The paramount paradox.
>
> > > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I
> > could
> > > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth
> > around
> > > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close
> > to
> > > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > > > looking within.
>
> > > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating
> > what
> > > > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to
> > prove
> > > > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were
> > oral and
> > > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One
> > also
> > > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous
> > because
> > > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and
> > distain
> > > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its
> > citizens- it
> > > > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an
> > 'entourage'
> > > > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than
> > you and
> > > > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some
> > rough
> > > > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name.
> > When I
> > > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the
> > chance to
> > > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few)
> > should
> > > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been
> > done
> > > > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the
> > shoulders of
> > > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish
> > stature).
> > > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal
> > in
> > > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced
> > a
> > > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown
> > being
> > > > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute
> > 'relativity'
> > > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The
> > chattering
> > > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in
> > such
> > > > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would
> > have us
> > > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is
> > sensible.
> > > > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to
> > the
> > > > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that!
> > (Oscar
> > > > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is
> > that which
> > > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of
> > the
> > > > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our
> > capacity to
> > > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative
> > of
> > > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable
> > memory
> > > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain -
> > perhaps
> > > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer
> > the
> > > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can
> > pervert into
> > > > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit
> > concerns a
> > > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism
> > easy to
> > > > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic
> > multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at
> > least as
> > > > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up
> > at it is
> > > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found
> > his view
> > > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his
> > discourse
> > > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What
> > damned
> > > > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to
> > give
> > > > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If
> > it's not
> > > > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are
> > libraries
> > > > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I
> > wish to put
> > > > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be
> > everyone's, of
> > > > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The
> > search for
> > > > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without
> > fear, free
> > > > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take
> > away from
> > > > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a
> > " home "
> > > > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body...
> > house or
> > > > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst
> > us come to
> > > > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home
> > " to
> > > > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their
> > happiness
> > > > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity
> > where,
> > > > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our
> > thought is
> > > > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to
> > focus on
> > > > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of
> > delicacies,
> > > > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our
> > purposes and
> > > > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is
> > also there
> > > > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is
> > consciously or
> > > > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion
> > as well.
> > > > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate,
> > decide and
> > > > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material
> > home-object in
> > > > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes,
> > encompasses
> > > > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is
> > outside the
> > > > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our
> > aim.
>
> > > > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person,"
> > is a build
> > > > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as :
> > " I
> > > > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful."
> > It is all a
> > > > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable
> > to our
> > > > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that
> > also blocks
> > > > > > > > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our
> > emotion -
> > > > > > > > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our
> > identity -
> > > > > > > > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite.
> > Because it
> > > > > > > > > limits us
>

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

--
(

)

|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-30T05:22:00.001-08:00

It's often easier to talk to oneself- either way thoughts go, you
win! :-)

On Jan 29, 1:21 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone.
>
> it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced As I have
> very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a lot..which is
> no problem as I am never really alone,.
> Allan
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?
>
> > On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> > > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> > > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> > > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The paramount paradox.
>
> > > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I
> > could
> > > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth
> > around
> > > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close
> > to
> > > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > > > looking within.
>
> > > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating
> > what
> > > > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to
> > prove
> > > > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were
> > oral and
> > > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One
> > also
> > > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous
> > because
> > > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and
> > distain
> > > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its
> > citizens- it
> > > > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an
> > 'entourage'
> > > > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than
> > you and
> > > > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some
> > rough
> > > > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name.
> > When I
> > > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the
> > chance to
> > > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few)
> > should
> > > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been
> > done
> > > > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the
> > shoulders of
> > > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish
> > stature).
> > > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal
> > in
> > > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced
> > a
> > > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown
> > being
> > > > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute
> > 'relativity'
> > > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The
> > chattering
> > > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in
> > such
> > > > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would
> > have us
> > > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is
> > sensible.
> > > > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to
> > the
> > > > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that!
> > (Oscar
> > > > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is
> > that which
> > > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of
> > the
> > > > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our
> > capacity to
> > > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative
> > of
> > > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable
> > memory
> > > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain -
> > perhaps
> > > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer
> > the
> > > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can
> > pervert into
> > > > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit
> > concerns a
> > > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism
> > easy to
> > > > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic
> > multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at
> > least as
> > > > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up
> > at it is
> > > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found
> > his view
> > > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his
> > discourse
> > > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What
> > damned
> > > > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to
> > give
> > > > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If
> > it's not
> > > > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are
> > libraries
> > > > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I
> > wish to put
> > > > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be
> > everyone's, of
> > > > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The
> > search for
> > > > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without
> > fear, free
> > > > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take
> > away from
> > > > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a
> > " home "
> > > > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body...
> > house or
> > > > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst
> > us come to
> > > > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home
> > " to
> > > > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their
> > happiness
> > > > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity
> > where,
> > > > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our
> > thought is
> > > > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to
> > focus on
> > > > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of
> > delicacies,
> > > > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our
> > purposes and
> > > > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is
> > also there
> > > > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is
> > consciously or
> > > > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion
> > as well.
> > > > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate,
> > decide and
> > > > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material
> > home-object in
> > > > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes,
> > encompasses
> > > > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is
> > outside the
> > > > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our
> > aim.
>
> > > > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person,"
> > is a build
> > > > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as :
> > " I
> > > > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful."
> > It is all a
> > > > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable
> > to our
> > > > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that
> > also blocks
> > > > > > > > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our
> > emotion -
> > > > > > > > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our
> > identity -
> > > > > > > > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite.
> > Because it
> > > > > > > > > limits us
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-30T05:17:00.001-08:00

courtesan...

On Jan 30, 7:14 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Who could afford it? :-) I read the reviews a couple of years ago and
> have scouted Amazon where it is nearly half it's original price of
> $195. Even our library has only one copy- pending- and it will reside
> in the non-circulating arena- downtown. Maybe I will browse it first.
> The comparison to Wm. Blake seems valid. I also thought of Chagall and
> another contemporary who pens stuff on paintings of dreamy women. I
> desk by a Japanese coutesan reading a scroll, come to think of it!
> Undeciphered. Anyway, Jung published "Modern Man in Search of a Soul"
> in 1933- after the "Red Book" but it's dull. In fact, Campbell seemed
> dull or overwhelming last week so I needed some illustrations and
> color myself- I switched to Larousse- "World Mythology". Campbell did
> publish books with eye-appeal in his historical atlases of myth before
> his death- I have two- one inscribed- haven't read either, however.
> Someone has to do the cooking around this joint. :-)// Great
> suggestion, Gabby!
>
> On Jan 28, 9:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> > you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> > haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> > me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> > On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The paramount paradox.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I could
> > > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth around
> > > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close to
> > > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > > looking within.
>
> > > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating what
> > > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to prove
> > > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were oral and
> > > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One also
> > > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous because
> > > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and distain
> > > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its citizens- it
> > > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an 'entourage'
> > > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than you and
> > > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some rough
> > > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name. When I
> > > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the chance to
> > > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few) should
> > > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been done
> > > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the shoulders of
> > > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish stature).
> > > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal in
> > > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced a
> > > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown being
> > > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute 'relativity'
> > > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The chattering
> > > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in such
> > > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would have us
> > > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is sensible.
> > > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to the
> > > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that! (Oscar
> > > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is that which
> > > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of the
> > > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our capacity to
> > > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative of
> > > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable memory
> > > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain - perhaps
> > > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer the
> > > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can pervert into
> > > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit concerns a
> > > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism easy to
> > > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-30T05:14:00.001-08:00

