Logic

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Yeah, because nobody's ever said "man are we a bunch of idiots".

But that doesn't really matter, because you're wrong. The comparison is equally valid when you are comparing something to what is expected from the average. ie. Stephen Hawking probably calls Einstein a genius, even if they are/were both of relatively equal intelligence. So when I say that Thai food tastes good, it only tastes good in comparison to myself? No, it is good in comparison to other food. So to be clear, Moonbeams postings are stupid when compared to the thoughts of the average person you see around here. Hopefully you see how you're wrong there.

Also, not to be pedantic, but the definition of idiot (and of stupid) is either someone of below average intelligence, or someone who is foolish. Guess which one I was going for.

Irregardless of all that, to think that notifying someone that they are doing something wrong can only be done in the context of self promotion is also... stupid.

You don't notify people they are wrong. You ridicule them and call them fools. I think that's what makes you a fool. All you do is mumble about how stupid I am, but you neither make any intelligent case of your own nor intelligently argue why what I say is wrong. It's just wrong because you say it's stupid. Hehe. You will never think I am as stupid as I do. I am a chimpanzee. And I know you're right because your roommate and 9 out of ten dentists says so.

Actually, that's exactly what he said. He said "you're wrong", you are the one who is ridiculing. BTW, Moonie, you are wrong. Also, you also never intelligently argue why what you say is right, nor why what others say is wrong. Nothing but psychobabble ever comes from your fingertips, that much I know. Are your lips as bad?

edit: Sorry, Seekermeister, I couldn't help myself.

 

[fskimospy]

Again, my problem is not that his viewpoint is different then mine, but that his viewpoint rejects reason.

I think I see where you're going with your previous argument, but I have to say that I think the premise is flawed. I don't think that anger, hate, jealousy, or any other negative emotions are deviations from what is natural or normal. If by unnatural you mean infrequently occuring or requiring stimuli then I think many positive emotions such as laughter, love, and other such things would be considered unnatural. I don't agree with that.

 

[Moonbeam]

Moonie says that he use to feel and be just like us all.. until he under went transformation..... and realized that all the feelings he did have... just like us - were motivated by something or somethings inculcated in his youth .. that what was once pristine became tainted. He goes on to say.. that what you and I and others say and do is most probably caused by events we are not aware of today.. and that often this directed anger is not the state an optimum human should exist in.. all those 'bad' emotions..

I still feel like everybody else. I just found that questions of meaning also have no meaning. I was born with animal joy and it's all I need. I know also that what we think we feel has not much to do with what we really feel if we follow it back if we work at feeling what we feel deeper and deeper. It leads into understandings that transform. We are all ok but we hate ourselves. We are all the same. I may have some interior experience but I am nobody at all.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Again, my problem is not that his viewpoint is different then mine, but that his viewpoint rejects reason.

I think I see where you're going with your previous argument, but I have to say that I think the premise is flawed. I don't think that anger, hate, jealousy, or any other negative emotions are deviations from what is natural or normal. If by unnatural you mean infrequently occuring or requiring stimuli then I think many positive emotions such as laughter, love, and other such things would be considered unnatural. I don't agree with that.

Ok.. the human mind is an interesting device.. intangible and dependent on the brain function to operate..
A human devoid of all emotion ... one never ever subjected to any kind of stimuli like having lived on an island in the South Pacific will display both a smile and a frown.. based on what has occured.. That is my opinion..
When I say unnatural I am trying to convey the notion that all emotion is caused.. all actions are caused.. the human is not content to sit and do nothing or feel nothing.. but i've to start somewhere in order to get anywhere
For the record... I'm not 22 nor 32 but 60 and not that that matters but just so you can assume I will always have an agenda to my blathering.. hehehehhe

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Yeah, because nobody's ever said "man are we a bunch of idiots".

But that doesn't really matter, because you're wrong. The comparison is equally valid when you are comparing something to what is expected from the average. ie. Stephen Hawking probably calls Einstein a genius, even if they are/were both of relatively equal intelligence. So when I say that Thai food tastes good, it only tastes good in comparison to myself? No, it is good in comparison to other food. So to be clear, Moonbeams postings are stupid when compared to the thoughts of the average person you see around here. Hopefully you see how you're wrong there.

Also, not to be pedantic, but the definition of idiot (and of stupid) is either someone of below average intelligence, or someone who is foolish. Guess which one I was going for.

