Weakness is strength??

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby WendyDarling » Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:49 pm

MA,

Having a goal to be the best without the capability to be the best is more akin to being delusional. While confidence in one's ability can be used to psych-out one's competition at times, confidence does not translate into being the best nor does desire without the potential for vast improvement. Most people do not possess the necessary potential for vast improvements and they fall into the average or less than average categories. Also, most people do not know what their limits are in varying physical/mental trials. Modern folks aren't required to understand much let alone be able to do much.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 4550
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Tue Apr 18, 2017 10:32 pm

Mags wrote:
I am simply a statistic of a product of a toxic world.


pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:
Mags ... you are a flicker of light ... a glimmer of hope personified ... during a dark and gloomy night for humanity.


Mags wrote:
I think that's you. :)


Mags wrote:
In the wake of my now slowly-receding recently-acquired physical weakness, yes I did have to acquire a different kind of strength formed by the new state I found myself in.. a lot of mental energy was involved during that time, which is maybe why the physical was not fully supported and so somewhat dis-abled by the brain.. a case of self-induced life support?


Fascinating ... astonishing ... thanks for sharing.

Reminds me of something I read some time ago ... can't remember the source ... the basic message was ... "There are many ways to wake up."

Wake up as in:

Waking up is unpleasant, you know. You are nice and comfortable in bed. It's irritating to be woken up. That's the reason the wise guru will not attempt to wake people up. I hope I'm going to be wise here and make no attempt whatsoever to wake you up if you are asleep. It is really none of my business, even though I say to you at times, "Wake up!" My business is to do my thing, to dance my dance. If you profit from it, fine; if you don't, too bad! As the Arabs say, "The nature of rain is the same, but it makes thorns grow in the marshes and flowers in the gardens."

Anthony De Mello
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:36 pm

WendyDarling wrote:MA,

Having a goal to be the best without the capability to be the best is more akin to being delusional.


One more tautological wisdom: unrealistic goals are unrealistic.

It doesn't matter what they are. To be the best, to be average or to be the worst. If the necessary mobility, whether upward or downward, is lacking, then the goal is unrealistic.

We are discussing what is better. You're saying average is better. It's not necessarily. Only if you're below average. Otherwise, you're not making progress but regress.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby WendyDarling » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:28 am

MA,

It is better to not be delusional. Since you and I have differing definitions of average as well as differing ideas of realistic goals for ourselves, progress is lacking in this conversation. To reiterate, a jack-of-all-trades is a master of none, his ability is not the best in any area for he lacks the best capabilities, instead he has ample capabilities in many areas. Every label given to non-masters is arbitrary usually being self-referentially spawned through biased exaggeration, misuse of the word better.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 4550
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby WendyDarling » Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:34 am

Is it true that to Moderns the jack-of-all-trades is special? Survival throughout history required folks to be jacks-of-all-trades in order to continue their existence, it really wasn't something special to be capable of doing many activities from fighting, farming, hunting, construction projects from sewing clothes to baking bread, building instruments, tools, housing, etc...
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 4550
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:46 pm

I don't know, Wendy, I think that back in the day people used to be less of a "jack off all trades" then they are today. There used to be castes. Peasants were peasants, warriors were warriors. Tautologies worked well. It's only nowadays that we hear that peasants are warriors.

When I hear "jack off all trades" I immediately think all breadth and no depth which is the worst combination.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby WendyDarling » Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:20 pm

MA,

What does a caste have to do with capabilities? If anything, the undeserving often had their families' stature/wealth to ensure their survival whereas the peasants had to be resourceful, had to learn to do it all for they couldn't afford to pay others to do it for them.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 4550
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Thu Apr 20, 2017 12:40 am

Wendy and MA

Perhaps the following equation is mathematically correct.

In the Collective Consciousness ... One Mind = One Unit ... no distinction.

If true it becomes a numbers game ... as more and more minds "awaken" ... the 'how'or the 'class' is irrelevant.