Who could afford it? :-) I read the reviews a couple of years ago and
have scouted Amazon where it is nearly half it's original price of
$195. Even our library has only one copy- pending- and it will reside
in the non-circulating arena- downtown. Maybe I will browse it first.
The comparison to Wm. Blake seems valid. I also thought of Chagall and
another contemporary who pens stuff on paintings of dreamy women. I
desk by a Japanese coutesan reading a scroll, come to think of it!
Undeciphered. Anyway, Jung published "Modern Man in Search of a Soul"
in 1933- after the "Red Book" but it's dull. In fact, Campbell seemed
dull or overwhelming last week so I needed some illustrations and
color myself- I switched to Larousse- "World Mythology". Campbell did
publish books with eye-appeal in his historical atlases of myth before
his death- I have two- one inscribed- haven't read either, however.
Someone has to do the cooking around this joint. :-)// Great
suggestion, Gabby!

On Jan 28, 9:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The paramount paradox.
>
> > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I could
> > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth around
> > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close to
> > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > looking within.
>
> > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating what
> > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to prove
> > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were oral and
> > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One also
> > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous because
> > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and distain
> > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its citizens- it
> > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an 'entourage'
> > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than you and
> > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some rough
> > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name. When I
> > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the chance to
> > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few) should
> > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been done
> > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the shoulders of
> > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish stature).
> > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal in
> > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced a
> > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown being
> > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute 'relativity'
> > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The chattering
> > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in such
> > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would have us
> > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is sensible.
> > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to the
> > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that! (Oscar
> > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is that which
> > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of the
> > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our capacity to
> > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative of
> > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable memory
> > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain - perhaps
> > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer the
> > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can pervert into
> > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit concerns a
> > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism easy to
> > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > > > > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > > > > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > > > > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
> > > > > > > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
> > > > > > > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > > > > > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > > > > > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
> > > > > > > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > > > > > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > > > > > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > > > > > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > > > > > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > > > > > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > > > > > public and personal lives.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Re: Mind's Eye Truth & I

2012-01-30T04:56:00.001-08:00

While I thought it was high time for Pakistan to have good news of any
sort! :-)//Re ignorance and superstition- I would put controls on the
list of constraints of the individual- from family/tribe, religion,
education, government, climate (!) personal strengths and weaknesses,
etc. Much of life is luck and timing- then making some sense of it.

On Jan 28, 5:52 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No headache here rigsy. England's batsmen have a few against Pakistan
> spinners though. The cycle I see us as in is broadly one of a
> potential escape from ignorance and superstition and the fear of
> this. We are held in this almost as England's batters are in the
> spell of Pakistan spin.
>
> On Jan 28, 5:10 am, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Though I know what you are saying and your thoughts are very familiar
> > they are often out of my grasp. I decided to write my thoughts or I'd
> > be stuck saying nothing when I have too many thoughts and result in no
> > words, like staring into the dark recesses of the mind will coax some
> > convergence of arcane geometries. I find that the rhythm of learning
> > is stochastic but over time undulations emerge. Echolocation without
> > the echo is how my sight seems to work. It seems to be a tough spot
> > kinda in between or outside that I'm in. You are right about seeing
> > things for yourself, holding whatever truth, there is a profound
> > difference in what we assume things to mean. I mean that simply, as
> > things have become evident to me over time from many perspectives. I
> > am grateful to understand most of what you've said, even though a
> > little unsure of what Zero and Bliss Infinite mean.
>
> > In humor, I think if there are multiple lives this one's a lesson in
> > humility. In my terms I would call your ideas on Home and Vanity
> > 'living truth' of great value. We 'begin again'?
>
> > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > a challenge?"
>
> > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > what does not.
>
> > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
> > > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
> > > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
> > > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > public and personal lives.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Mind's Eye Beliefs

2012-01-29T23:35:00.000-08:00

I have had both of my knees replaced, I am not complaining as they are what allow me to walk normally, they do come with their share of problems though and they can not take the abuse of a normal healthy knee..

This morning I was taking my dog down stairs to go potty, half awake as usual and I over stepped taking three steps at one time. That is not good for me or my artificial knees. The moment before what could have been a serious accident happened I was suddenly brought to being totally alert where I was able to prevent a serious falling accident. I have a Spiritual Guardian whose name is Patches who managed to save my buns from serious injury. Patches is very much part of my life in this physical world, Because of him I know there is order instead of chaos and also there is rank and file.

I am very grateful to Patches as he has been my companion though thick an thin. I know he is a very honored guardian, the reason why I prefer not to make public..

(NOTE)

The occupy movement is required to move to shelters during freezing weather which was to the delight of the Mayor of Den Haag ,, sorry the occupy movement is allowed to be on their site till 10 PM at which time they are required to go to shelters for their safety, The courts have ruled this way and they also ruled that the tents do not have to be removed and when it is safe to return they will to their tents full time.. the emergency shelters are open to all that need them and the homeless are required to go there.. The City is also required to 'post' Police Officers to protect their property and tents while they are in the shelters.

It is nice to see protesters dealt with humanly rather than have them beat up at the whim of politicians under the influence of money.

Allan

--
(

)

|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-29T18:14:00.001-08:00

The orderly way our body is formed and works throughout life , the
effects of food and the environment on it - shows that there is some
Mind behind it and which by its very name denotes order and not chaos.
We can see order everywhere and where we don't we will find so in
times to come as life cannot be explained by human caprice. Neil , the
spiritual and the material is mixed up and no spiritual activity can
override its physical or material background. You will still need this
physical body and brain for all your spiritual controls. And the
physical , you will admit , is very much controlled by laws of biology
etc.

