Anyone into philosophy?

zapataxiv said:
no enlightenment is not at the end. and that isn't a goal for lay people anyway. we still have to live in the world and function.

the pursuit of enlightenment is a different journey from what lay people persue not an ultimate goal for everyone on the path.


more it's about being able to be honest and recognize your ego and not get trapped in it. not a destruction of it as some people seem to preach but instead developing a sort of 3rd person perch to be able to access and keep yourself from getting lost


it's not spiritual as in there is no aspect that is about higher power and magic etc..

instead it is just about recognizing people and valuing them as people. that is the vipassana part. for me I grew up around aggressive people and I realized my life I was conditioning myself to be ok with hurting people. I made poor choices because of that.

I till get aggro but I have calmed way down
Click to expand...


This is interesting so if you'll bear with me, I would ask a few more questions.

If enlightenment isn't the goal is any kind of genuine spiritual growth the goal? And I do recognize self-awareness as genuine spiritual growth. So maybe that question is already answered...

You say mystical experience is not a part of this approach and I've been on a spiritual path long enough to recognize the deep value in what you are saying. However, I want to ask how this approach deals with mystical experience in this approach if and when it happens? Is it shunned and ridiculed if it happens or is there a way to integrate it happening in an ordinary person's life who may still be a long way from enlightenment but who is having mystical experience anyway?

I guess I'm asking if it would be considered wrong if someone had a mystical experience that changed their life dramatically or if they would just leave the approach you're talking about and try a different approach in that case?

Also, you used the word magic to refer to God (or whatever it's called) and I'm wondering if that word comes from the approach you take and if they are basically atheists in that sense?
 
zapataxiv said:
no enlightenment is not at the end. and that isn't a goal for lay people anyway. we still have to live in the world and function.

the pursuit of enlightenment is a different journey from what lay people persue not an ultimate goal for everyone on the path.


more it's about being able to be honest and recognize your ego and not get trapped in it. not a destruction of it as some people seem to preach but instead developing a sort of 3rd person perch to be able to access and keep yourself from getting lost


it's not spiritual as in there is no aspect that is about higher power and magic etc..

instead it is just about recognizing people and valuing them as people. that is the vipassana part. for me I grew up around aggressive people and I realized my life I was conditioning myself to be ok with hurting people. I made poor choices because of that.

I till get aggro but I have calmed way down
Click to expand...

I'm confused by this post - are you talking about your specific practice or vipassana in general?

Vipassana is an insight practice generally used as a method of awakening. And lay people can absolutely awaken - I generally reserve the term enlightenment for the the Buddha or a select few other historical figures, but the early stages of awakening are absolutely within reach for lay practitioners.
 
Phlog said:
I don't believe so.

There's no either or in the flow of time, reality is a block which we travel through, no choice, only fate.

You can observe people's decisions through brain scan before they are conscious of them, people are not conscious of their decisions and therefore there is no conscious deliberation.

Every 'decision' made, would be made the same were it possible to observe from outside the universe and rewind time, because each decision is a result of one's genes and experience. There is no magical space for free will to exist.

That's what I see is the available evidence on the matter. As Einstein said, "God does not play dice with the universe."
Click to expand...

Let's pull up one of those studies where they do. How did they do that trial again?

"In every trial, participants had to choose to imagine one of two possible different colored and oriented gratings while we recorded brain blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) using fMRI (Fig. 1, see Materials and Methods for details). After the start of the trial, participants had a maximum of 20 seconds to freely decide which pattern to think of."

When you are being asked to choose between one of two choices and given a maximum of 20 seconds to choose it, yes, you don't have free will. That's not exactly an astute observation. When you are being guided by the compulsions of a particular situation you are put in, you don't have free will, also not surprising.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-39813-y

Same study

"Interestingly, it has been recently shown that self-initiated movements can be aborted even after the onset of predictive neural signals, suggesting that the decision can be somewhat dissociated from predictive neural signals."

So predictive neural signals aren't the end all be all determining what you will do.
 
Last edited:
terrapin said:
This is interesting so if you'll bear with me, I would ask a few more questions.

If enlightenment isn't the goal is any kind of genuine spiritual growth the goal? And I do recognize self-awareness as genuine spiritual growth. So maybe that question is already answered...

You say mystical experience is not a part of this approach and I've been on a spiritual path long enough to recognize the deep value in what you are saying. However, I want to ask how this approach deals with mystical experience in this approach if and when it happens? Is it shunned and ridiculed if it happens or is there a way to integrate it happening in an ordinary person's life who may still be a long way from enlightenment but who is having mystical experience anyway?

