I don't get Buddhism

For intuitive and critical discussions, from spirituality to theological doctrines. Fair warning: because the subject matter is personal, moderation is strict.

Moderator: Dan~

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:46 pm

iambiguous wrote:
felix dakat wrote:Your so-called "real world" is nothing more than an image in your mind. The real "real world" encompasses you, and is infinite and unbounded. You cannot know it although you are a part of it and it is a part of you. You are a drop of water in an infinite ocean. Glub. Glub.


Note to others...

Make of this what you will. You know, as it relates to the actual life you go about living from day to day to day. =D> #-o =D>

The so-called " others" that you appeal to for validation "again and again" are also nothing more than an image in your mind. You know like the "They" of Heidegger's Being and Time from which you lifted your impoverished conception of Dasein.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8621
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Mar 27, 2020 9:36 pm

felix dakat wrote:The so-called " others" that you appeal to for validation "again and again" are also nothing more than an image in your mind. You know like the "They" of Heidegger's Being and Time from which you lifted your impoverished conception of Dasein.


Let's just hope for your sake we really do live in a wholly determined world. 8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:23 pm

iambiguous wrote:
felix dakat wrote:The so-called " others" that you appeal to for validation "again and again" are also nothing more than an image in your mind. You know like the "They" of Heidegger's Being and Time from which you lifted your impoverished conception of Dasein.


Let's just hope for your sake we really do live in a wholly determined world. 8)


Well Spinoza thought so and he was no dummy. There are different modes of being according to him. And on one level of perception it seems like we're making choices. But that could well just be because of our limited perception of causes including unconscious ones which by definition we're unaware of. Like you, when your typing one of your arguments, you can't be typing it and thinking about the content of it and aware of the process that is producing these thoughts in your mind at the same time. Most of what we are is unconscious. Consciousness rests upon and is determined by unconscious biological processes. What you're explicitly conscious of are a limited repertoire of stale fragmented concepts and words which you seem to think are reality. If anything doesn't fit in your narrow little accretion of tropes it isn't real to you. You think you've got the Buddha beat, when he's not even playing your game. And, like the song asks, if it makes you happy, why are you so sad?
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8621
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Sat Mar 28, 2020 6:31 pm

felix dakat wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
felix dakat wrote:The so-called " others" that you appeal to for validation "again and again" are also nothing more than an image in your mind. You know like the "They" of Heidegger's Being and Time from which you lifted your impoverished conception of Dasein.


Let's just hope for your sake we really do live in a wholly determined world. 8)


Well Spinoza thought so and he was no dummy. There are different modes of being according to him. And on one level of perception it seems like we're making choices. But that could well just be because of our limited perception of causes including unconscious ones which by definition we're unaware of. Like you, when your typing one of your arguments, you can't be typing it and thinking about the content of it and aware of the process that is producing these thoughts in your mind at the same time. Most of what we are is unconscious. Consciousness rests upon and is determined by unconscious biological processes. What you're explicitly conscious of are a limited repertoire of stale fragmented concepts and words which you seem to think are reality. If anything doesn't fit in your narrow little accretion of tropes it isn't real to you. You think you've got the Buddha beat, when he's not even playing your game. And, like the song asks, if it makes you happy, why are you so sad?


Yet another gigantic general description intellectual contraption.

Consciousness about what?

When you ever decide to focus in on that which you are conscious of as it relates to your understanding of karma and enlightenment as that relates to the behaviors you choose on this side of the grave as that relates to what you "get" about Buddhism in regard to reincarnation and Nirvana on the other side of it, please get in touch.

Until then: https://youtu.be/V2f-MZ2HRHQ
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Sat Mar 28, 2020 7:41 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Yet another gigantic general description intellectual contraption.

Consciousness about what?

When you ever decide to focus in on that which you are conscious of as it relates to your understanding of karma and enlightenment as that relates to the behaviors you choose on this side of the grave as that relates to what you "get" about Buddhism in regard to reincarnation and Nirvana on the other side of it, please get in touch.

Until then: https://youtu.be/V2f-MZ2HRHQ


See above. I already specified consciousness of your argument on the page. According to Bodhidharma, Zen is a special transmission outside the scriptures not based on words or letters, a direct pointing to the heart of reality so that we might see into our own nature and wake up.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8621
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Sat Mar 28, 2020 7:48 pm

felix dakat wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Yet another gigantic general description intellectual contraption.

Consciousness about what?

When you ever decide to focus in on that which you are conscious of as it relates to your understanding of karma and enlightenment as that relates to the behaviors you choose on this side of the grave as that relates to what you "get" about Buddhism in regard to reincarnation and Nirvana on the other side of it, please get in touch.

Until then: https://youtu.be/V2f-MZ2HRHQ


See above. I already specified consciousness of your argument on the page. According to Bodhidharma, Zen is a special transmission outside the scriptures not based on words or letters, a direct pointing to the heart of reality so that we might see into our own nature and wake up.


We're done. 8)
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Sat Mar 28, 2020 8:04 pm

iambiguous wrote:
felix dakat wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Yet another gigantic general description intellectual contraption.

Consciousness about what?