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 4:36 AM, archytas <nwterry@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure we are that certain of the trajectories of celestial
> bodies RP. We need fractals even for that. I'm not sure determinism
> matters as we attempt to understand what is determining us and whether
> we can exert some other (spiritual) 'control'. It may all be for
> nothing by such is the nature of the quest.
>
> On Jan 29, 6:44 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you read my posts in continuum you will find that I have been
>> saying the same thing , although not thus rudely.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:55 PM, pol.science kid <r.freeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > but sometimes you know .. you say something completely different..
>>
>> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:51 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the Creation which
>> >> emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you have choice , but
>> >> whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the trajectory of the
>> >> celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is bound by laws and
>> >> everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of God".
>>
>> > --
>> > EverComing

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-29T18:10:00.001-08:00

Molly your question has my mind running around its dust bins. Most my thoughts are not original but more composites of other ideas. They are like hand me downs,, like the 3D image comes from watching how people search for treasure on sunken vessels, it is rags from a different ?idea?.

My world is a world of rags in the form of other ideas.
Allan

On Jan 29, 2012 8:21 PM, "Allan H" <allanh1946@gmail.com> wrote:

Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone.

it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced As I have very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a lot..which is no problem as I am never really alone,.

Allan

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <mollyb363@gmail.com> wrote:
Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?

On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > The paramount paradox.
>
> > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I could
> > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth around
> > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close to
> > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > looking within.
>
> > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating what
> > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to prove
> > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were oral and
> > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One also
> > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous because
> > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and distain
> > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its citizens- it
> > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an 'entourage'
> > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than you and
> > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some rough
> > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name. When I
> > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the chance to
> > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few) should
> > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been done
> > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the shoulders of
> > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish stature).
> > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal in
> > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced a
> > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown being
> > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute 'relativity'
> > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The chattering
> > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in such
> > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would have us
> > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is sensible.
> > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to the
> > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that! (Oscar
> > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is that which
> > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of the
> > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our capacity to
> > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative of
> > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable memory
> > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain - perhaps
> > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer the
> > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can pervert into
> > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit concerns a
> > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism easy to
> > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > > > > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > > > > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > > > > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
> > > > > > > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
> > > > > > > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > > > > > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > > > > > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
> > > > > > > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > > > > > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > > > > > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > > > > > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > > > > > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > > > > > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > > > > > public and personal lives.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -

--
(
)
|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-29T15:06:00.001-08:00

I'm not sure we are that certain of the trajectories of celestial
bodies RP. We need fractals even for that. I'm not sure determinism
matters as we attempt to understand what is determining us and whether
we can exert some other (spiritual) 'control'. It may all be for
nothing by such is the nature of the quest.

On Jan 29, 6:44 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you read my posts in continuum you will find that I have been
> saying the same thing , although not thus rudely.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:55 PM, pol.science kid <r.freeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > but sometimes you know .. you say something completely different..
>
> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:51 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the Creation which
> >> emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you have choice , but
> >> whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the trajectory of the
> >> celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is bound by laws and
> >> everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of God".
>
> > --
> > EverComing

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-29T11:21:00.000-08:00

Yeah it is kind of like an old dog sappen on his favorite bone.

it is trying to understand others, and what I have experienced As I have very few friends that like discussing God I talk to myself a lot..which is no problem as I am never really alone,.

Allan

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Molly <mollyb363@gmail.com> wrote:

Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?

On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > The paramount paradox.
>
> > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I could
> > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth around
> > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close to
> > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > looking within.
>
> > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating what
> > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to prove
> > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were oral and
> > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One also
> > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous because
> > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and distain
> > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its citizens- it
> > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an 'entourage'
> > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than you and
> > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some rough
> > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name. When I
> > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the chance to
> > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few) should
> > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been done
> > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the shoulders of
> > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish stature).
> > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal in
> > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced a
> > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown being
> > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute 'relativity'
> > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The chattering
> > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in such
> > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would have us
> > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is sensible.
> > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to the
> > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that! (Oscar
> > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is that which
> > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of the
> > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our capacity to
> > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative of
> > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable memory
> > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain - perhaps
> > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer the
> > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can pervert into
> > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit concerns a
> > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism easy to
> > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > > > > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > > > > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > > > > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
> > > > > > > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
> > > > > > > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > > > > > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > > > > > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
> > > > > > > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > > > > > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > > > > > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > > > > > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > > > > > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > > > > > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > > > > > public and personal lives.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -

--
(

)

|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-29T10:44:00.000-08:00

If you read my posts in continuum you will find that I have been
saying the same thing , although not thus rudely.

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:55 PM, pol.science kid <r.freebird@gmail.com> wrote:
> but sometimes you know .. you say something completely different..
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:51 PM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the Creation which
>> emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you have choice , but
>> whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the trajectory of the
>> celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is bound by laws and
>> everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of God".
>
>
>
>
> --
> EverComing

Re: Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-29T10:25:00.000-08:00

but sometimes you know .. you say something completely different..

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:51 PM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> wrote:

God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the Creation which emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you have choice , but whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the trajectory of the celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is bound by laws and everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of God".

--
EverComing

Mind's Eye The Unconscious

2012-01-29T07:21:00.000-08:00

God , Nature , Truth , Reality is unconscious and the Creation which emanates from it has no choice. You may think that you have choice , but whatever you think , feel and do is as certain as the trajectory of the celestial bodies. The entire universe , you included, is bound by laws and everyone is a slave to" Laws", that is , "The Will of God".

Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-29T06:05:00.001-08:00

Not at all irrelevant. did you have more thoughts about this?

On Jan 28, 10:19 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
> you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
> haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
> me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.
>
> On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > The paramount paradox.
>
> > On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I could
> > > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth around
> > > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close to
> > > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > > looking within.
>
> > > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating what
> > > > > already exists.
>
> > > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to prove
> > > > > that it has.
>
> > > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were oral and
> > > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One also
> > > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous because
> > > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and distain
> > > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its citizens- it
> > > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an 'entourage'
> > > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than you and
> > > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some rough
> > > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name. When I
> > > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the chance to
> > > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few) should
> > > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been done
> > > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the shoulders of
> > > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish stature).
> > > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal in
> > > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced a
> > > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown being
> > > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute 'relativity'
> > > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The chattering
> > > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in such
> > > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would have us
> > > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is sensible.
> > > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to the
> > > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that! (Oscar
> > > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is that which
> > > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of the
> > > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our capacity to
> > > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative of
> > > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable memory
> > > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain - perhaps
> > > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer the
> > > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can pervert into
> > > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit concerns a
> > > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism easy to
> > > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > > > > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > > > > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > > > > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
> > > > > > > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
> > > > > > > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > > > > > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > > > > > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
> > > > > > > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > > > > > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > > > > > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > > > > > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > > > > > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > > > > > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > > > > > public and personal lives.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-29T02:17:00.001-08:00

It has been my experience that it is extremely difficult to explain nothing to people who know everything. Maybe it is because people understand what is said as they as they want to understand it see their world as they want to see it, this is normal and valid.