I guess I'm asking if it would be considered wrong if someone had a mystical experience that changed their life dramatically or if they would just leave the approach you're talking about and try a different approach in that case?

Also, you used the word magic to refer to God (or whatever it's called) and I'm wondering if that word comes from the approach you take and if they are basically atheists in that sense?
Click to expand...
no it wouldn't be considered wrong
it would just be more that you shouldn't attach feelings of godliness or stuff like that to states of awakening because we don't know what or if there is a God

religious belief is also an attachment

instead focus on the love and warmth you feel and just accept it as that and live your life in a way that propegates that


athiest, agnostic whatever those are all also attachments
you hold be able to separate your practice from them
dirtypablo said:
I'm confused by this post - are you talking about your specific practice or vipassana in general?

Vipassana is an insight practice generally used as a method of awakening. And lay people can absolutely awaken - I generally reserve the term enlightenment for the the Buddha or a select few other historical figures, but the early stages of awakening are absolutely within reach for lay practitioners.
Click to expand...
yes I guess my practice was taught first by shambhala but I branches off to some other groups that were more grounded

awakening is not inherently mystical

it's something we can all do with practice

like you said it is different than enlightenment
and the two don't have to cross
 
zapataxiv said:
no it wouldn't be considered wrong
it would just be more that you shouldn't attach feelings of godliness or stuff like that to states of awakening because we don't know what or if there is a God

religious belief is also an attachment

instead focus on the love and warmth you feel and just accept it as that and live your life in a way that propegates that


athiest, agnostic whatever those are all also attachments
you hold be able to separate your practice from them

yes I guess my practice was taught first by shambhala but I branches off to some other groups that were more grounded

awakening is not inherently mystical

it's something we can all do with practice

like you said it is different than enlightenment
and the two don't have to cross
Click to expand...
this is VERY similar to apophaticism in Christianity. while we do have mystic experience and while we do have revelation from God we take all of that apophatically. this means that we KNOW that all of the symbols and words that describe reality or God they are only descriptions and we do not know the fullness.

your approach just seems like an extreme version of that approach.
 
UberHere said:
No it’s boring and useless.
Click to expand...
It is absolutely not useless. I wish more students had to study philosophy in school.

One hugely important skill you can get from reading philosophy is the ability to analyze and criticize arguments. This skill is absolutely vital in today’s media-driven (and social media-driven) world, but it’s a skill that seems to be largely lacking amongst younger people. Studying philosophy instills critical thinking skills.

Secondly, understanding philosophy is vital for understanding the framework of historical, and contemporary, events. People are influenced and inspired by ideas. I’d argue that if you truly want to understand the American Revolution, you need to understand the philosophies of John Locke and Thomas Paine. Likewise, I’d say you can’t truly understand what’s happening with Russia and Ukraine, until you understand post-Cold War Russia, which requires understanding Cold War Russia, which requires understanding the Russian Revolution, which requires understanding Karl Marx.
 
Last edited:
People like to think we are intellectual creatures clouded by instinct, in fact we are instinctive creatures clouded by intellectual.
 
Prefect said:
I got a philosphophical haiku for you.

In heart's gentle sway,
Identity's light of day,
You're gay, truth's display.

Like Ricky's vibrant spark,
A journey not in the dark,
Love's melody, an arc.

Butts and chests so fair,
Desires woven in the air,
Passion's fire, rare.

Cher's courage embraced,
In your steps, love is traced,
Authenticity faced.

Manly men's allure,
In diversity, love's pure,
Connections to secure.

Ball sweat's intimate grace,
Love's closeness finds its space,
Heart's tender embrace.

Meaty biceps' might,
Holding love's truth so tight,
In passion's pure light.

Poppers and lube's glide,
Love's intimacy amplified,
In moments that bide.

Gay bars and trucker stops,
Where identity swaps and swaps,
Acceptance blooms, never drops.

Prancing in joy's embrace,
Freedom's dance, love's grace,
Hearts intertwine and pace.

Manly musk's allure,
Nature's scent, love's pure,
Affection to reassure.

Mustaches bold and true,
Expressions of self to imbue,
Love's tapestry, in you.
Click to expand...
I never understood haikus. It's like:

The water flows
Fish is the colour of the leaf
Both cold in the morning

Or some useless shit like that.
 
In the macro sense, the advent of philosophy was a shifting away from superstition to universal law. Advancement through part science (truth), part humanities (justice), part artistry (beauty).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,158
Messages
55,471,607
Members
174,787
Latest member
Biden's Diaper

Share this page

Back
Top