Thought Experiment: English Prime? Language, Reason, and Reality.

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:30 AM
link   



"E[nglish]-Prime is the use of English without any form of "is" or "being."

The gist of this is, I suppose, to see the world more objectively by speaking more objectively. Instead of saying, "the grass is green," one would say, "the grass appears green to me," which is a much more scientifically accurate statement. Instead of "being" a human, one would appear human to him or herself.

Thinking like this in the long term would be pretty weird, but from a philosophical standpoint it's perhaps the most immaculate way to think.




posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy



"E[nglish]-Prime is the use of English without any form of "is" or "being."

The gist of this is, I suppose, to see the world more objectively by speaking more objectively. Instead of saying, "the grass is green," one would say, "the grass appears green to me," which is a much more scientifically accurate statement. Instead of "being" a human, one would appear human to him or herself.

Thinking like this in the long term would be pretty weird, but from a philosophical standpoint it's perhaps the most immaculate way to think.

It is 'grassing' or it is 'greening'.
What is it? It is not a thing - it is a happening.
edit on 29-6-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by DestroyDestroyDestroy
 


Does the ocean wave?

If so, have you ever waved back?



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by LiveForever8
reply to post by DestroyDestroyDestroy
 


Does the ocean wave?

If so, have you ever waved back?

The ocean is the wave.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by DestroyDestroyDestroy
 


There are no objects - there is only what is happening (being).

Destroy, destroy, destroy all the things of the world and realize happening/being.
Wording creates the illusion of a separate world. Wording creates the illusion that there are 'things' - 'things' are 'thinks'.
edit on 29-6-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Is it? Or does the wave appear as such to you?



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
Thinking like this in the long term would be pretty weird, but from a philosophical standpoint it's perhaps the most immaculate way to think.

Thinking is wording. Take words away and what is there?
Non conceptual (not worded) reality is here and now as presence - there is nothing else but words pretend there is.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Is it? Or does the wave appear as such to you?


The ocean and the wave are one. Can a wave appear without an ocean? The ocean has to be before any wave can have apparent existence.
edit on 29-6-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Wrong. Well, somewhat. The only thing that you can truly know to exist is yourself; anything else is a leap of faith. You cannot verify the happening of anything other than yourself. So, should you assume coexistence and refer to it as being, or assume nothing as simply observe things as they appear to you?



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Without words we would think in a rather pure form, and that is ideas. What tends to happen, at least when I think, is I get the idea, then put it to image, then put it to words. For example, idea of "bed," image of "bed," the word "bed."



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Wrong. Well, somewhat. The only thing that you can truly know to exist is yourself; anything else is a leap of faith. You cannot verify the happening of anything other than yourself. So, should you assume coexistence and refer to it as being, or assume nothing as simply observe things as they appear to you?


I am being all there is.
I am the one ocean with waves appearing. The waves constantly move and change.
edit on 29-6-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


What is the wave? If you were observing the wave from above, it would not appear as a wave. but perhaps as a part of a ripple.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


Without words we would think in a rather pure form, and that is ideas. What tends to happen, at least when I think, is I get the idea, then put it to image, then put it to words. For example, idea of "bed," image of "bed," the word "bed."

When the word 'bed' appears can you lie in it?
The word appears 'bed' but it is just the appearance of the word bed - it is not a bed.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


What is the wave? If you were observing the wave from above, it would not appear as a wave. but perhaps as a part of a ripple.

The forming (wave) is what is seen.
Nothing is seeing the scene.

Have a look right now and see if you can see what is seeing the appearing form (what is before you). Presently, there is an image appearing made of light right now - what is seeing the appearance?



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


But you're not. Well, you Are, but you are not that.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


But you're not. Well, you Are, but you are not that.

I am that.
I both am and am not.
edit on 29-6-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


What is seen and what is can be entirely different things. This is because different creatures observe things differently, and I don't just mean colors, I mean dimensionally. Think of how a fly sees, compare your reality to the reality of a fly. Do you see where I am going with this? Perception is subjective; the I deceives the Eye, and the Eye deceives the I.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


The word "bed" looks like a bed...




posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


That it does.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


What is seen and what is can be entirely different things. This is because different creatures observe things differently, and I don't just mean colors, I mean dimensionally. Think of how a fly sees, compare your reality to the reality of a fly. Do you see where I am going with this? Perception is subjective; the I deceives the Eye, and the Eye deceives the I.


Look right now at what is seeing what is seen.
Can you find the seer of this scene?

I am not talking about what you think a fly sees. I want you to look to what is seeing presently here and now.
edit on 29-6-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join