The Metaphysics of Language

reply to post by Kashai


Actually, you said I was Trying to rationalize an obsession. I said i could say the same to you, meaning anyone is capable of making an unjustified comment towards another on the Internet. Nowhere did I say you we're obsessed. I know nothing about you. Nonetheless, the comment was first made in my direction, formed by your words.

Also, nowhere did I say things weren't things. That is the exact opposite of what I said.

A baloney sandwich.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Kashai

 

Actually, you said I was Trying to rationalize an obsession. I said i could say the same to you, meaning anyone is capable of making an unjustified comment towards another on the Internet. Nowhere did I say you we're obsessed. I know nothing about you. Nonetheless, the comment was first made in my direction, formed by your words.

Also, nowhere did I say things weren't things. That is the exact opposite of what I said.

A baloney sandwich.

You are trying very hard to rationalize your position. Obviously members of this forum have made clear you are crazed.

In my opinion they are justified in such a consideration.

That is my opinion and the fact you have a problem with that is an indication of a obsessive/compulsive disorder.

I would suggest you get over that or find somebody else that support your delusions so that you can continue.

Until of course you develop a psychotic disorder, which seems obvious at some point in the future.

Any thoughts?

In all sincerity SIR you are trying to inspire an Ideology that philosophically is as extinct as the Dinosaur's

Any thoughts?

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Maybe you can outdo your fellow advocates and show me this awareness?

I have done the most I can to convince you. It seems you're taking the words for the thing themselves. Can you not conceive of "words" as references to things that exist in themselves? When I say "grass" - does grass not exist because I've said the word "grass"? Or does it continue to exist independent of my observation and naming of it?

Awareness is the same thing. Thought experiment: Are you reading this? HOW are you reading this? Isn't awareness the 'glue' that brings you - lesmiserables - to the understanding of the words you read?

LesMiserables. I appreciate your threads. You're always a tactful, eloquent poster. But this contention of yours is patently absurd. It's Daniel Dennetesque in it's denial of the blatantly obvious. It's an extreme position that 99 out of 100 thinkers will reject because of it's reckless logicality.

Syllogistic reasoning is not the only way to reason. Sometimes the logical thing to do is: do I have awareness? How can I test if I have awareness? I gave a perfectly valid thought experiment above. How are you reading these words if not through the medium of a focused awareness?

reply to post by Kashai


There's no need to say spiteful things.

LesMiserables: this position IS absurd. I don't think it puts you on the "edge of insanity", since you seem to be in control of yourself. Nevertheless, it is a very rickety footing to be establishing yourself.

If awareness doesn't exist - and awareness is a basic, fundamental property of being conscious, what are you doing right now? How can you shift from one thought to another? When you corrected Kashai before about internet etiquette, didn't you have the awareness to discern the wrongness of his position?

There seems to be a borderline disjunction in your thinking. Your using awareness to syllogize, yet denying that awareness exists through the very medium of awareness.

I'm puzzled by how someone usually so intelligent could not notice the absurdity of that

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


applauding your topic
and kudos for your description

But its contextual hogwash

see; Words dó have incredible Power,
but it depends on who speaks it

or better: "which Consciousness speaks them"
because, we, as humans, now, have no power at all in speaking words
- because that power has been Stolen from us.
By Evil.

its an incredible interesting topic though -
since the words people speak, define their consciousness

example:
"La" is 'matter'
"Hu" is the authoritative word, command
so al-la-hu [ allah ] is " to be grounded to matter "

...so; all of those who recite this Mantra [ cause thats what it is] ,
declare themselves "to be grounded to Matter [ earth/dust] "

...and observing their consciousness [ of islamics]
that precisely what is happening !

Ya or yah is EA, is ENKI,
so the concept of "yahwah"or "yahweh" directs Enki - not God.
...it was the task of the pharisees and Scribes, to Play with Words and Sounds -
to anull the power of the word of God.

..likewise, Dje-hu-ti [ thoth, the Scribe ] ,
notice that same "Hu" in the name
claimed to spoken word of God,
ofcourse with the goal to DISTORT it.

...we, souls, not only can Kill or Heal with words -
but there is a complete WAR going on in that other dimension,
about the very words, sounds, we speak

kind regards

reply to post by Astrocyte


Hence the conclusion that you have no idea what you are presently talking about LM.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I seem to recall you saying thoughts are also present. Do they happen at another time? Tell me what precedes the present?

There is only ever what is happening - presently.
The present never goes anywhere, it has always been the present.
Thoughts cannot appear any other time because there is no 'other' time.
What ever appears must appear within presence.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

I seem to recall you saying thoughts are also present. Do they happen at another time? Tell me what precedes the present?

Notice that what you are is always present - awareness of what is happening is now.
A thought may arise but it has to arise in what you are. A thought arising is noticed - what is it that notices the arising thought?
The thought (word) may say 'tomorrow' or 'another time' but it can only say it now and can only be noticed now.
'Another time' is only ever a thought arising presently.
Words appear in awareness, colours appear in awareness, sound appears in awareness. And awareness is ever present.

OP has a most valid point though,
that he feels "sounds / words " are important

but the thing is, Evil "distorted" those sounds -

making Ka - the spirit
Ba the soul
Maa , truth
aam to be moon
ah to be energy
saa to be sight
etc

...we see the same thing in the eastern world;

the famous aum
om
try say a, you ll feel it in your abdomen
the U will be in your throat
and the M will resonate in your head

sound = power = frequency
able to mold the visible world

but our problem is,
that we do not know the Creational Word anymore

since Evil has owned it, and Distorted it

and now telling us Lies about "what words we should speak"

regards

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


You were telling others awareness didnt exist. If you are aware, in some sense, awareness exists.