The result is logical and rational ... the stability of the Collective Consciousness is disturbed ... this might explain the unusual turbulence keen observers are noticing.
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Thu Apr 20, 2017 2:34 am

Pilgrim wrote:

Power eventually self destructs ... Entropy ... Empire ... Bully

Weakness self perpetuates ... water metaphor ... http://web.uri.edu/iaics/files/09-Guo-M ... d-Holt.pdf

NT ... "the meek shall inherit the earth" ... "blessed are the poor in spirit".


Western philosophy generally, looks upon weakness as a lack of power or moral failing but, there are those who have in their own way shown another view in defence of one's passivity to be a strength. However, how are we to understand the collaboration between weakness and power, when there is a strong claim for them to be opposites of each other.

Examination of the nature of weakness has inspired many to write about the human condition. For example, Nietzsche and the feminist writer Simone de Beauvoir both explored the concept of weakness. Weakness can appear passive in a way pain and suffering do not, Virginia Woolf believed that 'we have no language for physical pain', but there are two sides to weakness. Weakness as acceptance of bodily need and weakness of a psychological or ethical failing of some kind.

Consider that weakness appears in many forms, whether it be "the flesh is weak" or Kierkegaard's "despair in weakness" of which both describe the fundamental attribute of the Christian believer.

Nietzsche rejected religion and referred to it as "the weak ruling the strong". If you accept that Nietzsche presented as a narcissistic personality, it would be only natural for him to see himself as superior. He was smart enough to see through the outward appearance of religion during the time he lived, but the hypocrisy of his thinking was, in the process of overcoming his own limitations, he most probably believed himself to be some sort of deity or supreme being who had the ability to guide the 'sheep'.

Sometimes in our enthusiasm to explain power and strength, we neglect to identify their connection to weakness and in so doing we then reject the notion that weakness is a part of the character of a person and in reality it is a typical aspect of our shared humanity.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Thu Apr 20, 2017 4:22 am

MA wrote:
"jack off all trades"
:lol:

Is that a Freudian slip?
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:48 pm

Suppose you're ugly. I'm not saying you are. But suppose. Suppose you know, with sufficiently high degree of confidence, that you can never be -- and when I say never I don't really mean never, but more like within some arbitrarily chosen timeframe -- that you can never be anything more than ugly. Now tell me, does it logically follow that ugliness is beauty?

We can take another example. Similar but a bit more concrete. Suppose you somehow know that your descendants can never be anything more than a little less ugly than you are. Does that mean, I have to ask again, that ugliness is beauty?

What is my point?
My point is that you are confusing two different questions. One is "what is within your capabilities?" and another is "what is beautiful?" I am afraid you are not willing to keep the two separate instead confusing them.

That's what people who are emotionally reactive do. They confuse what was previously recognized as distinct.

Another interesting fact about emotionally reactive people is their lack of tolerance, or patience, for their unpleasant, which means overwhelming, emotional reactions. So, for example, when they realize they are not perfect, that they lack something others possess, they immediately start to pursue that thing. In other words, they cannot admit they are ugly (or otherwise inferior) without immediately positing a goal and pursuing what is beautiful (or otherwise superior.) So what happens . . . instead of simply accepting they are ugly (stimulus) as well as that ugliness is inferior to beauty (reaction to stimulus) and rejecting the immediate pursuit of beauty (reaction to reaction to stimulus) because it's not within their ability, they are rejecting first reaction, that ugliness is inferior to beauty, so that they don't have to make an effort to destroy the connection between first reaction and second reaction. Do you see where I am going?

What is better is independent from what you can do. It is also independent from what you personally want.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby WendyDarling » Thu Apr 20, 2017 8:11 pm

MA,

Where does taste, preference play into what is "seen" as better? Purpose? Fit?

Better is not useful as a blanket statement for what is better for you may not be better for me.