If you don't believe me take ten friends with digital cameras decide on a common animal or bird subject walk out and at the same time take a picture.. they may look the same but it picture has it own point of . They can stitched together to see a 3 D view of the subject. which can be of great interest.

Spirituality can be of much greater beauty when viewed using this 3 D effect.. Like taking an off the wall statement like "Before the beginning is the Entirety with complete harmony and balance. From within the Entirety came the beginning." Now how can the idea be applied to your personal beliefs.

As for an old dog sap-pen on a favorite bone.. I can relate and understand.

Allan

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 6:53 AM, Vam <atewari2007@gmail.com> wrote:

Great responses... Molly, of course, is the one at ease; and Allan,
forever fresh, means so much without that verbal finesse I now
associate more with admen than people with culture.

RP : " Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend,

nowadays ,to try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself
were talking of infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or
God is the same thing to me."

Is God relevant to the dog sucking on the bone ? I am not sure if he
is even aware of God, but it is plain that nobody in the entire
universe is more pleased, fed and satisfied, than the dog. And, like
it, our senses need their respective objects to home-in, RP, not God.
It's a matter between the world and us, subject to rules and laws,
norm and order.

When I spoke of bliss infinite, I also spoke of zero identity, silence
and love. And, of a process to take our being between the world and
ourself from senses <+ vanity> to love <- vanity>, silence <-
thought>, zero < - need it be said ? > and what remains < yes, bliss
infinite >.

So, when people with vanity speak of God, I easily choose to be
counted among the atheists. It's impossible to find someone without
vanity, ordinarily, much less hear him speak... of God. I am among the
most fortunate to have met one and have heard him speak, when it was
plain that he was referring to the all-inclusive truth supreme.

Neil's grouse about over-individualised notion of the inner is
understandable. I mean, only an overly vain person would communicate
notions of the "inner" to the dog perched on his senses ! The dog is
equally an individual and he ' knows ' all other individuals are no
different. He would be right in wondering what the whole babble and
brouhaha was all about.

Almost all voluntary attempts at introspection are short-lived and
prove more in the manner of fad or play, which make no difference to
the individual's spiritual position or moral perspective, in terms of
shift or committment. And forced attempts, imposed by others, are
worse.

There is something fateful or innate at work when the introspection
abides for long, deepens with increasing withdrawal from material
values, without loss of honesty or the courage to live by one's
accepted truths.

On Jan 29, 8:38 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I suspect we have an over-individualised notion of the "inner". The
> standard citation for this, not without irony Vam, was a bloke called
> Wrong! My guess is we miss something about the voluntary nature of
> introspection and what keeps us honest in its retreat. There are
> points even in chemistry where on can only rely on intuition as to
> what is going on - typically in some crystal behaviour, what a 'third
> atom' may do in reaction, stuff like space being too cold for most
> chemical reactions (yet they happen) and in reactions going both ways
> at once. I guess Allan that in the case of some tortured souls we do
> ascribe outer responsibility for the condition. Very sage otherwise
> of course.
>
> On Jan 28, 9:13 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > No one is responsible for your inner being except you, it is a path of our
> > own choosing.
>
> > I can share my experiences and insights, as I hope others share theirs and
> > I have the wisdom to examine theses insights and apply what is relevant to
> > each of us.
>
> > We are each responsible for our own lives and souls. Choose wisely.
> > Allan
>
> > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:09 PM, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > And who can be trusted to judge ultimate teleological objectives, who
> > > can be trusted to command in God's name? This brings us to the
> > > question of power, whether we should entrust our daily matters to
> > > professors of divine inspiration instead of learning to judge for
> > > ourselves. Then it brings into question what value is contributed to
> > > the process of governance, guiding morality is quite another thing
> > > from force of submission and compliance to theocratic dogma.
>
> > > This isn't unique to religion or cosmology and spans into deep
> > > sociological stressors. But what I am thinking about is the things
> > > that can be built into society and culture to make it resilient, like
> > > an immune system against the factors that contribute to radicalisation
> > > and behaving in general like a bunch of yahoos. These things seem for
> > > the most part secular knowledge, the reasoning doesn't require
> > > transcendent reference to say, "hey starving people aren't going to be
> > > positioned for making the best long term decisions", neither will
> > > pascal's wager tell us how to build solutions to climatic and energy
> > > problems or a politician's disbelief in a pernicious deity intervene
> > > to solve those problems. Vam's idea that starting at a God-position
> > > doesn't help the situation holds weight with me, but I am still
> > > pondering a spectrum. Perhaps it is a categorical problem where
> > > aspects are tools, akin to schools, and what function something serves
> > > identifies where it fits?
>
> > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend, nowadays ,to
> > > > try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself were talking of
> > > > infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or God is the same
> > > > thing to me.
>
> > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Seems good to me, RP...
> > > >> except that this matter about God might be irrelevant.
>
> > > >> The moral code is the core but for ourself.
> > > >> It is the ethics code that is for others,
> > > >> but it needs the moral code for its foundation.
>
> > > >> On Jan 26, 9:57 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> It is not the God within which we have to search - He is there O.K. ,
> > > >>> has always been and will always be. We have to look outside at the
> > > >>> multitude , and evolve a moral code for the benefit of individuals
> > > >>> and humanity as a whole.
>
> > > >>> On Jan 25, 8:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>> > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > >>> > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > >>> > a challenge?"
>
> > > >>> > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > >>> > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > >>> > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > >>> > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > >>> > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > >>> > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > >>> > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > >>> > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > >>> > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > >>> > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > >>> > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to
> > > put
> > > >>> > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > >>> > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > >>> > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > >>> > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > >>> > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > >>> > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > >>> > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > >>> > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come
> > > to
> > > >>> > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > >>> > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > >>> > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > >>> > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > >>> > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > >>> > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > >>> > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > >>> > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > >>> > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > >>> > what does not.
>
> > > >>> > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also
> > > there
> > > >>> > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > >>> > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > >>> > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > >>> > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > >>> > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > >>> > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > >>> > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > >>> > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a
> > > build
> > > >>> > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > >>> > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all
> > > a
> > > >>> > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > >>> > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > >>> > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > >>> > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > >>> > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because
> > > it
> > > >>> > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore
> > > over
> > > >>> > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > >>> > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > >>> > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and
> > > Silence,
> > > >>> > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > >>> > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > >>> > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > >>> > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > >>> > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > >>> > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > >>> > public and personal lives.
>
> > --
> > (
> > )
> > |_D Allan
>
> > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

--
(

)

|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-28T21:53:00.001-08:00

Great responses... Molly, of course, is the one at ease; and Allan,
forever fresh, means so much without that verbal finesse I now
associate more with admen than people with culture.