Irregardless of all that, to think that notifying someone that they are doing something wrong can only be done in the context of self promotion is also... stupid.

You don't notify people they are wrong. You ridicule them and call them fools. I think that's what makes you a fool. All you do is mumble about how stupid I am, but you neither make any intelligent case of your own nor intelligently argue why what I say is wrong. It's just wrong because you say it's stupid. Hehe. You will never think I am as stupid as I do. I am a chimpanzee. And I know you're right because your roommate and 9 out of ten dentists says so.

Actually, that's exactly what he said. He said "you're wrong", you are the one who is ridiculing. BTW, Moonie, you are wrong. Also, you also never intelligently argue why what you say is right, nor why what others say is wrong. Nothing but psychobabble ever comes from your fingertips, that much I know. Are your lips as bad?

edit: Sorry, Seekermeister, I couldn't help myself.

Hehe, I used to say that about my Physics teacher. Whenever anybody would tell him things fall up he'd start in with babbling in equations. The bastard was incapable of logical reason. But he was wrong.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Moonie says that he use to feel and be just like us all.. until he under went transformation..... and realized that all the feelings he did have... just like us - were motivated by something or somethings inculcated in his youth .. that what was once pristine became tainted. He goes on to say.. that what you and I and others say and do is most probably caused by events we are not aware of today.. and that often this directed anger is not the state an optimum human should exist in.. all those 'bad' emotions..

I still feel like everybody else. I just found that questions of meaning also have no meaning. I was born with animal joy and it's all I need. I know also that what we think we feel has not much to do with what we really feel if we follow it back if we work at feeling what we feel deeper and deeper. It leads into understandings that transform. We are all ok but we hate ourselves. We are all the same. I may have some interior experience but I am nobody at all.

Of course you feel like everyone else.. but not because of some hidden subconscious motivator.. if you stub your toe.. you'll curse and yell to the heavens and be as mad as hell... heheheh but as I read what you say.. the cause and effect are current.. .. and all about you... Some may stub their toe.. and lash out at the nearest person.. to release that event on them.. (perhaps a bad example.. )

Freud... and I'm not a fan of his.. centers on very few motivators.. I say just about every thing can motivate.. and it will based on how the individual digests them and will regurgitate based on the entirety of its existence.. we are the same but different..

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Yeah, because nobody's ever said "man are we a bunch of idiots".

But that doesn't really matter, because you're wrong. The comparison is equally valid when you are comparing something to what is expected from the average. ie. Stephen Hawking probably calls Einstein a genius, even if they are/were both of relatively equal intelligence. So when I say that Thai food tastes good, it only tastes good in comparison to myself? No, it is good in comparison to other food. So to be clear, Moonbeams postings are stupid when compared to the thoughts of the average person you see around here. Hopefully you see how you're wrong there.

Also, not to be pedantic, but the definition of idiot (and of stupid) is either someone of below average intelligence, or someone who is foolish. Guess which one I was going for.

Irregardless of all that, to think that notifying someone that they are doing something wrong can only be done in the context of self promotion is also... stupid.

You don't notify people they are wrong. You ridicule them and call them fools. I think that's what makes you a fool. All you do is mumble about how stupid I am, but you neither make any intelligent case of your own nor intelligently argue why what I say is wrong. It's just wrong because you say it's stupid. Hehe. You will never think I am as stupid as I do. I am a chimpanzee. And I know you're right because your roommate and 9 out of ten dentists says so.

Actually, that's exactly what he said. He said "you're wrong", you are the one who is ridiculing. BTW, Moonie, you are wrong. Also, you also never intelligently argue why what you say is right, nor why what others say is wrong. Nothing but psychobabble ever comes from your fingertips, that much I know. Are your lips as bad?

edit: Sorry, Seekermeister, I couldn't help myself.

Hehe, I used to say that about my Physics teacher. Whenever anybody would tell him things fall up he'd start in with babbling in equations. The bastard was incapable of logical reason. But he was wrong.

So, since you never addressed my post at all, you're obviously admitting that you were, in fact, doing exactly what you were accusing him of doing. You aren't nearly as enlightened as you seem to think, now are you?

 

[GZeus]

I considered not posting to this thread again since it serves no purpose to engage someone who is irrational. But I have a lot of free time on my hands and find this exchange amusing in so many ways.