Are you now advocating for subjectivity? Objectivity is a blanket approach used to simplify an estimation.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 4550
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:52 pm

Honey, when I say better I mean greater. I don't mean any kind of better. But better as in greater. How the fuck is that subjective? It's quintessentially objective.

You want me to repeat myself. Okay. A, B and C is greater than A. That's simple mathematics. Hardly subjective. More and less. The basis of every judgment of general, rather than specific, value.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:11 pm

Western philosophy generally, looks upon weakness as a lack of power or moral failing but, there are those who have in their own way shown another view in defence of one's passivity to be a strength. However, how are we to understand the collaboration between weakness and power, when there is a strong claim for them to be opposites of each other.


I don't know, Maiden, I think that the purpose of consciousness is to discriminate -- to recognize distinctions instead of blurring them.

Strength and weakness are opposites. That's how it is. Deny this and it better be a metaphor. Otherwise, you're committing a sin.

Consider this situation: I know in advance that my actions will miss the target but they have acquired a momentum, in the form of instinct, making me inclined to perform them anyways. By restraining myself I would make myself passive in that moment . . . I'd have no reaction to the external stimulus. But my intelligence says this is better than reacting because it estimates it will lead to less damage than otherwise. You can now say "weakness is strength". My response would be rather simple "lol". No, honey, it isn't strength, it is simply wiser than the other option. My reactions would still be manifestation of my strength, even though, in this particular instance, they would be self-destructive.

Then, you have to ask whether restraint should be considered passivity. Though it makes you less active it also requires active effort to do so. Indeed, many people who act a lot are passive in the sense that they are inert: not restraining their instincts when their intelligence tells them they should, making their behavior very rigid, mechanical, repetitive, obsessive.

Finally, simply not acting, I presume outwardly, does not mean you're weak. Weakness refers to your potential -- to what you CAN do and not to what you DO. There's a difference. If a lion does not react much, that does not mean he's weak.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby WendyDarling » Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:40 am

Magnus Anderson wrote:Honey, when I say better I mean greater. I don't mean any kind of better. But better as in greater. How the fuck is that subjective? It's quintessentially objective.

You want me to repeat myself. Okay. A, B and C is greater than A. That's simple mathematics. Hardly subjective. More and less. The basis of every judgment of general, rather than specific, value.
*yawn* #-o I already said that too. Objectivity helps save time by simplifying distinctions into sweeping categories not based on individuality.

No, honey,(You have a greater amount of honeys than anyone I know.) it isn't strength, it is simply wiser than the other option. My reactions would still be manifestation of my strength, even though, in this particular instance, they would be self-destructive.


A Shieldmaiden (MA's other, Honey)...his conversation is of greater value to you, yes? :evilfun:
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 4550
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:50 pm

WendyHoney wrote:Having a goal to be the best without the capability to be the best is more akin to being delusional.


This tells me you cannot separate realism from idealism. Realism is about what is likely to happen in the future which includes what goals you can achieve. Idealism is about comparing patterns in order to rank them in terms of their greatness. If you say X is better than Y that does not mean you should pursue X. There is no necessary connection between the two. Unless your brain is inflexible and impulsive, unable to separate the two, instead seeing them as one. Then there is a necessary connection but only in your brain.

You are forcing me to repeat myself. Over and over again.

Honey, if you're fat and you know that being fit is better than being fat, that does not mean you should immediately jump on your treadmill. Whether you should or should not do something is a matter, not of idealism, but of realism. And sometimes, it's better to remain fat than to pursue fitness (why? because it would backfire if you tried to be fit, that's why.)

Similarly, just because you can do Y and not X does not mean Y is better than X.

Tastes aren't arbitrary.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:53 am

Wendy wrote:
A Shieldmaiden (MA's other, Honey)...his conversation is of greater value to you, yes?


There is no helpful information I could offer to answer that question. When a person resorts to name calling it is an indication, to me anyway, that there are some feelings of inadequacy in that person.

