from the various marks in the margins and passed the course, of
course, but how has he slipped into the swamp area of brain memory?
On Aug 30, 11:19 pm, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the explanation, archytas. Funny title.
>
> I think Plato does try to deal with the Soul and Reason being superior
> to the body and emotions- but don't know where to locate the argument.
> Anyway, this rather leaves ego in the lurch for the time being as I
> must now consider it a worldly trifle! I really don't know Plato very
> well.
>
> I agree about economics being unfair through human history. What do
> you see in biology and history that is hopeful for the future?
> Especially since it is possible to view them as hopeless! Yet today I
> was spellbound watching a film about the construction of the Hoover
> Dam which rivaled the Pyramids...somewhat.:-) Everything is possible.
>
> On Aug 30, 2:27 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sorry about all the 'b's rigsy - I hadn't noticed - must be down to a
> > brilliant old series called 'Rising Damp' and its main character
> > 'Rigsby'. My apologies - no intent whatsoever. You do sometimes
> > display the wit and humour of the programme, but it's just down to my
> > misreading.
>
> > I'm always struck by the way critical intent can co easily seem to
> > leave us with nothing credible. Science generally builds from
> > questioning doubt - and it leaves me doubting pretty much everything
> > we call economics as lacking any feeling for people. The Dark Tea
> > Time of the soul isn't much use to us and I think much of it is down
> > to not being 'freely communal' and secure. I'm not at all sure any
> > philosophy helps as it is so obviously based on fictions. I think we
> > could adjust to a more equal society and need to see this one
> > collapse. The issues are basic but we refuse the see them.
>
> > What some see as moral and ethical is often very dangerous and even
> > Plato regarded much of it as a lie. I think we are missing something
> > about our social condition that we could develop from biology and
> > history.
>
> > On Aug 30, 6:35 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > "...What is an "ultimate sense"?" - rigsy
>
> > > In this context, ultimate sense implies eternal/eternity.
>
> > > On Aug 30, 6:36 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Never fear! By last evening I considered that the ego could be viewed
> > > > as the "husk" of the soul! :-) Yes- I think in day-to-day terms though
> > > > I can stretch, if forced. For instance, we cease to exist because we
> > > > are forgotten and really only a grain of sand in an historical sense.
> > > > I am thinking that birth and death and their mystery started the
> > > > rituals- religions- philosophies- arts. What is an "ultimate sense"?
>
> > > > On Aug 29, 7:08 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > "Yes it is as I distinguish you from all others. Why? Because you
> > > > > have
> > > > > projected your ego driven self into words." – rigsy
>
> > > > > In the way you are looking at it rigsy, yes, ego does exist. Having
> > > > > had numerous and long discussions about this topic with Vam in the
> > > > > past, it is my understanding that when he (and I to some degree) say
> > > > > that ego isn't real we are talking in more of an ultimate sense, not a
> > > > > day to day interaction way. It is more in the line that anything that
> > > > > is 'real' is something that is permanent. And, I think it is clear
> > > > > that all of us, or most of us at least, hold that ego does cease to
> > > > > exist at some point.
>
> > > > > On Aug 29, 4:25 am, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Yes it is as I distinguish you from all others. Why? Because you have
> > > > > > projected your ego driven self into words.
>
> > > > > > On Aug 28, 11:16 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Vam, we are in agreement. The ego isn't real.
>
> > > > > > > On Aug 28, 12:27 pm, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Just continuing this discussion...
>
> > > > > > > > - The ego is NOT a living being in truth, in reality. It, in truth,
> > > > > > > > does not exist, is non-existent, is absent. If we still feel it as
> > > > > > > > something real, as some "thing" that must die, it is only because we
> > > > > > > > are ignorance itself, we are a lie, as in opposed to truth, we are
> > > > > > > > living in non-existence !
>
> > > > > > > > So, the only meaning that "...the death of the ego" has is " awakening
> > > > > > > > in truth, in existence, in reality," and resuming something very
> > > > > > > > ordinary, natural, and true. It is wholly strange being, but only
> > > > > > > > because we have been living in non-being so far.