RP : " Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend,
nowadays ,to try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself
were talking of infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or
God is the same thing to me."

Is God relevant to the dog sucking on the bone ? I am not sure if he
is even aware of God, but it is plain that nobody in the entire
universe is more pleased, fed and satisfied, than the dog. And, like
it, our senses need their respective objects to home-in, RP, not God.
It's a matter between the world and us, subject to rules and laws,
norm and order.

When I spoke of bliss infinite, I also spoke of zero identity, silence
and love. And, of a process to take our being between the world and
ourself from senses <+ vanity> to love <- vanity>, silence <-
thought>, zero < - need it be said ? > and what remains < yes, bliss
infinite >.

So, when people with vanity speak of God, I easily choose to be
counted among the atheists. It's impossible to find someone without
vanity, ordinarily, much less hear him speak... of God. I am among the
most fortunate to have met one and have heard him speak, when it was
plain that he was referring to the all-inclusive truth supreme.

Neil's grouse about over-individualised notion of the inner is
understandable. I mean, only an overly vain person would communicate
notions of the "inner" to the dog perched on his senses ! The dog is
equally an individual and he ' knows ' all other individuals are no
different. He would be right in wondering what the whole babble and
brouhaha was all about.

Almost all voluntary attempts at introspection are short-lived and
prove more in the manner of fad or play, which make no difference to
the individual's spiritual position or moral perspective, in terms of
shift or committment. And forced attempts, imposed by others, are
worse.

There is something fateful or innate at work when the introspection
abides for long, deepens with increasing withdrawal from material
values, without loss of honesty or the courage to live by one's
accepted truths.

On Jan 29, 8:38 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I suspect we have an over-individualised notion of the "inner". The
> standard citation for this, not without irony Vam, was a bloke called
> Wrong! My guess is we miss something about the voluntary nature of
> introspection and what keeps us honest in its retreat. There are
> points even in chemistry where on can only rely on intuition as to
> what is going on - typically in some crystal behaviour, what a 'third
> atom' may do in reaction, stuff like space being too cold for most
> chemical reactions (yet they happen) and in reactions going both ways
> at once. I guess Allan that in the case of some tortured souls we do
> ascribe outer responsibility for the condition. Very sage otherwise
> of course.
>
> On Jan 28, 9:13 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > No one is responsible for your inner being except you, it is a path of our
> > own choosing.
>
> > I can share my experiences and insights, as I hope others share theirs and
> > I have the wisdom to examine theses insights and apply what is relevant to
> > each of us.
>
> > We are each responsible for our own lives and souls. Choose wisely.
> > Allan
>
> > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:09 PM, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > And who can be trusted to judge ultimate teleological objectives, who
> > > can be trusted to command in God's name? This brings us to the
> > > question of power, whether we should entrust our daily matters to
> > > professors of divine inspiration instead of learning to judge for
> > > ourselves. Then it brings into question what value is contributed to
> > > the process of governance, guiding morality is quite another thing
> > > from force of submission and compliance to theocratic dogma.
>
> > > This isn't unique to religion or cosmology and spans into deep
> > > sociological stressors. But what I am thinking about is the things
> > > that can be built into society and culture to make it resilient, like
> > > an immune system against the factors that contribute to radicalisation
> > > and behaving in general like a bunch of yahoos. These things seem for
> > > the most part secular knowledge, the reasoning doesn't require
> > > transcendent reference to say, "hey starving people aren't going to be
> > > positioned for making the best long term decisions", neither will
> > > pascal's wager tell us how to build solutions to climatic and energy
> > > problems or a politician's disbelief in a pernicious deity intervene
> > > to solve those problems. Vam's idea that starting at a God-position
> > > doesn't help the situation holds weight with me, but I am still
> > > pondering a spectrum. Perhaps it is a categorical problem where
> > > aspects are tools, akin to schools, and what function something serves
> > > identifies where it fits?
>
> > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend, nowadays ,to
> > > > try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself were talking of
> > > > infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or God is the same
> > > > thing to me.
>
> > > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Seems good to me, RP...
> > > >> except that this matter about God might be irrelevant.
>
> > > >> The moral code is the core but for ourself.
> > > >> It is the ethics code that is for others,
> > > >> but it needs the moral code for its foundation.
>
> > > >> On Jan 26, 9:57 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> It is not the God within which we have to search - He is there O.K. ,
> > > >>> has always been and will always be. We have to look outside at the
> > > >>> multitude , and evolve a moral code for the benefit of individuals
> > > >>> and humanity as a whole.
>
> > > >>> On Jan 25, 8:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>> > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > >>> > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > >>> > a challenge?"
>
> > > >>> > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > >>> > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > >>> > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > >>> > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > >>> > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > >>> > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > >>> > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > >>> > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > >>> > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > >>> > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > >>> > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to
> > > put
> > > >>> > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > >>> > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > >>> > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > >>> > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > >>> > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > >>> > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > >>> > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > >>> > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come
> > > to
> > > >>> > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > >>> > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > >>> > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > >>> > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > >>> > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > >>> > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > >>> > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > >>> > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > >>> > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > >>> > what does not.
>
> > > >>> > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also
> > > there
> > > >>> > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > >>> > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > >>> > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > >>> > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > >>> > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > >>> > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > >>> > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > >>> > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a
> > > build
> > > >>> > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > >>> > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all
> > > a
> > > >>> > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > >>> > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > >>> > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > >>> > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > >>> > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because
> > > it
> > > >>> > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore
> > > over
> > > >>> > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > >>> > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > >>> > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and
> > > Silence,
> > > >>> > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > >>> > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > >>> > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > >>> > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > >>> > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > >>> > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > >>> > public and personal lives.
>
> > --
> > (
> > )
> > |_D Allan
>
> > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-28T19:38:00.001-08:00

I suspect we have an over-individualised notion of the "inner". The
standard citation for this, not without irony Vam, was a bloke called
Wrong! My guess is we miss something about the voluntary nature of
introspection and what keeps us honest in its retreat. There are
points even in chemistry where on can only rely on intuition as to
what is going on - typically in some crystal behaviour, what a 'third
atom' may do in reaction, stuff like space being too cold for most
chemical reactions (yet they happen) and in reactions going both ways
at once. I guess Allan that in the case of some tortured souls we do
ascribe outer responsibility for the condition. Very sage otherwise
of course.

