Think For Yourself

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I am non-demoninational but I can honestly agree 100% on this statement!




posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by sulaw
 



Originally posted by sulaw
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


Just to go a step furter. Where did your OP come from? Was it an Original thought? Or did you derive that post from knowledge aquired? I already SnF I would again if I could as this is very thought provoking, see where i'm going with this though? I'll say you thought for yourself 100% accurate but the knowledge therin must have been learnt from outside sources thus making your OP just as suseptable to the same logic?

Please advise, think tank is awake and he's been known to be wrong as well.....

I await the answer's Les~

Cheers~

sulaw



Sulaw, I will get to your great questions as soon as I can find a moment to think about them. Please return I'd like to continue the discussion.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


For sure ^_^ I await the response!

Cheers~



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I do enjoy reading the words of others to catalyze my mind to places it might not elsewhere be.
Recently I have been rediscovering the world outside of TV computers and the simple real hard rewards it brings.
I for a time was so engrossed in work then after dinner TV culture I forgot my true power.

I have in the past often been judged by the consumer culture for doing my own experiments into the unknown. From a pedestal behind glass they judge without ever doing the experiment because the orthodox paradigm they have been programmed with makes them feel empowered to judge that which they have never experienced as incorrect.

Anyways just some thoughts of my own thanks for sharing your catalyzing conclusions.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


Wonderful thread.

I think it shares the message and spirit I was trying to impart in an older thread of mine:

Inspire yourself



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 



You don't get under my skin. You amuse me immensely and it amuses me that not everyone sees the game you can't stop playing.


I am here for yours and everyone's amusement. I write to entertain.

Please, what youtube video will you link me to next? Who knows, maybe you'll find your words, express yourself, and finally think for yourself.



He doesn't even think that he exists. I'm not holding my breath on him actually expressing himself as a unique and inimitable intellect.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 08:16 PM
link   


We should show the disobedience of our prophets. We should not follow them, our books, our philosophers, our sages, or our leaders—they too are relevant only to themselves—we should instead do as them. The one thing they have done differently is they thought for themselves.
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


I read the whole thing, but this was quite profound.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Hrmmm..... I would have thought Les would have answered my questions by now.... I don't think actually highly doubtful I stumped him.... Maybe I'm overly excited to continue the discussion we were in.... I'm glad to see so many people enjoying this thread as much as I have.

Alright Les, I'll be going to bed soon and I will most surely be checking in tomorrow to see if we can get the think tank going again


Good night and god speed~

sulaw



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 



Let's take for instance the google generation (such a seductive habit) which has almost eliminated problem solving and experimentation; "why delve into the unknown if someone's already done the difficulties?" Google it. And sometimes writers quote another in place of their own words, adopting stray thoughts, the fodder of another, to stand in for their own (a commonality on ATS).


First of all, what would we think about without any input from others?

Accepting input without straining it through a very fine sieve of skepticism is where the trouble begins. Wheat from chaff.

So when the pundits are all saying "he bad', I try to use search engines to virtually travel to the places in question, to watch and listen to the people in their own milieu and get a feel for the sincerity of their words. THEN its time to think for myself.

jmo.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
He doesn't even think that he exists.

Fish Poshsticker!


Originally posted by NorEaster
I'm not holding my breath on him actually expressing himself as a unique and inimitable intellect.

Quoth the maven.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 



You don't get under my skin. You amuse me immensely and it amuses me that not everyone sees the game you can't stop playing.


I am here for yours and everyone's amusement. I write to entertain.

Please, what youtube video will you link me to next? Who knows, maybe you'll find your words, express yourself, and finally think for yourself.


Here again is weak attempt to incite an emotional reaction.
You are here for your entertainment - nothing entertains you more than getting under peoples skin.
edit on 11-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)


Well, The OP is certainly not alone in those motivations amongst all here, tho, is he?



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj



We should show the disobedience of our prophets. We should not follow them, our books, our philosophers, our sages, or our leaders—they too are relevant only to themselves—we should instead do as them. The one thing they have done differently is they thought for themselves.
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


I read the whole thing, but this was quite profound.

I heartily agree. Otherwise, we just keep the repititious going on, and on and I won't bore you with the obvious next two letter word. And we use those prophets, great minds, and classic philosophers, too often, perhaps as justifications for doing just that. If the age of enlightenment was the best of our thinking, we've certainly become rather stagnated....and that certainly isn't for lack of the pot being stirred, so to speak.
edit on 11-4-2013 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion

Originally posted by NorEaster
He doesn't even think that he exists.

Fish Poshsticker!


Originally posted by NorEaster
I'm not holding my breath on him actually expressing himself as a unique and inimitable intellect.