Of course, the first observation from the twins (MB&LR) will be made is that my ego forced me to reply. Since 'they' are without ego, I wonder why they continue to reply? Oh, I forgot... they are here to enlighten us peons and I am an ego based creature with no control :roll:.



First to 'Seekermeister',

I ask your pardon for my part if you view this as a hijacking of your thread. I disagree with many things you say but your philosophies/theological beliefs are clear. I will continue to dispute your more outrageous conclusions or statements until it no longer amuses me to do so because I think that such statements deserve to be challenged.

I do not seek to change your view point - as this will not occur - but I will call 'BS' for anyone who reads your more provocative statements.



To eskimospy,

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Do you really think that people are driven to desparation by attempting to fight the truth that you reveal? We're driven to desparation because talking to you is like talking to a five year old. You're simply immune to reason. You've found a way to turn your brain off, and reject all forms of rational argument in favor of a philosophy worthy of an R.L. Stine book. Don't expect people to follow you.

The only feelings you are stirring up are sadness and frustration... and it sure ain't because we're afraid of your Absolute Truth.

You are simply unable to grasp just how ridiculous this crap you are spouting is.

All of your arguments are crap. Every single one. To think that the only reason someone would challenge the things you say is because they are afraid of them is not only the height of arrogance, but again... dumb. You just sheild yourself behind your (dumb) argument that people only tell you that you're acting stupid because they are afraid they are stupid themselves. It's not... they call you that because they're right.

QFT - good summary :thumbsup:



Finally, to the twins, MB&LR,

Since you speak with one voice, I won't bother with which one said what and will address you as the individual I believe you to be. Let's examine some of your own statements:
(I have adopted an element of your posts, but more on that in a minute.)

"So, are you saying that IF true you'd be inferior in your current state? If this is true and since you recognize superiority then what is it that keeps mankind from achieving this advanced state of mind?"

- Obviously, I am in some "current state" while you have achieved some "advance state of mind". Arrogant and condescending.

"The worm mocks the elephant's ears while the elephant has not a care in the world about the worm."

- If you truly did not have a "care in the world" about the opinions of others then your posts would not be the point-by-point counter views that you post. This style of post, which I adopted here, simply reinforces my view that you are trapped by your own egotistical need to be right. This is contradictory to the very message you try to convey. This is why you have richly earned the derision of others and can only be called a hypocrite.

"hidden behind the reality you see is the reality you don't see"

- An inane and obvious observation almost unworthy of comment. Congratulations on having read a pop-culture book on psychology or completing Psyc101. The inclusion of such a statement can only lead to the assumption that you believe that you are privy to this unseen reality. Arrogant and condescending.

"You wouldn't notice how superior I am otherwise." ; "I am superior to you because I can happily be the inferior you can't be but are." ; "I'm infinitely superior to you at being nothing. My humility is maybe 100 times as great as your own."

- Hmmm... no arrogance is those statements. The fact that you make such statements belittles your "humility" and again shows you to be a hypocrite. You cloak your claims of superiority in statements of inferiority and no one is fooled.

"No it is your insecurities that cause you to challenge."

- Nice projection. "It's not me that does that, its you." 5 year olds make better counterpoints.

"I am here to tell you that the reason you do not know truth is because the truth is something you hate. You also hate to be told."

- Once again, arrogant and presumptive beyond the pale. Has it occurred to you at all, that perhaps you don't know the "truth"? Of course not. Your ego will not allow it.

"I am pointing to the way out of hell."

- Who ordained you? Just like the previous statement, what makes you think that you are the most qualified individual to point the right direction? Complete arrogance.


These are just from your replies to me in a couple of posts. There are many more equally absurd statements in your other posts.

If you are seeking to provoke a real debate about a practical issue, you are failing miserably. Your posts contain so much self satisfied arrogance that it difficult to find any actual opinion or point (other than satisfying your ego driven need for self promotion).

If you truly have little or no knowledge of Scientology, then I suggest you examine it. You will find many concepts and philosophies that are parallel to your views as expressed here. I admit to my error - hardly my first - in presuming to know your philosophies well enough to categorize you as a Scientologist. However, as I stated, your views as expressed here have many parallels with Scientology.

I have no quarrel with Scientology, Christianity, Islam or any other system of belief. In a free society each individual is entitled to adopt any philosophy or theology that provides them with peace.

I will however call 'BS' anytime an individual claims to be in exclusive possession of the "truth". Your "truth" is not universal. Not because it is unprovable, but because it is not even attached to reason. It is, therefore, your personal madness and you should have no expectation that others will be willing to share it.