On Jan 28, 9:13 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No one is responsible for your inner being except you, it is a path of our
> own choosing.
>
> I can share my experiences and insights, as I hope others share theirs and
> I have the wisdom to examine theses insights and apply what is relevant to
> each of us.
>
> We are each responsible for our own lives and souls. Choose wisely.
> Allan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:09 PM, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > And who can be trusted to judge ultimate teleological objectives, who
> > can be trusted to command in God's name? This brings us to the
> > question of power, whether we should entrust our daily matters to
> > professors of divine inspiration instead of learning to judge for
> > ourselves. Then it brings into question what value is contributed to
> > the process of governance, guiding morality is quite another thing
> > from force of submission and compliance to theocratic dogma.
>
> > This isn't unique to religion or cosmology and spans into deep
> > sociological stressors. But what I am thinking about is the things
> > that can be built into society and culture to make it resilient, like
> > an immune system against the factors that contribute to radicalisation
> > and behaving in general like a bunch of yahoos. These things seem for
> > the most part secular knowledge, the reasoning doesn't require
> > transcendent reference to say, "hey starving people aren't going to be
> > positioned for making the best long term decisions", neither will
> > pascal's wager tell us how to build solutions to climatic and energy
> > problems or a politician's disbelief in a pernicious deity intervene
> > to solve those problems. Vam's idea that starting at a God-position
> > doesn't help the situation holds weight with me, but I am still
> > pondering a spectrum. Perhaps it is a categorical problem where
> > aspects are tools, akin to schools, and what function something serves
> > identifies where it fits?
>
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend, nowadays ,to
> > > try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself were talking of
> > > infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or God is the same
> > > thing to me.
>
> > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Seems good to me, RP...
> > >> except that this matter about God might be irrelevant.
>
> > >> The moral code is the core but for ourself.
> > >> It is the ethics code that is for others,
> > >> but it needs the moral code for its foundation.
>
> > >> On Jan 26, 9:57 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> It is not the God within which we have to search - He is there O.K. ,
> > >>> has always been and will always be. We have to look outside at the
> > >>> multitude , and evolve a moral code for the benefit of individuals
> > >>> and humanity as a whole.
>
> > >>> On Jan 25, 8:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > >>> > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > >>> > a challenge?"
>
> > >>> > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > >>> > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > >>> > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > >>> > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > >>> > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > >>> > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > >>> > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > >>> > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > >>> > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > >>> > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > >>> > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to
> > put
> > >>> > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > >>> > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > >>> > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > >>> > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > >>> > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > >>> > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > >>> > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > >>> > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come
> > to
> > >>> > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > >>> > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > >>> > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > >>> > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > >>> > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > >>> > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > >>> > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > >>> > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > >>> > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > >>> > what does not.
>
> > >>> > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also
> > there
> > >>> > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > >>> > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > >>> > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > >>> > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > >>> > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > >>> > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > >>> > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > >>> > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a
> > build
> > >>> > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > >>> > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all
> > a
> > >>> > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > >>> > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > >>> > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > >>> > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > >>> > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because
> > it
> > >>> > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore
> > over
> > >>> > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > >>> > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > >>> > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and
> > Silence,
> > >>> > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > >>> > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > >>> > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > >>> > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > >>> > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > >>> > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > >>> > public and personal lives.
>
> --
> (
> )
> |_D Allan
>
> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-28T13:13:00.001-08:00

No one is responsible for your inner being except you, it is a path of our own choosing.

I can share my experiences and insights, as I hope others share theirs and I have the wisdom to examine theses insights and apply what is relevant to each of us.

We are each responsible for our own lives and souls. Choose wisely.

Allan

On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:09 PM, James Lynch <ashkashal@gmail.com> wrote:

And who can be trusted to judge ultimate teleological objectives, who
can be trusted to command in God's name? This brings us to the
question of power, whether we should entrust our daily matters to
professors of divine inspiration instead of learning to judge for
ourselves. Then it brings into question what value is contributed to
the process of governance, guiding morality is quite another thing
from force of submission and compliance to theocratic dogma.

This isn't unique to religion or cosmology and spans into deep
sociological stressors. But what I am thinking about is the things
that can be built into society and culture to make it resilient, like
an immune system against the factors that contribute to radicalisation
and behaving in general like a bunch of yahoos. These things seem for
the most part secular knowledge, the reasoning doesn't require
transcendent reference to say, "hey starving people aren't going to be
positioned for making the best long term decisions", neither will
pascal's wager tell us how to build solutions to climatic and energy
problems or a politician's disbelief in a pernicious deity intervene
to solve those problems. Vam's idea that starting at a God-position
doesn't help the situation holds weight with me, but I am still
pondering a spectrum. Perhaps it is a categorical problem where
aspects are tools, akin to schools, and what function something serves
identifies where it fits?

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend, nowadays ,to
> try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself were talking of
> infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or God is the same
> thing to me.
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Vam <atewari2007@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Seems good to me, RP...
>> except that this matter about God might be irrelevant.
>>
>> The moral code is the core but for ourself.
>> It is the ethics code that is for others,
>> but it needs the moral code for its foundation.
>>
>> On Jan 26, 9:57 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It is not the God within which we have to search - He is there O.K. ,
>>> has always been and will always be. We have to look outside at the
>>> multitude , and evolve a moral code for the benefit of individuals
>>> and humanity as a whole.
>>>
>>> On Jan 25, 8:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
>>> > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
>>> > a challenge?"
>>>
>>> > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
>>> > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
>>> > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>>>
>>> > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
>>> > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
>>> > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
>>> > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
>>> > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
>>> > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>>>
>>> > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
>>> > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
>>> > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
>>> > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
>>> > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
>>> > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
>>> > us. Truth is our Home.
>>>
>>> > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
>>> > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
>>> > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
>>> > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
>>> > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
>>> > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>>>
>>> > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
>>> > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
>>> > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
>>> > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
>>> > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
>>> > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
>>> > what does not.
>>>
>>> > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
>>> > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
>>> > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
>>> > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
>>> > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
>>> > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
>>> > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
>>> > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>>>
>>> > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
>>> > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
>>> > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
>>> > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
>>> > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
>>> > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
>>> > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
>>> > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
>>> > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
>>> > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
>>> > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
>>> > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
>>> > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>>>
>>> > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
>>> > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
>>> > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
>>> > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
>>> > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
>>> > public and personal lives.

--
(

)

|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

Re: Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-28T12:09:00.001-08:00

And who can be trusted to judge ultimate teleological objectives, who
can be trusted to command in God's name? This brings us to the
question of power, whether we should entrust our daily matters to
professors of divine inspiration instead of learning to judge for
ourselves. Then it brings into question what value is contributed to
the process of governance, guiding morality is quite another thing
from force of submission and compliance to theocratic dogma.

This isn't unique to religion or cosmology and spans into deep
sociological stressors. But what I am thinking about is the things
that can be built into society and culture to make it resilient, like
an immune system against the factors that contribute to radicalisation
and behaving in general like a bunch of yahoos. These things seem for
the most part secular knowledge, the reasoning doesn't require
transcendent reference to say, "hey starving people aren't going to be
positioned for making the best long term decisions", neither will
pascal's wager tell us how to build solutions to climatic and energy
problems or a politician's disbelief in a pernicious deity intervene
to solve those problems. Vam's idea that starting at a God-position
doesn't help the situation holds weight with me, but I am still
pondering a spectrum. Perhaps it is a categorical problem where
aspects are tools, akin to schools, and what function something serves
identifies where it fits?