One must keep in mind that philosophy is a discipline of clear thinking and there is no statement of truth that is, in and of itself, philosophy, simply because, philosophers take innumerable mutually opposed positions and have done since the beginnings of philosophy. I would offer that one needs to be constantly aware of how to avoid logical flaws, not always easy when you passionately believe in a particular stance or feel threatened by a particular person.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sat Apr 22, 2017 3:06 am

MA wrote:

Another interesting fact about emotionally reactive people is their lack of tolerance, or patience, for their unpleasant, which means overwhelming, emotional reactions. So, for example, when they realize they are not perfect, that they lack something others possess, they immediately start to pursue that thing. In other words, they cannot admit they are ugly (or otherwise inferior) without immediately positing a goal and pursuing what is beautiful (or otherwise superior.) So what happens . . . instead of simply accepting they are ugly (stimulus) as well as that ugliness is inferior to beauty (reaction to stimulus) and rejecting the immediate pursuit of beauty (reaction to reaction to stimulus) because it's not within their ability, they are rejecting first reaction, that ugliness is inferior to beauty, so that they don't have to make an effort to destroy the connection between first reaction and second reaction. Do you see where I am going?


Beauty is difficult to define, it has no common core, so save yourself the trouble in attempting to define it, and

ugliness does have something to say, surprisingly more to some than others.
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Apr 22, 2017 4:07 am

Everything is difficult to define in the beginning. Things aren't born defined.

You have an anti-intellectual agenda as does anyone who thinks that everything is relative.

You are emotionally reactive. You can't control your emotions. You can't understand your reactions. So you have to fight them. With stupid, entirely unnecessary, thoughts.

Someone says "you're ugly" and then your brain gets flooded with emotional reactions. Instead of trying to understand what's going on you simply turn against your emotions and whatever is triggering them.

So it must be that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" so that you don't have to suffer in reaction to the fact that you're ugly.

No, you're not ugly. You're beautiful. Because you say so. Tastes are like that. You just say they are whatever you want they are. Entirely arbitrary.

Why not learn how to separate realism (what you are and what you can become) from idealism (what is better)?

Why not learn how to accept who you are without having to tell yourself you are something you are not?
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Apr 22, 2017 4:30 am

Here's the kind of goal you should set for yourself: being able to see yourself as you are and then when you switch to observing someone better than yourself being able to feel comfortable in this fact. You accept you are inferior and you don't suffer. You feel no need to hate yourself for being inferior nor to glorify yourself by telling yourself you're actually better or that tastes are relative and so that we're all actually better (a.k.a. equal, egalitarianism being collective arrogance.)
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:40 am

Everything is difficult to define in the beginning. Things aren't born defined.

You have an anti-intellectual agenda as does anyone who thinks that everything is relative.

You are emotionally reactive. You can't control your emotions. You can't understand your reactions. So you have to fight them. With stupid, entirely unnecessary, thoughts.

Someone says "you're ugly" and then your brain gets flooded with emotional reactions. Instead of trying to understand what's going on you simply turn against your emotions and whatever is triggering them.

So it must be that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" so that you don't have to suffer in reaction to the fact that you're ugly.

No, you're not ugly. You're beautiful. Because you say so. Tastes are like that. You just say they are whatever you want they are. Entirely arbitrary.

Why not learn how to separate realism (what you are and what you can become) from idealism (what is better)?

Why not learn how to accept who you are without having to tell yourself you are something you are not?


Wow! You got that from my response? Take a chill pill.

Beauty and ugliness, it appears means a great deal to you. I understood what you wrote, but I disagree with your premise and I might add not from a personal perspective as I believe you may well think I am ugly that is your perception and I cannot or do not wish to change it, let alone take offence at it, but I question the validity of a persons's appearance with what it has to do with philosophy. Voltaire writes that the toad sees beauty in large round eyes and a flat snout, and the devil sees beauty in a pair of horns and four claws.