Your inability to comprehend this is the surest sign of your arrogance and ego.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Again, my problem is not that his viewpoint is different then mine, but that his viewpoint rejects reason.

I think I see where you're going with your previous argument, but I have to say that I think the premise is flawed. I don't think that anger, hate, jealousy, or any other negative emotions are deviations from what is natural or normal. If by unnatural you mean infrequently occuring or requiring stimuli then I think many positive emotions such as laughter, love, and other such things would be considered unnatural. I don't agree with that.

You will never know anything about emotions all all thinking. The way one acquires emotional wisdom is to feel. If you have never allowed yourself to feel what you feel you have no idea what this means. If you have you know that almost nobody else knows. That is the way of things. The path to understanding takes you to hell. It's there in all the myths of the world what the Hero has to go thorough to acquire the Grail.

You want to argue and theorize about something you actually have to experience. You can't have an orgasm in theory. You are simply like one too young, emotionally speaking, to know that orgasms exist. You yell about how illogical people are who won't give you car keys when you don't even know how to drive. You want words and arguments about something whey what you need is to see yourself in the mirror. You want to contest not to learn.

 

[LunarRay]

Hehe, I used to say that about my Physics teacher. Whenever anybody would tell him things fall up he'd start in with babbling in equations. The bastard was incapable of logical reason. But he was wrong

Moonster.. is that sorta like the difference between an Asteroid hitting Earth and Earth hitting an Asteroid? It is all about the frame of reference? (In the context I inferred from the quoted passage)

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: GZeus
I considered not posting to this thread again since it serves no purpose to engage someone who is irrational. But I have a lot of free time on my hands and find this exchange amusing in so many ways.

Hehehehe! Am I like fly paper collecting giggling flies with time?

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: GZeus
I considered not posting to this thread again since it serves no purpose to engage someone who is irrational. But I have a lot of free time on my hands and find this exchange amusing in so many ways.

Of course, the first observation from the twins (MB&LR) will be made is that my ego forced me to reply. Since 'they' are without ego, I wonder why they continue to reply? Oh, I forgot... they are here to enlighten us peons and I am an ego based creature with no control :roll:.



First to 'Seekermeister',

I ask your pardon for my part if you view this as a hijacking of your thread. I disagree with many things you say but your philosophies/theological beliefs are clear. I will continue to dispute your more outrageous conclusions or statements until it no longer amuses me to do so because I think that such statements deserve to be challenged.

I do not seek to change your view point - as this will not occur - but I will call 'BS' for anyone who reads your more provocative statements.



To eskimospy,

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Do you really think that people are driven to desparation by attempting to fight the truth that you reveal? We're driven to desparation because talking to you is like talking to a five year old. You're simply immune to reason. You've found a way to turn your brain off, and reject all forms of rational argument in favor of a philosophy worthy of an R.L. Stine book. Don't expect people to follow you.

The only feelings you are stirring up are sadness and frustration... and it sure ain't because we're afraid of your Absolute Truth.

You are simply unable to grasp just how ridiculous this crap you are spouting is.

All of your arguments are crap. Every single one. To think that the only reason someone would challenge the things you say is because they are afraid of them is not only the height of arrogance, but again... dumb. You just sheild yourself behind your (dumb) argument that people only tell you that you're acting stupid because they are afraid they are stupid themselves. It's not... they call you that because they're right.

QFT - good summary :thumbsup:



Finally, to the twins, MB&LR,

Since you speak with one voice, I won't bother with which one said what and will address you as the individual I believe you to be. Let's examine some of your own statements:
(I have adopted an element of your posts, but more on that in a minute.)

"So, are you saying that IF true you'd be inferior in your current state? If this is true and since you recognize superiority then what is it that keeps mankind from achieving this advanced state of mind?"

- Obviously, I am in some "current state" while you have achieved some "advance state of mind". Arrogant and condescending.

"The worm mocks the elephant's ears while the elephant has not a care in the world about the worm."

- If you truly did not have a "care in the world" about the opinions of others then your posts would not be the point-by-point counter views that you post. This style of post, which I adopted here, simply reinforces my view that you are trapped by your own egotistical need to be right. This is contradictory to the very message you try to convey. This is why you have richly earned the derision of others and can only be called a hypocrite.