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM, RP Singh <1234rp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Vam , God is not irrelevant as it is the general trend, nowadays ,to
> try to realize God , Self if you like. You yourself were talking of
> infinite bliss , whether it is realization of Self or God is the same
> thing to me.
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Vam <atewari2007@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Seems good to me, RP...
>> except that this matter about God might be irrelevant.
>>
>> The moral code is the core but for ourself.
>> It is the ethics code that is for others,
>> but it needs the moral code for its foundation.
>>
>> On Jan 26, 9:57 pm, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It is not the God within which we have to search - He is there O.K. ,
>>> has always been and will always be. We have to look outside at the
>>> multitude , and evolve a moral code for the benefit of individuals
>>> and humanity as a whole.
>>>
>>> On Jan 25, 8:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
>>> > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
>>> > a challenge?"
>>>
>>> > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
>>> > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
>>> > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>>>
>>> > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
>>> > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
>>> > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
>>> > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
>>> > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
>>> > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>>>
>>> > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
>>> > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
>>> > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
>>> > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
>>> > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
>>> > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
>>> > us. Truth is our Home.
>>>
>>> > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
>>> > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
>>> > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
>>> > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
>>> > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
>>> > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>>>
>>> > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
>>> > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
>>> > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
>>> > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
>>> > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
>>> > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
>>> > what does not.
>>>
>>> > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
>>> > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
>>> > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
>>> > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
>>> > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
>>> > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
>>> > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
>>> > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>>>
>>> > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
>>> > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
>>> > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
>>> > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
>>> > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
>>> > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
>>> > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
>>> > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
>>> > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
>>> > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
>>> > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
>>> > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
>>> > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>>>
>>> > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
>>> > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
>>> > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
>>> > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
>>> > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
>>> > public and personal lives.

Alterações na Política de Privacidade e nos Termos de Serviço do Google

2012-01-28T10:14:00.001-08:00

		Esta mensagens não está sendo exibida corretamente? Abra-a em seu navegador.
Caro usuário do Google, Estamos substituindo mais de 60 políticas de privacidade diferentes do Google por uma política mais concisa e fácil de ler. A nova política abrange vários produtos e recursos, refletindo nosso objetivo de criar uma experiência extremamente simples e intuitiva em todos os produtos do Google. Isto é importante. Assim, dedique alguns minutos para ler as versões atualizadas da nossa Política de Privacidade e dos nossos Termos de Serviço em http://www.google.com/policies. Estas mudanças entrarão em vigor no dia 1º de março de 2012.
Uma política, uma experiência no Google

Fácil de trabalhar em vários produtos Nossa nova política reflete nosso desejo de criar uma experiência de produto simples, que ofereça o que você precisar, quando você quiser. Seja ao ler um e-mail que o faça lembrar de marcar um encontro familiar ou encontrar um vídeo favorito que você queira compartilhar, queremos que você possa utilizar com facilidade o Gmail, o Google Agenda, a ferramenta de pesquisa, o YouTube ou o que mais você quiser.	Sob medida para você Se você fizer login no Google, podemos sugerir consultas de pesquisa ou adequar os resultados da pesquisa de acordo com os interesses que você expressou no Google+, Gmail e YouTube. Assim, poderemos compreender melhor qual versão do Pink ou Jaguar você está pesquisando e oferecer esses resultados com mais rapidez.	Compartilhar e colaborar é fácil Ao postar ou criar um documento on-line, é provável que você queira que outras pessoas o vejam e contribuam. Ao lembrar as informações de contato das pessoas com quem você deseja compartilhar, facilitamos seu compartilhamento em qualquer produto ou serviço do Google com o mínimo de cliques e erros.

A proteção de sua privacidade não mudou. Nosso objetivo é fornecer a você o máximo de transparência e de escolha possível, por meio de produtos como Google Dashboard e Gerenciador de preferências de anúncios entre outras ferramentas. Nossos princípios de privacidade permanecem os mesmos. Ainda, nunca venderemos nem compartilharemos suas informações profissionais sem sua permissão (a não ser em raras circunstâncias, como solicitações legais legítimas).	Alguma dúvida? Temos a resposta. Visite nossas Perguntas frequentes em http://www.google.com/policies/faq para saber mais sobre estas mudanças. (Imaginamos que nossos usuários podem ter uma pergunta ou vinte e duas.)

Aviso de alteração A nova Política de Privacidade e os novos Termos de Serviço do entrarão em vigor em 1º de março de 2012. Se optar por continuar usando o Google assim que a alteração ocorrer, você fará isso de acordo com a nova Política de Privacidade e os Termos de Serviço. Não responda a este e-mail. Respostas enviadas para este endereço não serão respondidas. Nunca insira sua senha após abrir um link que aponte para um site não confiável. Em vez disso, acesse diretamente o site, como mail.google.com ou www.google.com/accounts. O Google nunca mandará um e-mail pedindo sua senha ou outra informação confidencial.

Mind's Eye Re: Truth & I

2012-01-28T07:19:00.001-08:00

Hi Mol&Rigs, listening to you two I've been asking myself why none of
you mentions Jung and his description of the collective unconscious. I
haven't read the Red Book yet, but maybe of of you has and could tell
me why this is irrelevant to what you are discussing.

