Enlightenment: Just tell what it is.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Sure. But sometimes, simplicity and vagueness are another way of saying "I don't have the slightest effing clue what I'm talking about, but you don't know that and I'm not about to admit it."

It happens a lot around here. Then they play semantics and make groundless accusations in order to distract participants. Classic sleight of hand. Punch a guy in the face while you steal his wallet, etc etc.

Simplicity (specifically with clarity) is not synonymous with vagueness The point was that they can both serve a purpose, even if they are diametrically opposed. Like so many things..

However when there is nothing but vagueness, then I would tend to agree it is just regurgitated data.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
It is unknown.

No one can say what makes a heart beat.

That is not true. It is regulated by electrical signals and the brain. It takes energy gained from consumption of food for its fuel.

Check online.
"Does the heart beat independently?"

Capacitance.

Mind: The accumulative result of the processes of the brain, including (but not limited to) thoughts, emotions, memory, awareness, etc.

reply to post by Serdgiam


You are the one who used the word "vague". I just reused it as part of my point. Also, simplicity and clarity often clash. Clarity means adding details to further specify the subject, which reduces the simplicity in that more adjectives, verbs, nouns, and other stuff is added.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

You are the one who used the word "vague". I just reused it as part of my point. Also, simplicity and clarity often clash. Clarity means adding details to further specify the subject, which reduces the simplicity in that more adjectives, verbs, nouns, and other stuff is added.

I said how vagueness can be a tool to expose bias, then I used the qualifier "however" and went into how simplicity and clarity should be an overarching goal when attempting to learn about something. That is kind of the deal with science, but I can understand if you are not particularly interested in science (not everyone is). We clarify, then we simplify, and continue on with that process until it yields usable results. Vagueness has little place in it. Its quite fun, actually. Well, at least to some like myself, of course.

I never, at any point, said that vagueness shows understanding. Quite the opposite!

Like I said, we can have a discussion about the semantics of it, but really, that isnt very appealing to me. That sort of thing is far too common on boards like this.

reply to post by Serdgiam


Semantics reveals the depth of our understanding in ideas used to expressing a theory. If we are not able to explore the foul underbelly of semantics, then we do not really understand the ideas we're tossing around. After all, these words and their meanings are all we have. If we use them in vain, then we discuss ideas in vain because they don't really mean what we say they mean.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Fair enough

It just doesnt interest me. I prefer math!

As you say:

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
It happens a lot around here. Then they play semantics and make groundless accusations in order to distract participants. Classic sleight of hand. Punch a guy in the face while you steal his wallet, etc etc.

reply to post by Serdgiam


When I said that, I meant that people tend to take an idea and redefine it in order to distract you, then they use the redefinition in order to support a completely unrelated point which they tie back into their original argument. Which you then argue with, attempting to outline their semantic fallacy, which they take your argument and redefine it so you're forced to defend your own castle instead. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

When I said that, I meant that people tend to take an idea and redefine it in order to distract you, then they use the redefinition in order to support a completely unrelated point which they tie back into their original argument. Which you then argue with, attempting to outline their semantic fallacy, which they take your argument and redefine it so you're forced to defend your own castle instead. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Yup! Happens all the time. Sometimes, we arent even aware we are doing it ourselves. What were we talking about again?

reply to post by Serdgiam

Yup! Happens all the time. Sometimes, we arent even aware we are doing it ourselves. What were we talking about again?

The meaning of enlightenment. And I thought the meaning of life was a hard question...

reply to post by AfterInfinity


The way I have figured it; the meaning of life is to live.

And, enlightenment doesnt exist.

There, now that we have all that sorted.. and the mysteries of the universe revealed.. want to eat some cookies with me?

I have chocolate chip and oatmeal raisin. Both are quite delicious, I tell you what.

reply to post by Serdgiam


So you're just going to throw your opinion at me and move on? Nuh uh, I don't think so. Why do you think enlightenment doesn't exist?

reply to post by Serdgiam


Buddy i could bake you up some cookies that would be sure to enlighten you for a little while. Had me some epiphanies while munching on a few myself. LoL

On a more serious note IMHO enlightenment exists in many different shapes and forms. Its the way we look and perceive the notion that counts.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

So you're just going to throw your opinion at me and move on? Nuh uh, I don't think so. Why do you think enlightenment doesn't exist?

To be perfectly honest, I am not really feeling up to going into a full conversation about it, though Ill try to briefly explain. And hey.. isnt drive-by opinionation what the interweb is all about?

I do believe everything exists, though perhaps not in a quantifiable fashion. In that respect, I view enlightenment to be in much the same vein as leprechauns. It doesnt exist outside of the mind that is perceiving/creating it. To most, enlightenment is that first time the rope is cut (using the horse story). It is a moment. One that is somehow made more special because of various reasons.

Similar to what you say, I see it as a realization of a process. One that is ongoing, whether or not it is recognized by the perceiving system. That rope only has the power that we give it. So, in a way, I concede that it exists. But I have my doubts that the universe we are all a part of considers a realization of the innate limitations of being a part of the whole is somehow special or noteworthy. Its a foregone conclusion.

Originally posted by andy06shake
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

Buddy i could bake you up some cookies that would be sure to enlighten you for a little while. Had me some epiphanies while munching on a few myself. LoL

What ever could you be talking about?

If its got fat, it could lead to epiphanies with the right variables.

reply to post by Serdgiam


I understand. I'll keep this simple then. I believe that the OP is looking for the wrong answer. Enlightenment is not a thing. It's an adjective we use to describe a state of understanding that allows us to coexist harmoniously with elements that would otherwise cause us distress. In that sense, you're right. It doesn't exist outside of the mind. It's a form of perception, as with all things, really.

I hope the OP reads this post - I would be interested to know what he thinks.

If everyone is right in what they do then noone is right in what they do, right?

reply to post by Serdgiam


"If its got fat, it could lead to epiphanies with the right variables."

Ile take that to mean you can atleast entertain the notion that given the right set of circumstances, anything becomes possible?

So why not enlightenment?

reply to post by andy06shake


You may have been typing your response while I posted this to AI. Does that answer your question?

I am quickly reaching my sitting/computer limit, so may have to continue this tomorrow or the next day.

reply to post by Serdgiam


Cool, cool. Guess its just our interpretation of what enlightenment means that differs. That was on the cards anyway since no two people interpret anything in the exact same fashion.

Good evening to ya!

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Unity_99

 

That's essentially what I've been saying. If you seek enlightenment, you will find it in motion. Have you ever noticed how hard it is to keep a stationary top balanced, as compared to a spinning top? Motion provides effortless balance. Round and round, a circle of experience and reflection. When you realize how everything feeds into everything else, how negativity and positivity are quarreling brothers who could not live a day apart, you will understand the true nature of enlightenment, and you will understand the true nature of the universe.

Be water. Be motion.

edit on 10-2-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Be water. Be motion. And Flow. Put the Whole into it (snap snap) be one with "the"....