"hidden behind the reality you see is the reality you don't see"

- An inane and obvious observation almost unworthy of comment. Congratulations on having read a pop-culture book on psychology or completing Psyc101. The inclusion of such a statement can only lead to the assumption that you believe that you are privy to this unseen reality. Arrogant and condescending.

"You wouldn't notice how superior I am otherwise." ; "I am superior to you because I can happily be the inferior you can't be but are." ; "I'm infinitely superior to you at being nothing. My humility is maybe 100 times as great as your own."

- Hmmm... no arrogance is those statements. The fact that you make such statements belittles your "humility" and again shows you to be a hypocrite. You cloak your claims of superiority in statements of inferiority and no one is fooled.

"No it is your insecurities that cause you to challenge."

- Nice projection. "It's not me that does that, its you." 5 year olds make better counterpoints.

"I am here to tell you that the reason you do not know truth is because the truth is something you hate. You also hate to be told."

- Once again, arrogant and presumptive beyond the pale. Has it occurred to you at all, that perhaps you don't know the "truth"? Of course not. Your ego will not allow it.

"I am pointing to the way out of hell."

- Who ordained you? Just like the previous statement, what makes you think that you are the most qualified individual to point the right direction? Complete arrogance.


These are just from your replies to me in a couple of posts. There are many more equally absurd statements in your other posts.

If you are seeking to provoke a real debate about a practical issue, you are failing miserably. Your posts contain so much self satisfied arrogance that it difficult to find any actual opinion or point (other than satisfying your ego driven need for self promotion).

If you truly have little or no knowledge of Scientology, then I suggest you examine it. You will find many concepts and philosophies that are parallel to your views as expressed here. I admit to my error - hardly my first - in presuming to know your philosophies well enough to categorize you as a Scientologist. However, as I stated, your views as expressed here have many parallels with Scientology.

I have no quarrel with Scientology, Christianity, Islam or any other system of belief. In a free society each individual is entitled to adopt any philosophy or theology that provides them with peace.

I will however call 'BS' anytime an individual claims to be in exclusive possession of the "truth". Your "truth" is not universal. Not because it is unprovable, but because it is not even attached to reason. It is, therefore, your personal madness and you should have no expectation that others will be willing to share it.

Your inability to comprehend this is the surest sign of your arrogance and ego.

Wow, that's one elegant post. I'm impressed, to say the least.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Hehe, I used to say that about my Physics teacher. Whenever anybody would tell him things fall up he'd start in with babbling in equations. The bastard was incapable of logical reason. But he was wrong

Moonster.. is that sorta like the difference between an Asteroid hitting Earth and Earth hitting an Asteroid? It is all about the frame of reference? (In the context I inferred from the quoted passage)

Not sure. Does the paper grab the fly or the fly the paper?

 

[GZeus]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Hehe, I used to say that about my Physics teacher. Whenever anybody would tell him things fall up he'd start in with babbling in equations. The bastard was incapable of logical reason. But he was wrong

Moonster.. is that sorta like the difference between an Asteroid hitting Earth and Earth hitting an Asteroid? It is all about the frame of reference? (In the context I inferred from the quoted passage)

Not sure. Does the paper grab the fly or the fly the paper?

Wow, thats deep. What's next... "When a tree falls in the forest...?" I can't wait. :roll:

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Moonster.. is that sorta like the difference between an Asteroid hitting Earth and Earth hitting an Asteroid? It is all about the frame of reference? (In the context I inferred from the quoted passage)

Not sure. Does the paper grab the fly or the fly the paper?

The fly lights on the paper. Who didn't know that?

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: GZeus
I considered not posting to this thread again since it serves no purpose to engage someone who is irrational. But I have a lot of free time on my hands and find this exchange amusing in so many ways.

Of course, the first observation from the twins (MB&LR) will be made is that my ego forced me to reply. Since 'they' are without ego, I wonder why they continue to reply? Oh, I forgot... they are here to enlighten us peons and I am an ego based creature with no control :roll:.
Well... thank you for replying... I have lots of time on my hands too... and MY ego.. demands that I attempt to edify... it is in my nature.. my genetic structure and my INFJ personality... hehehhehe


First to 'Seekermeister',

I ask your pardon for my part if you view this as a hijacking of your thread. I disagree with many things you say but your philosophies/theological beliefs are clear. I will continue to dispute your more outrageous conclusions or statements until it no longer amuses me to do so because I think that such statements deserve to be challenged.