On Jan 27, 2:35 pm, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The paramount paradox.
>
> On Jan 27, 8:21 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Yes- I've read a lot of Campbell and admire his efforts. In fact, I
> > was going to put the Oriental Mythology of his Masks of God series
> > aside to reread- Indian, Chinese and Japanese chapters. I wish I could
> > keep certain studies on top of my thinking but maybe I have read so
> > much there is a chute to forgetfulness or a pit of scrambled
> > ideas! :-) Oh, dear!
>
> > However, back to your comment about looking back/within. I consider
> > there is impossible split between the spiritual and material and yet
> > that is our struggle to bridge- if possible.
>
> > On Jan 27, 6:32 am, Molly <mollyb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Do myths disappear? Joseph Campbell mapped common human myth around
> > > the word and through time to discover a mechanism something close to
> > > common memory - the expression of the same archetypes in real time,
> > > isolated incidents around the globe and at the same time. This
> > > phenomena has occurred throughout human history. This may tell us
> > > that it is not the looking back that is important, but as Vam says,
> > > looking within.
>
> > > On Jan 26, 5:54 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > What is original? I might argue that one is simply explicating what
> > > > already exists.
>
> > > > Each generation assumes it has a distinct character- or needs to prove
> > > > that it has.
>
> > > > Was thinking the reason myths disappear is because they were oral and
> > > > native languages are usually suppressed by the conquerors. One also
> > > > carries family myths- which interfere with deep communication.
>
> > > > Yes- there are terrible inequities- all the more scandalous because
> > > > there really is plenty to go around so the root is greed and distain
> > > > for others. Governments only pretend to care for all its citizens- it
> > > > picks and chooses.
>
> > > > We passed the Gilded Age- I would call this the Tinsel Age.
>
> > > > On Jan 25, 9:45 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I would say, Vam, that you often jump in the water with an 'entourage'
> > > > > of assumptive baggage. I probably dislike citation more than you and
> > > > > am not the first. Veblen would be a good start (to use some rough
> > > > > citation). These days, you can at least Google the name. When I
> > > > > started it meant a trip to the library. Anyone who has the chance to
> > > > > read a lot of what's available (this is still remarkably few) should
> > > > > discover most of what they thought their own ideas have been done
> > > > > before. The idea is no doubt to try to 'stand on the shoulders of
> > > > > giants' (itself a wisecrack by Newton on Hooke's dwarfish stature).
> > > > > The 'giants' always turn out flawed. Moses is a war criminal in
> > > > > Numbers 31, the Greeks, for all their argument, never produced a
> > > > > decent one against slavery (the lunatic-religious John Brown being
> > > > > better). Many, because they don't read enough, attribute 'relativity'
> > > > > to Einstein, but it has a longer and wider history. The chattering
> > > > > class reinvents the square wheel all over the place.
>
> > > > > What if the best of our system is fascist and we have grown in such
> > > > > culture, or a caste system? By what processes do we get an
> > > > > understanding for change from such? Western propaganda would have us
> > > > > believe pouring resources into the gullets of the rich is sensible.
> > > > > We all live in the gutter. Only some of us lift our eyes to the
> > > > > stars. If only I was smart enough to have been first to that! (Oscar
> > > > > Wilde) A common jibe by academics is that common sense is that which
> > > > > allows us to believe the world is flat - yet flat-earth was an
> > > > > academic construction - one can actually see the curvature of the
> > > > > Earth.
>
> > > > > What we need is reliable collective memory. Given our capacity to
> > > > > pervert, citation is usually used in a highly selective manner,
> > > > > usually along with a core academic (religious etc.) narrative of
> > > > > exclusion of competing argument. Control of what is reliable memory
> > > > > is, of course, just what those in power want to maintain - perhaps
> > > > > through principles of Home and Vanity. I will always prefer the
> > > > > margins to this, remembering that to oppose tyranny can pervert into
> > > > > its support.
>
> > > > > Deconstruction is only a beginning. I believe its spirit concerns a
> > > > > defeat of madness that includes rationalist fantasy and animal
> > > > > consensus (which I sense as grasping, selfish individualism easy to
> > > > > rule).
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 3:26 am, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > "Is this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind
> > > > > > Vam, can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as
> > > > > > a challenge?"
>
> > > > > > James, starting with God is a bad idea. Perhaps, ending up at it is
> > > > > > what needs to happen. Dawkins was in Jaipur here and I found his view
> > > > > > a lot more balanced, less bigoted and militant.
>
> > > > > > And Neil is right : it must deal with morality. Where his discourse
> > > > > > runs dry is when he is quoting other people ! That is also my
> > > > > > compelling logic against intellectual property rights. What damned
> > > > > > "rights" on knowledge of any kind ? Or, why must we have to give
> > > > > > references, when all we wish to say is ours, with us ? If it's not
> > > > > > ours, for us to say, we should STFU !
>
> > > > > > The formal aspect of Truth or truths is onerous. There are libraries
> > > > > > out there where it goes dry. It is the informal one that I wish to put
> > > > > > across : it is mine... and for that reason should be everyone's, of
> > > > > > everything. And that ( informal aspect ) is... HOME. The search for
> > > > > > that place which is truly ours, where we can rest without fear, free
> > > > > > and fulfilled, which nothing in the whole universe can take away from
> > > > > > us. Truth is our Home.
>
> > > > > > This is no parable I've begun. People are spent for and on a " home "
> > > > > > for themselves. They build, buy, rent one for the body... house or
> > > > > > apartment, car or craft. But then the worst a-holes amongst us come to
> > > > > > believe that home they are so invested on is also the " home " to
> > > > > > their emotion, to their thought, their identity, and their happiness
> > > > > > too ! Well, it is and it definitely isn't.
>
> > > > > > The better ( a-hols ) take on a wife, friend, progeny or pet,
> > > > > > community or cause, to engage their emotion-thought-identity where,
> > > > > > with whom or which, one then feels at home. Of that our thought is
> > > > > > preoccupied... that same ' faculty ' that had been used to focus on
> > > > > > money to buy the home, on the value of food and worth of delicacies,
> > > > > > on the relevance of what is beneficial and serves our purposes and
> > > > > > what does not.
>
> > > > > > That pitch of ' acquisition,' value, worth, relevance... is also there
> > > > > > in our thought and eye, as in it pre-exists and is consciously or
> > > > > > subconsciously applied, for the home-objects of our emotion as well.
> > > > > > For a lifetime, we carry that pitch to manage, manipulate, decide and
> > > > > > deal with what is outside us to acquire the material home-object in
> > > > > > our aim ... a domain that, for all practical purposes, encompasses
> > > > > > everything. For everything, external and internal, is outside the
> > > > > > agency, the ego-person, we are through the pursuit after our aim.
>
> > > > > > What is concurrent within, inside of us - the "ego-person," is a build
> > > > > > up and an intensification of VANITY... which expresses as : " I
> > > > > > possess;" " I win;" " I will acquire;" " I am successful." It is all a
> > > > > > matter of process that is normal to our drive and inevitable to our
> > > > > > search. But, as surely as sure can be, it is Vanity that also blocks
> > > > > > our evolution and progression into the true Home to our emotion -
> > > > > > which is Love, to our thought - which is Silence, to our identity -
> > > > > > which is Zero, and to our spirit - which is Bliss Infinite. Because it
> > > > > > limits us to what we have, even as it automatically makes us pore over
> > > > > > all that we does not have; and, it is limiting because while with it
> > > > > > we can never give up that " pitch " we have internalised along the
> > > > > > journey and can hence never view and see things with Love and Silence,
> > > > > > and be Zero with Bliss Infinite.
>
> > > > > > These are the real aspects and issues to spirituality : Home and
> > > > > > Vanity. It is these that I find more pertinent than God or whatever.
> > > > > > It is these that will make us be better and excel, that will address
> > > > > > the monstrous twists with which people reduce the best of systems and
> > > > > > opportunities to gutter, that will redress the moral deficit in our
> > > > > > public and personal lives.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -