Apech
-
Content count
17,067 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
216
Posts posted by Apech
-
-
-
...
And here I am, back to useful and useless.
I will stop here and await input as I have no idea in which direction to go from here.
I'm going to suggest this.
Real is real. Its not a 'thing', its not the tree or the man observing the tree. It includes these but is not them. Like this. Subject (the real) = Subject + predicate ... where predicate is everything that can be said about the real. E.g. its hard, its soft, its hot, its cold, its a tree, its not a tree ...
The terms objective and subjective only arise because of observation. As in ... objective only arises because subjective exists ... sounds quite Taoist, eh?
We look at a chair. Or sit on it even. It's real. Why not we're not Buddhists (wash my keyboard with soap and water) . Its real ok ... but what is it? What is it's nature beyond just saying ... oh. its a chair of course. Philosophers argue for centuries and struggle to define what it is. Descartes got in a real tizz over the ontological gap between his thoughts (he thunk so he was) and the objective ...he struggled to link the two ... because although intuitively we know its real .. but we can't ever quite say what it is.
Taoists say ... you can't give it a name (the real) because as soon as you do ... its not the true real.
-
1
-
-
Absolutely.
Ha. I have no freakin' idea. If we do not have a perfectly clear mind as well as perfectly clear senses we will distort what is real due to our subjectivity.
But I will stick with my useless/useful concept. This is why I cannot directly argue against religions, beliefs in ghosts, etc, and all the other things that I think are useless to me. Apparently they are useful for others. It's all subjective when we apply our mind to it. That is, unless my thought about 'wu wei' being equal to pure objectivity. But that is a new thought for me and I would need input from others in order to test my thoughts.
I could speak of scientific proof but that subject gets boring after a while. One can say only so much in this field.
Does a cougar contemplate whether a rattlesnake is real? I doubt it. The cougar has two choices, avoid it or try to kill it. S/he knows it is real. But then, if a phoney snake is put in its path and it opts to kill it, it will proceed with the process of killing until it realizes that it is not alive.
I don't know! Darn! Ask me an easier question to answer.
Ok, what does real mean? Maybe that's the same question so its a bit unfair I suppose. Or better what does Taoism say about what is real? How about that ... or are you going to go back to your tree now.....
-
But no, I don't look at Tao as the true objective reality but I think that objective reality lies within Tao - it is an aspect of Tao but it is not the totality of Tao.
But then subjective reality is also within the Tao ... if you are going to use those terms. What is the test that we should use to decide if something is real?
-
Who are we kidding here.
Not one of us is ultimately right.
Every written truth will someday be untruth.
We are all culprits of disinformation.
This is just a big mess of cooperative mind-dumping.
Thoughts, theories, egos, emotions and concepts squishing around in a great big, smelly muck-pit.
But good compost grows lovely flowers.
Stig you are ultimately right!
(WARNING : this message may include disinformation)
-
1
-
-
Not exactly but I suppose the presence of so much Buddhist discussion (no bad thing in itself) has led to the idea that it would be good to have an exclusively Taoist Discussion part of the forum. The renaming of Taoist Discussion to General Discussion is really to acknowledge that the free flowing nature of discussion there ... also gives another option to mods if say a strictly non-Taoist debate kicks off on the Taoist section we can just switch it back to general. Its just an idea to make TTBs better ... and we see how it works out ...hopefully people will like it.
-
1
-
-
-
Hi and welcome.
Suggest you post your questions in general discussion - see what answers you get from there.
A.
-
....
The subjective is in the mind of Hui Tzu, the objective is in the mind of Chuang Tzu.
That's interesting. You seem to be using a particular application of the terms subjective and objective ... as in 'subject to judgement' and 'not subject to judgement' i.e. is this thing useful or not ... being a subject value placed upon the thing. Whereas Chungtzu accepts the thing-as-it-is and looks for whatever value to has in itself. The other theme of that story is that that which appears to be useless endures (i.e. is not cut down and converted into furniture or whatever).
That which endures, is constant or eternal is the Tao and we know that the Tao cannot be given a name ... cannot be spoken. If this is what is fundamentally real then can we apply a phrase like 'objective reality' to it????? No I don't think so. But we can say, I think that the Tao is real and as a consequence that the 10k things are real also ... I'm not going to mention the B (ism) word ... but this is different to it.
-
Questions that come to mind:
Do Taoists have a concept of 'objective' as such?