I do not seek to change your view point - as this will not occur - but I will call 'BS' for anyone who reads your more provocative statements.



To eskimospy,

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Do you really think that people are driven to desparation by attempting to fight the truth that you reveal? We're driven to desparation because talking to you is like talking to a five year old. You're simply immune to reason. You've found a way to turn your brain off, and reject all forms of rational argument in favor of a philosophy worthy of an R.L. Stine book. Don't expect people to follow you.

The only feelings you are stirring up are sadness and frustration... and it sure ain't because we're afraid of your Absolute Truth.

You are simply unable to grasp just how ridiculous this crap you are spouting is.

All of your arguments are crap. Every single one. To think that the only reason someone would challenge the things you say is because they are afraid of them is not only the height of arrogance, but again... dumb. You just sheild yourself behind your (dumb) argument that people only tell you that you're acting stupid because they are afraid they are stupid themselves. It's not... they call you that because they're right.

QFT - good summary :thumbsup:



Finally, to the twins, MB&LR,

Since you speak with one voice, I won't bother with which one said what and will address you as the individual I believe you to be. Let's examine some of your own statements:
(I have adopted an element of your posts, but more on that in a minute.)

Well thank you for that association with MB.. I am honored to be in the nobody class with him.. or her.. heheheheh (shhhhh)

"So, are you saying that IF true you'd be inferior in your current state? If this is true and since you recognize superiority then what is it that keeps mankind from achieving this advanced state of mind?"

- Obviously, I am in some "current state" while you have achieved some "advance state of mind". Arrogant and condescending.

Well many have advanced their minds and many have not.. I for one have not sated my interest in learning... about me and about what ever else I find of interest... If you find me arrogant.. OK.. and condescending .. OK.. from your POV I'm sure you do.. but, is it not from MY POV that we should be looking... Am I acting with Mal Res... what is MY motivation.. Is that not what makes something one way or another... or have YOU with Omniscient vista garnered sufficient mind reading ability to determine that.. or are you projecting on me... you?

"The worm mocks the elephant's ears while the elephant has not a care in the world about the worm."

- If you truly did not have a "care in the world" about the opinions of others then your posts would not be the point-by-point counter views that you post. This style of post, which I adopted here, simply reinforces my view that you are trapped by your own egotistical need to be right. This is contradictory to the very message you try to convey. This is why you have richly earned the derision of others and can only be called a hypocrite.

You propound point by point and point to me... hehehehe I try to contextualize for your consumption... and appreciate you doing the same.. makes for clear discourse
You bet, I love to be right. It makes me feel good... the question is.. why does it? That is the point of alot of what we are talking about... why does it do what it does.. Is that not of interest? Moonster has an answer to that.. Do you think it possible that I need to feel good so badly cuz I was made to feel bad as a child?

"hidden behind the reality you see is the reality you don't see"

- An inane and obvious observation almost unworthy of comment. Congratulations on having read a pop-culture book on psychology or completing Psyc101. The inclusion of such a statement can only lead to the assumption that you believe that you are privy to this unseen reality. Arrogant and condescending.

Once again.. thanks for the compliment... What is a pop-culture book? Anyhow, that you and I both take time to post here says something about us both... I'd think.. Not sure which of us needs to be right more.. that we do is obvious

"You wouldn't notice how superior I am otherwise." ; "I am superior to you because I can happily be the inferior you can't be but are." ; "I'm infinitely superior to you at being nothing. My humility is maybe 100 times as great as your own."

- Hmmm... no arrogance is those statements. The fact that you make such statements belittles your "humility" and again shows you to be a hypocrite. You cloak your claims of superiority in statements of inferiority and no one is fooled.

"No it is your insecurities that cause you to challenge."

- Nice projection. "It's not me that does that, its you." 5 year olds make better counterpoints.

"I am here to tell you that the reason you do not know truth is because the truth is something you hate. You also hate to be told."

- Once again, arrogant and presumptive beyond the pale. Has it occurred to you at all, that perhaps you don't know the "truth"? Of course not. Your ego will not allow it.

"I am pointing to the way out of hell."

- Who ordained you? Just like the previous statement, what makes you think that you are the most qualified individual to point the right direction? Complete arrogance.


These are just from your replies to me in a couple of posts. There are many more equally absurd statements in your other posts.