Originally posted by Lone12
OP has a most valid point though,
that he feels "sounds / words " are important

but the thing is, Evil "distorted" those sounds -

making Ka - the spirit
Ba the soul
Maa , truth
aam to be moon
ah to be energy
saa to be sight
etc

...we see the same thing in the eastern world;

the famous aum
om
try say a, you ll feel it in your abdomen
the U will be in your throat
and the M will resonate in your head

sound = power = frequency
able to mold the visible world

but our problem is,
that we do not know the Creational Word anymore

since Evil has owned it, and Distorted it

and now telling us Lies about "what words we should speak"

regards

And this is why only the seeing of the non conceptual will set one free.
Seeing and hearing without preconceived concepts and ideas will set one free.
Jesus came to teach the blind to see and the deaf to hear (the immaculate conception).

WTF? You guys are twisting everything he says into something else!
-And what you make it into seems to be specially engineered so that you can claim spiritual and intellectual superiority.

Why not just deal with what he said ?

An interesting look at the uses and abuses of language.

Even twisting his name here, from LesMisanthrope to Les Miserables... Oh please

Originally posted by Bluesma
WTF? You guys are twisting everything he says into something else!
-And what you make it into seems to be specially engineered so that you can claim spiritual and intellectual superiority.

Why not just deal with what he said ?

An interesting look at the uses and abuses of language.

Even twisting his name here, from LesMisanthrope to Les Miserables... Oh please

Words have an effect upon quantum reality....words are non-random events

Get over it...and to be clear it is ridiculous that modern science has not investigated the phenomenon from this perspective.

Any thoughts?

Originally posted by Bluesma
Why not just deal with what he said ?

An interesting look at the uses and abuses of language.

In the opening statement it is claimed that 'being' is a word and to contemplate 'being' is to just think about a word. It is being dealt with.
It is the topic of discussion.

Originally posted by Kashai

Originally posted by Bluesma
WTF? You guys are twisting everything he says into something else!
-And what you make it into seems to be specially engineered so that you can claim spiritual and intellectual superiority.

Why not just deal with what he said ?

An interesting look at the uses and abuses of language.

Even twisting his name here, from LesMisanthrope to Les Miserables... Oh please

Words have an effect upon quantum reality....words are non-random events

Get over it...and to be clear it is ridiculous that modern science has not investigated the phenomenon from this perspective.

Any thoughts?

Get over it? What should I get over? I have expressed here that language and it's effect upon reality and consciousness is one of my favorite topics and fascinations.

I have no idea why you bring this assertion about modern science to me - what does that have to do with what I just said in the post you quoted??

So- you agree, language is powerful in this reality. So my pointing out that twisting his meanings, attributing ideas to him that he has not expressed, even deforming his name, may not be meaningless and benign?
These are not 'random events"

They are most likely, people choosing to project into the words of someone else that which they desire to see and hear, rather than what was actually intended and expressed. (the Misanthrope being deformed into Miserables is not a random twist which happened hazardly- it has very specific reasons for the one who did that)

Psychologists study the effects of language on cognition, behavior and personality. Linguistic determinism, linguistic relativity... these are areas of research that exist.

In these areas we can recognize the way people use language to impact each other in subconscious ways- to manipulate covertly. People can have their perception and thoughts, even self image shaped by the way people around them use language.

If 'get over it' is your way of saying, "don't point out what we're doing here, turn away and ignore this" (?)
I say that just reinforces my assertion. To be covert manipulation, it must stay covert. But I think you know Les is not as easily manipulated.. I suspect it is the other readers you wish to impact with this twisting and deforming.

reply to post by Bluesma


With all due respect I think LM should make sure that he has relatives that care for him when he begins to experience Dementia, due to old age.

God forbid he ends up in a nursing home

His argument has no basis in fact and due to that he needs to be concerned as to how that translates later in his life.


If anything I am his friend and concerned about his welfare.


Any thoughts?

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by Bluesma

 

With all due respect I think LM should make sure that he has relatives that care for him when he begins to experience Dementia, due to old age.

God forbid he ends up in a nursing home

His argument has no basis in fact and due to that he needs to be concerned as to how that translates later in his life.


If anything I am his friend and concerned about his welfare.


Any thoughts?

My thoughts are that such ad hominem are used when someone is frustrated because they cannot form an effective argument to another's.
I don't believe for a moment you are concerned about him in any way,
nor that you are friend to him.

I also do not believe any respect, (due or not) was included in that post.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

No where did I say I wasn't aware.

Are you aware?

Originally posted by Bluesma

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by Bluesma

 

With all due respect I think LM should make sure that he has relatives that care for him when he begins to experience Dementia, due to old age.

God forbid he ends up in a nursing home

His argument has no basis in fact and due to that he needs to be concerned as to how that translates later in his life.


If anything I am his friend and concerned about his welfare.


Any thoughts?

My thoughts are that such ad hominem are used when someone is frustrated because they cannot form an effective argument to another's.
I don't believe for a moment you are concerned about him in any way,
nor that you are friend to him.

I also do not believe any respect, (due or not) was included in that post.

edit on 5-7-2013 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)

As I have explained human behavior is non-random and in relation to a quantum environment. That would constitute a deviation from a materialistic standard.

Given human experience are based upon internal representations which, they in fact are, makes your point is mute.

You assume that reality is effectively flat without any empirical evidence and that essentially describes and extremist.

Any thoughts?