>
> > > > > > > > But we have staked so much, our everything, in this non-existence and
> > > > > > > > untrue... that, indeed, it is not easy, herculean for most, and
> > > > > > > > impossible for the rest. Only because we simply not leave these
> > > > > > > > paradigms of untruth and non-being !
>
> > > > > > > > On Aug 28, 11:07 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Yes Vam, as one continues to move up the scale, the point above
> > > > > > > > > disillusionment is the death of ego itself. This more commonly is
> > > > > > > > > known as the dark night of the soul.
>
> > > > > > > > > The path isn't easy…but is knowable.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Aug 27, 7:42 pm, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Agree with everything you said here...
>
> > > > > > > > > > What I must emphasise however, as I believe you would too, is that '
> > > > > > > > > > violent ' nauseating experience of emptiness is not the last word on
> > > > > > > > > > it. Without this perspective, and caveat I may say, despair and
> > > > > > > > > > depression is inevitable... the background to the well known and
> > > > > > > > > > extended debate between Sartre and Camus aired publicly !
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Aug 28, 4:54 am, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > "Complexity is never a reason to shut our eyes, i wouldn't have
> > > > > > > > > > > thought... " – paradox
>
> > > > > > > > > > > IF you somehow interpreted my having said "Relativism and
> > > > > > > > > > > deconstructionism do lead one into the depths of the well of
> > > > > > > > > > > disillusionment." as a call for blindness, nothing could be further
> > > > > > > > > > > from the truth.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it is the semantics involved with the term 'disillusionment'.
> > > > > > > > > > > If so, in an attempt at clarification, this term to me is fairly high
> > > > > > > > > > > up the ladder of levels of consciousness. In fact, it is very close to
> > > > > > > > > > > where one begins to see things as they actually are. The term itself
> > > > > > > > > > > means that one is no longer held by the trance of illusions. And, in
> > > > > > > > > > > this context, such a realization compared to how most people apprehend
> > > > > > > > > > > the world before reaching being disillusioned, can be quite painful –
> > > > > > > > > > > thus the reference to depths of a well. Here, even though such pain
> > > > > > > > > > > has always been part of the psyche; at this level, one who is 'waking
> > > > > > > > > > > up' is no longer anesthetized to their ego (illusion) pain… it is
> > > > > > > > > > > being felt quite strongly consciously for the first time.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > So here, with the awareness of pain, one actually is able to begin to
> > > > > > > > > > > open one's eyes metaphorically.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > As an aside, Sartre's novel, "Nausea", is an example of the psyche
> > > > > > > > > > > reaching this particular level of consciousness. And, as most are
> > > > > > > > > > > aware, Jean-Paul was opening his eyes rather than closing them. Thus
> > > > > > > > > > > it can be said that this level of transition is where the awareness of
> > > > > > > > > > > the emptiness of life is quite acute.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 27, 10:57 am, paradox <eadohe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Complexity is never a reason to shut our eyes, i wouldn't have
> > > > > > > > > > > > thought...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 27, 3:13 pm, ornamentalmind <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Relativism and deconstructionism do lead one into the depths of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > well of disillusionment.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 26, 10:50 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nietzsche argued (in front of the bourgeois) that bourgeois morality
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > was all based on the ability to use violence to recover debt. I take
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > it his play was ironic, much as Kierkegaard on Xtianity. To abandon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > morality and ethics in order to do the best we can in practical
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > circumstances is a move from generality to particularism and 'low and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > behold' the matter is somewhat ironic as we discover morality and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ethics in the particular. We might, for instance, be generally
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > against abortion, but leave this generality aside in considering a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rape victim wanting one - indeed we should go further and wonder what
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > role morality and ethics play in the decision that we have any 'right'
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be considering a decision many of us think the woman concerned
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > should be able to make and expect only our support in it - that is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > help with her distress.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > In German philosophy after Hegel, there was much attempt to 'free
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought' from Geist and what we might call 'socially approved
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > epistemic authority' (which we might corrupt to 'moralising') - one
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comments:
Post a Comment