If you are seeking to provoke a real debate about a practical issue, you are failing miserably. Your posts contain so much self satisfied arrogance that it difficult to find any actual opinion or point (other than satisfying your ego driven need for self promotion).

If you truly have little or no knowledge of Scientology, then I suggest you examine it. You will find many concepts and philosophies that are parallel to your views as expressed here. I admit to my error - hardly my first - in presuming to know your philosophies well enough to categorize you as a Scientologist. However, as I stated, your views as expressed here have many parallels with Scientology.

I have no quarrel with Scientology, Christianity, Islam or any other system of belief. In a free society each individual is entitled to adopt any philosophy or theology that provides them with peace.
edit: oops.. missed this.. I did mention I knew nothing about Scientology.. and don't... I'd only add; folks can choose regardless of the outcome.. peace or otherwise.. For my answer to all this Universe and what not.. I've found a direct link with the Creator... Know him personally, I might add.. and especially his son.. can't tell them apart actually so don't try.. He gave me this Ego capability so I'll let him deal with it.. but like my tummy.. I love banana splits.. chocolate and strawberry ice cream.. yummy.. I sate my Ego on knowing I like banana splits .. and that is truth..

I will however call 'BS' anytime an individual claims to be in exclusive possession of the "truth". Your "truth" is not universal. Not because it is unprovable, but because it is not even attached to reason. It is, therefore, your personal madness and you should have no expectation that others will be willing to share it.

You have determined this to be true, have you.. heheheheh.. Me thinks you are incorrect and false.. and your reasoning is with out merit.. and if you have any doubts about that truth .... hehehe ask Moonbeam... But, as Socrates has been recorded to have said.. "the only thing I know for sure is that I know nothing for sure"... Unlike us.. Socrates is Right.. his truth is truth..

Your inability to comprehend this is the surest sign of your arrogance and ego.

I didn't reply to those passages from MB's offerings.. how can I.. I think I could and do from time to time but in this case where being right is SOOOOOOOOOOOOo important.. I'd feel better letting him, if he desires, respond..

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: shira
My dear Moonie:

Of course "world" can mean something akin to "universe," given the proper context. But I think it's pretty clear that Blake's context in that line from "Auguries of Innocence" is a single world, not the entire cosmos. Let's look at that stanza again (the bolding is mine):

To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour.

Note that Blake uses "a world," not "the world." Clearly, "a world" is a part of something bigger, a something that contains this world, that world, Blake's "world" and every other world. A something that one could fairly refer to as "the universe."

Hehe, yes, but also note that the next two lines flesh out his real intention, that a world is infinity and a heaven is eternity. Infinity, of course, is the universe. Also poetically, it reads better as a world and a heaven, in my opinion, because you can't really say, in the context there, the world and the heaven. But, more importantly, if I may say so, he is talking about exactly that which I have been saying, namely, that there is a kind of awakening that colapses duality and ends time. One becomes the universe and enters the truth, heaven, when the ego disappears. I don't know Blake, but it sure as hell looks to me like, HE KNEW.

Also, since we are going to sever a thread with a sword here, I was referring to my statement, that the universe is contained in a grain of sand. When you said, 'Not the universe, exactly, but a good start.' I thought you were saying you might see a world an a grain of sand but not quite a whole universe whereas that is what Blake and I were both saying.

First, your analysis of Blake's poem:

Although Blake refers to eternity, infinity, and heaven in that stanza, he doesn't say that all or even any of those may be seen in a grain of sand. He says only that "a world" may be seen in a grain of sand (and that the other big things are in a wild flower, your hand, and an hour). So even if the "sum of the parts" of that stanza is referring to the universe, each part of the stanza (the "grain of sand" line being one of those four parts) does not.

To put this more succinctly: If the sum of the parts is the whole, that doesn't mean that each part is the whole. This is very basic stuff.

Bolded part next:

In an earlier post, you wrote about a grain of sand containing the universe. Presumably, that was intended as a paraphrase (whether you knew it or not) of Blake (who "coined" the grain of sand metaphor). So I was merely pointing out that Blake had made a much more modest statement - that a world (not the entire universe) may be seen in a grain of sand.

In other words, I was pointing out that the underpinnings of your claim didn't support the "universe" interpretation. But since I'm such a comedian, I said it in a highly amusing fashion ("Not the universe, exactly, but a good start."). I crack myself up sometimes.

 

[fskimospy]

e: I ridicule what you say because you aren't saying anything meaningful.

