The New Age of Thought and Self-Reflection

a reply to: PublicOpinion
The question i have asked myself since my teens, "what 'is' my reason for being"
... I've never stopped, and along the way I have found out so much, the only truth
I see is change but even truth must change, we are conditioned to follow the
paths of others, distracted and sedated.
"our schools make us stupid and our jobs make us poor"
Lupe fiasco

So what is my reason for being, I dunno but these days I'm thinking those planets in
Our solar system are conscious entities that are our gods. That makes sense to
Me now but a year from now we could be living in computer generated matrix.

I think a clever guy said the only think I know is I know nothing meant that as soon as
You believe something as truth you stop learning about it and are put on a path that
Goes with your belief.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: dfnj2015
No things.....just what is occuring.

I have spent years studying non-duality and yet when I try to put my finger on what it is the idea escapes me:

Strangely it is the only non idea.... it is non conceptual...... so its difficult, if not impossible to put in words.

Non duality means not two.
The first assumed divison assumes a you and a world.......two separate things.

Non duality is simply this that is happening... no things, no you and a world....just this, what actually is.

According to our best theories of physics, the fundamental building blocks of matter are not particles, but continuous fluid-like substances known as 'quantum fields'. David Tong explains what we know about these fields, and how they fit into our understanding of the Universe.

I just hit clarity that first person perspective reality is 2d as you can only go up down left and right lol when you are in charge of a person you move into 3d as you are viewing that person as yourself and are able to look deeper the more people or and things you are in charge of the higher your dimension.

Would you believe that the previous age of enlgihtmentment was just a bunch of wild crazy sex parties?

a reply to: Specimen88

Some people believe the beast within is enlightened so give in to it's every whim as they are weak. I believe true personal enlightenment to be about transcendence of carnal urges.....maybe that could mean giving into the beast until the thirst is quenched.

a reply to: Nataslived

Yea, the Victorians still went to church to wash their hands or sin, or both...every weekend.

Some people say feed the beast, dont feed the bears, unleash or free the beast, kill the beast, wear the beast, befriend the beast, sooth ir to beast mode( all the while it the recon mode, not their battle).

Cant I just catch it use as a pokemon, in a seemingly innocent theme of friendship yet deceivingly barbaric practice such as battling.

a reply to: Specimen88

I agree wholeheartedly. You can blame tv and people's inability to not be hypnotized by violent music for the advent of the battling beast.

a reply to: Nataslived

Yea, feeding bears can be expensive.

Cant we just call it the Copper Age, or Iron Age 2.0, or YahWeh 2000 for a new metaphor?

a reply to: Specimen88

The age of YOU. When you see people as me and you, me will understand.

a reply to: PublicOpinion The reality is we have been fed bull# over the years,nothing is as it appears and it was created that way to control populace,true history will never be known as the last 300 yrs were made redoing history

a reply to: PublicOpinion
There is a problem with thought..... it assumes something which does not exist and that something is its main concern.
Self centered thought is destructive.

Here is an interesting talk by American Physist David Bohm about the problem of thought.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

That's another way to look at it, yes.

One might even go further to state, that industrialized thought isn't thought at all, and more of a mere reflex or an internalized process of automation.

a reply to: PublicOpinion
Would you explain what you mean by 'industrialised' thought please?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I was thinking about rationality in the context of a positivist mindset, where the premise of effectiveness dictates the rationale. A somewhat automated process in the mind, which is essentially derived of any self-reflective thought that could mess with it's intentions.

Does that make sense?

I think New Age philosophers, much like Buddhist philosophers, are getting self-reflection and self-adulation+self-marketing* confused. (*: I'm also thinking of mutual marketing, marketing eachother by pretending other philosophers like them are worth listening to)

The "self-indulgent woo", as I heard someone on this forum call it (their philosophies and the promotion of them), is rather transparent. At least it is to me. They have nothing truly valuable to offer to human society and in terms of general insight and understanding. There is no enlightenment there.

originally posted by: ManyMasks
a reply to: PublicOpinion
...
I think a clever guy said the only thing I know is I know nothing ...

What's so clever about a logical contradiction? Can you see the contradiction in that statement? Does it help if I remind you that "nothing" means "no thing" or "not any thing". So one can't say that the only thing you know is that you know nothing. Those are 2 contradictory statements, both cannot be true. Either you know nothing, not any thing, or you know only 1 thing, if one wants to make either statement. Of course such statements would still never be true because such people do not exist*, people know many things, they just don't know all things. And often they are in denial of things they know but actually didn't want to know, therefore they sometimes like to say they know nothing. Preferring and promoting vagueness, ignorance and agnosticism over acknowledging the truth/certainty of something. It's better for selling and marketing unverified philosophies/ideas as knowledge, wisdom, insight, understanding and/or enlightenment.

*: people that can actually talk to make such statements that is. If they're talking English, they already know enough about the English language to make their point heard and understood by others, who then know what they said. Some might even know how empty and worthless their contradictory statements are. Especially if they have benn warned, forewarned is forearmed (actually the Dutch expression has it as "A warned person counts for 2").

1 Timothy 6:20

20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called “knowledge.”

a reply to: whereislogic
What if the statement read:
The only fact known is there is nothing to know.

Really, there is nothing to know and no one to know....... there is only ever what appears to be happening!

originally posted by: whereislogic

1 Timothy 6:20

20 Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called “knowledge.”

So what actually is there when speaking ceases?
Just this..... always just this.

I am and I am not (what thought says I am).

a reply to: whereislogic

Maybe your not Clever enough to understand the quote.