By thinking ?
L G.....there is no such thing as an original thought .Scientists or whoever ,layman or what ,don't think discoveries .Discoveries are a product of a process of learning and usually happen as an accident .Where are you Dexter ?
Reality is 'what is'.
- Thread starter china
- Start date
By thinking ?
L G.....there is no such thing as an original thought .Scientists or whoever ,layman or what ,don't think discoveries .Discoveries are a product of a process of learning and usually happen as an accident .Where are you Dexter ?
I haven't read much of it China, just enough for the headache. Please don't take my foolishness to heart man. You present fun exercises. thankyou:lol:
I,ve never had an original thought, I loot every bit of it, most times it gets mangled in the burlap bag.
You said it bear, and couldn't have said it better, shed the fantasies, and frills, and
material objects, and quietly look around you, 'reality', it's wonderful, and scarey, and not at
all a feeling of weakness, but a knowledge of 'what is'.
Lurking in the background. I've ceased responding to your philosophizing. It rarely makes any sense to me. I don't think you have the slightest comprehension of what you're talking about most of the time, and even if you do, I certainly don't, you have one of the fuzziest, most imprecise New Age minds I've ever encountered. Reading what you post and how others respond has a certain entertainment value, but I've disengaged, there's nothing in it for me but frustration. Our thought processes are just too dissimilar for meaningful dialogue.
Dexter Sinister
I would like you to show me any examples and back it up your accusations with some facts 111111
If you have problem undrstanding me ,let me advise you that the solution to a problem lies ALWAYS in the problem itself .Dexter ,you are the problem .
Obviously . Your second hand knowledge keeps you tied up to a center ,and the leghth of the rope (the second hand knowledge) prevents you from venturing beyond the perriffery of ignorance .I,m not insultig you ( as you have insulted me and others in this very forum )i,m just saying the way it is Dexter .
Last edited:
Nope, I'm not going to bother with any of that. I've already done it in many of your threads, pointing out the lack of meaning in what you say and the vague and self-referential nature of your conclusions. Like I said, I've disengaged. We have nothing in common and very different views of reality, there's nothing to talk about.
someone told me long ago that, you don't start to die till you are 12, and before that,
you are growing up.
Yes ,and if you have , you would not ask this question.
Last edited:
Cannibis often renders me to a state of being. Just two nights ago I solved a problem with blade twist because my head was quiet and empty an voila the solution just popped onto to blank board. And I'v been thinking about it for a year but it couldn't cross the street because of traffic congestion.
Yes ,and if you have , you would not ask this question.
Classical physics says that reality is actually little particles that separate the world into its independent elements. Now I'm proposing the reverse, that the fundamental reality is the enfoldment and unfoldment, and these particles are abstractions from that. We could picture the electron not as a particle that exists continuously but as something coming in and going out and then coming in again. If these various condensations are close together, they approximate a track. The electron itself can never be separated from the whole of space, which is its ground. (David Bohm, On Quantum Physics, 1987)
They are making the same considerations as you are I think, the language is just a little different. Science will never catch up with reality or philosophy.
Why not?[/quote]
Philosophy entertained the same questions ,seeking answers, millenia ago, science only now after all this time even approaches those same questions with numbers and reason, but I think human reason will not describe the universe but only that part which is percieved by humanity, if that.
Simply put, the universe is not human, so by my way of thinking, ultimately we will have no answer and will have to be content to always follow evolution, but wait can we lead evolution? Is that what civilization is about? Will we shape our perspective to encompass the whole truth? I don't think probability is on our side, we will be gone long before we read a fraction of "what is".
I'm of the opinion that those who purport to divulge the machinations of the one, while entertaining and engageing, somehow may have missed the enormity of reality in the first place, and that is not to say that they are wrong in any way to discuss and think about these things because they are no less under the same compelling powerful needs that all those great old philosopheres were and in that sence are obediantly employed travelers.