So I rest my case. HA!
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby A Shieldmaiden » Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:51 am

MA wrote:
Here's the kind of goal you should set for yourself: being able to see yourself as you are and then when you switch to observing someone better than yourself being able to feel comfortable in this fact. You accept you are inferior and you don't suffer. You feel no need to hate yourself for being inferior nor to glorify yourself by telling yourself you're actually better or that tastes are relative and so that we're all actually better (a.k.a. equal, egalitarianism being collective arrogance.)


What goal do you set for yourself, Jack off all trades?
The man that walks his own road, walks alone

Old Norse Proverb
User avatar
A Shieldmaiden
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby Magnus Anderson » Sat Apr 22, 2017 5:00 pm

Jackoffs of all trades have no goals, honey.
User avatar
Magnus Anderson
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3138
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby MagsJ » Sun Apr 23, 2017 6:23 pm

pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:
Mags wrote:
In the wake of my now slowly-receding recently-acquired physical weakness, yes I did have to acquire a different kind of strength formed by the new state I found myself in.. a lot of mental energy was involved during that time, which is maybe why the physical was not fully supported and so somewhat dis-abled by the brain.. a case of self-induced life support?
Fascinating ... astonishing ... thanks for sharing.

Reminds me of something I read some time ago ... can't remember the source ... the basic message was ... "There are many ways to wake up."

Wake up as in:
Waking up is unpleasant, you know. You are nice and comfortable in bed. It's irritating to be woken up. That's the reason the wise guru will not attempt to wake people up. I hope I'm going to be wise here and make no attempt whatsoever to wake you up if you are asleep. It is really none of my business, even though I say to you at times, "Wake up!" My business is to do my thing, to dance my dance. If you profit from it, fine; if you don't, too bad! As the Arabs say, "The nature of rain is the same, but it makes thorns grow in the marshes and flowers in the gardens."

Anthony De Mello

Well.. I was all(most) well and woke.. until a local anaesthetic floored me, and after 4 days and 3 nights I arose, but in the state that I previously described.. I am simply not good with toxins. This wasn't the first time that this episode has happened but I am working on it being the last, as I have people to see, things to do, places to visit, and new experiences to experience.

I have since learnt that an allergy to local anaesthetic is heart-stopping.. literally, so I now keep thinking about what was the defining factor in me coming to, as opposed to never coming to.

One cannot go beyond what one's body has re-programmed itself not to go beyond.. or suffer the physical consequences of that wrong action, so it is not a question of simply pushing beyond that limit.The changes may reverse over time, but that is not a scientific/biological certainty.
Image
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 16764
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: Weakness is strength??

Postby pilgrim-seeker_tom » Mon Apr 24, 2017 12:26 am

MagsJ wrote: as I have people to see, things to do, places to visit, and new experiences to experience.


Mags ... chances are ... you will see people in a different light ... you will see places in a different light ... you will experience "experiences" in a different light. At least lots of empirical evidence support such an outcome for people who have shared a similar life threatening experience. Kriswest comes to mind.

what will happen to the millions ( Billions) of men who are too weak to forego their earthly bread?


Perhaps ... just perhaps ... you have joined the community who have the fortitude to forego their earthly bread ... figuratively speaking. You have joined the community of the 'weak' who are at the same time very strong.

MagsJ wrote: so I now keep thinking about what was the defining factor in me coming to, as opposed to never coming to.


experience is our teacher ... perhaps ... just perhaps ... your experience was necessary to point you in the right direction to fulfill your life's purpose.

Lord, you provide the pricks to move us in the direction you want us to go.

St Augustine


MagsJ wrote:but that is not a scientific/biological certainty.


science/biology is unable to answer many many questions about human life.
"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Thomas Kempis 1380-1471
User avatar
pilgrim-seeker_tom
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1264
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:16 am

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ecmandu