Quoth the maven.


well, NorEaster does a wonderful job at least of sounding and writing as though he is an inimitable intellect....his mavenness. Just teasing, NorEaster. You're usually way over my head, anyway.
edit on 11-4-2013 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 

Everyone already thinks for themselves. Even the one's that are brainwashed into believing that they are the ones that are thinking, for themselves.

Some get paid, to think for others though.

While others, learn to think, in ways of Thought that a Master Craftsman has Mastered.

If I want to think like an Author, I'll study the the best Authors ever to have lived in Faulkner, Kafka, Proust, Doestoyevsky, etc .
The greatest Scientist see's me studying the Works of Einstein, Tesla, Crick, etc.
The Greatest Purveyors of Enlightenment see's me studying the works of Christ, Buddha, Lao Tzu, Socrates.

It was me thinking for myself, that made me realize that I really didn't know SH!* compared to the Masters in their respective Mastered Crafts.

This was the beginning of Wisdom. To exclaim to myself that I know nothing compared to others. I then set off to know these others. Eventually I realized, to Think For Myself is to create Bias For myself, which would then lead to me seeing that the thinker of thoughts, is not inherently who I am. For who I am, is that which Observes the thinking process, and is separate from it, for I can be with thought, or I can be with no thought.

So the old adage "I think, therefor I am," I had realized was a crock of snip!!!!

I am, therefore, can observe the Thinking Process is more like it.

Later, reaching deeper down the rabbit whole, This Observer that I had found myself to be, retains its own memories of a time long ago, of a wisdom that reins timelessly supreme in an upside down ME, Me, me world.

All that to say, I understand where your coming from OP, but there is more than meets the 'I', and a long way down the rabbit hole, far FAR away from the collectively agreed up truth of the status quo.

We all take these suits of fragile armor off one day, and then, There Will Be Blood, There Will Be Truth.

Non shall escape it, except those who illusions create



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50
well, NorEaster does a wonderful job at least of sounding and writing as though he is an inimitable intellect....his mavenness. Just teasing, NorEaster. You're usually way over my head, anyway.

TreasureNor? Nevermore, Cleverbore!
edit on 12-4-2013 by ErgoTheConclusion because:



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 



You don't get under my skin. You amuse me immensely and it amuses me that not everyone sees the game you can't stop playing.


I am here for yours and everyone's amusement. I write to entertain.

Please, what youtube video will you link me to next? Who knows, maybe you'll find your words, express yourself, and finally think for yourself.



He doesn't even think that he exists. I'm not holding my breath on him actually expressing himself as a unique and inimitable intellect.


Nothing exists. This right here and right now is nothing appearing to exist - it only appears to exist.
Emptiness is form.

Thought appears to exist and words appear to exist but what are they made of and what do they appear to exist in? And were do thoughts appear from and disappear to?



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 01:47 AM
link   
The title of this thread is 'Think For Yourself'.

Take the statement and take the statement apart:

'Who' is thinking?
What is 'thought'?

Can a 'thinker' be found?
Can a 'thought' be found?

What is looking for the thinker?
What is looking for a thought?

Have a really good look.
Look for what is looking.

edit on 12-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
The title of this thread is 'Think For Yourself'.

Take the statement and take the statement apart:

'Who' is thinking?
What is 'thought'?

Can a 'thinker' be found?
Can a 'thought' be found?

What is looking for the thinker?
What is looking for a thought?

Have a really good look.
Look for what is looking.

edit on 12-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)


I found it. Me. I am thought. Now i am part of your thought as you are mine. What are we? We are found depending on the location of the individual thought. I know where i am and you know where you are so now what is this thought. I know we both know thought exists outside the box so that is the thought. What is the box lol. Can thought be brought inside "the box"?



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheomExperience

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
The title of this thread is 'Think For Yourself'.

Take the statement and take the statement apart:

'Who' is thinking?
What is 'thought'?

Can a 'thinker' be found?
Can a 'thought' be found?

What is looking for the thinker?
What is looking for a thought?

Have a really good look.
Look for what is looking.

edit on 12-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)


I found it. Me. I am thought. Now i am part of your thought as you are mine. What are we? We are found depending on the location of the individual thought. I know where i am and you know where you are so now what is this thought. I know we both know thought exists outside the box so that is the thought. What is the box lol. Can thought be brought inside "the box"?


'Me' is a thought.
'Me' is a word. What does it mean?

You say you know where you are - where are you?
edit on 12-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2013 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

'Me' is a thought.


I know, i create "personalities" to identify an exchange of communication. For this you are labeled "you" until i come up with a better label. I am thinking of Thor and i can be Monkey Magic lol. This is what thought is to me. Anything i want it to be. So at the very top of the thought chain there is just two unique thoughts either exchanging useful information or trying to dominate focus attention. I want to know where this "thought beat" or "pulse comes from. Why can i identify as "me" and "you" when sitting face to face with someone else that is not me.





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join