M: I don't ridicule you because you don't say anything. You poop a lot of opinions though which you never back up.

Back up what? My opinions are that you babble nonsense in the desperate hope of sounding smart. Do you want me to cite some sort of source for why I think you're an idiot? When a scholarly journal does a piece on P&N and the dorm room philosophy that some people espouse, I'll cite a source.

Unless you want me to just make up some stupid Scientology-lite stuff like you do.

I actually wrote up a bunch of other stuff to this, but then just realized again that it won't matter. I do notice that you're starting to get a bit snippy though... I hope you aren't doing so out of fear of the truth I represent.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Moonster.. is that sorta like the difference between an Asteroid hitting Earth and Earth hitting an Asteroid? It is all about the frame of reference? (In the context I inferred from the quoted passage)

Not sure. Does the paper grab the fly or the fly the paper?

The fly lights on the paper. Who didn't know that?

This should end the thread right here. This perfectly encapsulates the entire discussion! ie. Moonbeam says something stupid that he attempts to dress up in order to sound philosophical, and then someone smacks him in the head with reality.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Moonster.. is that sorta like the difference between an Asteroid hitting Earth and Earth hitting an Asteroid? It is all about the frame of reference? (In the context I inferred from the quoted passage)

Not sure. Does the paper grab the fly or the fly the paper?

The fly lights on the paper. Who didn't know that?

This should end the thread right here. This perfectly encapsulates the entire discussion! ie. Moonbeam says something stupid that he attempts to dress up in order to sound philosophical, and then someone smacks him in the head with reality.

Ah... Eskomospy... remember .. but for Moonbeam you'd not have had the opportunity to respond as you did.. You and I both have used Moonbeam to 'feel good'.. don't ya think?... just an itty bit maybe?


Gosh.. Edit... hit button too fast.. ... the whole thing was about frame of reference... and the responses ASSUMED the fly did the fly thing and lit upon the paper... but you don't know what may have happened.. the fly may have been flying on by and the mean fly catcher guy flung the paper at the fly... Frame of Reference... demands you know some facts at least to conclude with absolute... don't ya think..

 

[fskimospy]

I understand where you're coming from... and you're definitely right. I've probably gotten way more satisfaction then anyone reasonably should from talking trash to him.

I think there is an assumption there however that all points of view are equally valid... and that's why I don't hold that we're all equal partners.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I understand where you're coming from... and you're definitely right. I've probably gotten way more satisfaction then anyone reasonably should from talking trash to him.

I think there is an assumption there however that all points of view are equally valid... and that's why I don't hold that we're all equal partners.

That is my argument.. hehhehe Moonbeam has a philosophy based on his own observations.. it is not dependent on us but are on him.. He says what he says cuz to him that is truth.. How can anyone say it is not when it is to him.. he extrapolates that his truth is universal.. and it sure seems like it is to me.. but in denying that we seek to deny the very core of his being.. hehehehhe we can't do that.. because it is Truth.. his.. and perhaps ours.. I don't know.. what I don't know.. but alot of folks maintain they do..

 

[fskimospy]

Oh, what I meant there was that I don't believe that all points of view are equally valid. Some are right, and some are wrong.

 

[GZeus]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
..... he extrapolates that his truth is universal.. and it sure seems like it is to me.......

Exactly. As long as he and you contend that any truth is universal, you shall be regarded as arrogant fools.

EDIT: That should have said "... any philosophical truth..."

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Oh, what I meant there was that I don't believe that all points of view are equally valid. Some are right, and some are wrong.

IF the context is exactly the same then I'd be hard pressed to find substance in a void..

Moonbeam has found something... and knows exactly what it is that he has found.. From his POV and studies.. it seems not only reasonable but logical for all folks to see it if they would only look.. but they won't look.. cuz they can't look cuz they are satisfied with their current state of affairs... I am.. you are, no doubt.. but he was not.. so he ventured to where the answers were.. and now knows truth.. truth that from his POV is universal..

He reads someone write a statement filled with hate.. directed at some other human.. He knows this person is projecting their repressed feelings unto that other human. The topic may be repugnant in its nature.. and that confuses the issue..
He could easily quote Freud.. and Maybe from time to time Jung.. or even Anna but the point is.. these brains are pretty on.. they knew behavior was caused by some event and you have to touch that to deal with it... that is the substance that folks here don't see .. so the void ain't.. it is filled with the work of the best of the best in the field..