(in English 'objective' from 'object' comes from roots meaning something like 'thrown against' (see note below from online etymological dictionary).)
Interesting that this 'jacere' = 'to throw' is there in 'subject' and hence 'subjective' also. So one is thrown 'against' or perhaps 'out' and the other is thrown 'in' or 'under' = sub.object (n.)
late 14c., "tangible thing, something perceived or presented to the senses," from M.L. objectum "thing put before" (the mind or sight), neut. of L. objectus, pp. of obicere "to present, oppose, cast in the way of," from ob "against" (see ob-) + jacere "to throw" (see jet). Sense of "thing aimed at" is late 14c. No object "not a thing regarded as important" is from 1782. As an adjective, "presented to the senses," from late 14c. Object lesson "instruction conveyed by examination of a material object" is from 1831.So in English anyway both have the sense of something projected. So both the idea of a an objective reality and a subjective reality are thrown or projected by arising from a reality which is neither 'ob' or 'sub'. The sense of an ultimately real objective (and hence physical) reality ... which is totally dependable, i.e. will always remain to be itself ... is as much a projection or 'pie in the earth' as opposed to the 'pie in the sky' of imagined totally subjectivity.
BUT what is important here in Taoist Discussion is what exactly does Taoist philosophy say about this question.
-
...
I've always thought that Pink Floyd gained some straightforward mass appeal but lost some magic when Syd was gone. They didn't sing the I Ching anymore, in particular... and the eerie otherworldly sound, as elusive as magic always is, was diligently imitated later but never again came from the upper dantien.
...
Agreed. Commercial vs. creative.
-
I was indeed harassed, requested to mame myself, hatefully ridiculed, etc. The evidence is in the posts.
Please let me have the numbers of the posts where you were requested to mame yourself and hatefully ridiculed ... I can't find anything like this. You are making serious accusations and need to back them up.
-
Of course,...could you ask that the diatribe to to mame, injure, etc., that prompted those replies be also removed?
Thanks
V
Could you point me to the posts where you were threatened, please?
-
**** Moderator Message ****
We are currently trying to make some sense of this thread - which to be honest is not easy. At present I have noted that Vmarco has called people 'rapists' and 'nitwits' which are clear insults. So I am asking him on this open forum to remove these insults. He has also made accusations that people are trolls or using 'sock puppets'. If you have any evidence of this please make it known to the moderators immediately. Otherwise stop making these accusations as they can be deemed insults in their own right.
As ever ... could everyone remain calm and address the ideas and issues being discussed and do not insult or belittle or indeed accuse the other poster.
We are deciding if further action is needed or appropriate.
Apech for Mod Team
**** Mod Message Ends ****
-
Hello stingray
-
The more I read this thread the more I value and admire people who find they have a genuine connection to tradition and lineage and are able to practice positively in that way.
-
1
-
-
-
-
I could tell you about my life and keep you amused I'm sure
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqDj5CP3Kag
-
-
May I ask:
Who wants to have the Status of Emptiness...???
What is the ultimate goal to obtain the Status of Emptiness...???
Anyone has an answer to these questions.???
The first bhumi of a bodhisattva is the joyous realisation of shunyata (emptiness). So anyone following this path would wish to have this realisation.
-
I have only two of Joe's LP's but I enjoy most of his music. Last I heard he is still performing.
Listening on vinyl just like the old days.
-
-
Chapter 57
1. Use basic principles to rule a country.
2. Use tactics to run a arm force.
3. Use non-violence to take over the world.
4. How do I know this can be done...???
5. From the list below.
57
1. 以正治國，
2. 以奇用兵，
3. 以無事取天下。
4. 吾何以知其然哉﹖
5. 以此。
To be continued....
Dinner time with tea....
No. 2 ... an armed force ... ... BUT army would be simpler I think.
JESUS IS THE WAY!
in General Discussion
Posted
A loophole to heaven? This is what you wanted?
The rest of your post reads a little like the plot to the film the Omen ... which has been subject to an inferior remake with the actress from the Bourne films as the mother. The one he meets in Berlin on the tram and so on, not the German girl who he takes off with in the first film and gets killed in the second film.
I think heroes like this have a kind of Christ-like quality. Outsiders who have super abilities and yet become a victim of the state. Without Jesus we wouldn't have this archetype. I actually like Jesus because the church and the state tried to kill him. Its a good metaphor for how mystics are treated by the worldly or muggles as we now know them ... sorry for so many film references ... it just came out that way.