When you ever decide to focus in on that which you are conscious of as it relates to your understanding of karma and enlightenment as that relates to the behaviors you choose on this side of the grave as that relates to what you "get" about Buddhism in regard to reincarnation and Nirvana on the other side of it, please get in touch.

Until then: https://youtu.be/V2f-MZ2HRHQ


See above. I already specified consciousness of your argument on the page. According to Bodhidharma, Zen is a special transmission outside the scriptures not based on words or letters, a direct pointing to the heart of reality so that we might see into our own nature and wake up.


We're done. 8)


Too bad for you. I think Zen could really help you. But it's antithetical to your linear way of thinking and the objective model of religion that you want to pigeonhole it in.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8621
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Mar 29, 2020 11:17 am

Congratulations Felix.

iambiguous wrote:We're done. 8)


It's rare that he just backs off. Offering experiential learning was both generous of you and timesaving.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Sun Mar 29, 2020 9:05 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:Congratulations Felix.

iambiguous wrote:We're done. 8)


It's rare that he just backs off. Offering experiential learning was both generous of you and timesaving.

Thank you. Softness triumphs over hardness.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8621
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Sun Mar 29, 2020 10:32 pm

How Does a Buddhist Monk Face Death?
An e-mail interview in the New York Times between George Yancy and Geshe Dadul Namgyal, a Tibetan Buddhist monk

Yancy: I really like how you link the idea of self-centeredness with our fear of death. It would seem that part of dealing with death is getting out of the way of ourselves, which is linked, I imagine, to ways of facing death with a peaceful mind.

Namgyal: We can reflect on and contemplate the inevitability of death, and learn to accept it as a part of the gift of life. If we learn to celebrate life for its ephemeral beauty, its coming and going, appearance and disappearance, we can come to terms with and make peace with it. We will then appreciate its message of being in a constant process of renewal and regeneration without holding back, like everything and with everything, including the mountains, stars, and even the universe itself undergoing continual change and renewal. This points to the possibility of being at ease with and accepting the fact of constant change, while at the same time making the most sensible and selfless use of the present moment.


All I can do is to point out over and again how an exchange of this sort reflects precisely the sort of "general description intellectual contraptions" that, when we situate what we think they mean by their points here into our own actual lives, can "for all practical purposes" mean almost anything. You embed them in your rendition of dasein, I embed them in mine.

What doesn't change of course is that each of us as individuals fears death in a particular set of circumstances where we are closer to or farther away from the actual reality of death; and where we have either considerably more or considerably less to lose when we do shuffle off this mortal coil.

Then the part where all religious denominations impart that which is understood: immortality and/or salvation...in one or another configuration of the "afterlife".

Of course there is then the paradox where millions upon millions of the faithful have thought themselves into believing in immortality and salvation, yet they exhibit all the signs of being terrified in the face of death "here and now" that any number of nonbelievers do.

Why are they not able to sink down into the comfort and consolation that comes from knowing that infected or not, dying or not, the "Lord is thy Shepherd"?

Though, sure, to the extent that Buddhists here can in fact calm themselves down by thinking and feeling the sort thing that Namgyal has managed, they are clearly a hell of a lot better off than I am.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:48 am

felix dakat wrote:
Karpel Tunnel wrote:Congratulations Felix.

iambiguous wrote:We're done. 8)


It's rare that he just backs off. Offering experiential learning was both generous of you and timesaving.

Thank you. Softness triumphs over hardness.


He's back, of course, to plucking bits of 'information' about a belief system he knows little about and cannot possibly learn anything about by 'analysing' mini-quotes from a primarily experiential system.

[see post above, though really there's no need]

It strikes me as trolling.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Mon Mar 30, 2020 12:46 pm

iambiguous wrote:How Does a Buddhist Monk Face Death?
An e-mail interview in the New York Times between George Yancy and Geshe Dadul Namgyal, a Tibetan Buddhist monk

Yancy: I really like how you link the idea of self-centeredness with our fear of death. It would seem that part of dealing with death is getting out of the way of ourselves, which is linked, I imagine, to ways of facing death with a peaceful mind.

Namgyal: We can reflect on and contemplate the inevitability of death, and learn to accept it as a part of the gift of life. If we learn to celebrate life for its ephemeral beauty, its coming and going, appearance and disappearance, we can come to terms with and make peace with it. We will then appreciate its message of being in a constant process of renewal and regeneration without holding back, like everything and with everything, including the mountains, stars, and even the universe itself undergoing continual change and renewal. This points to the possibility of being at ease with and accepting the fact of constant change, while at the same time making the most sensible and selfless use of the present moment.


All I can do is to point out over and again how an exchange of this sort reflects precisely the sort of "general description intellectual contraptions" that, when we situate what we think they mean by their points here into our own actual lives, can "for all practical purposes" mean almost anything. You embed them in your rendition of dasein, I embed them in mine.

What doesn't change of course is that each of us as individuals fears death in a particular set of circumstances where we are closer to or farther away from the actual reality of death; and where we have either considerably more or considerably less to lose when we do shuffle off this mortal coil.

Then the part where all religious denominations impart that which is understood: immortality and/or salvation...in one or another configuration of the "afterlife".

Of course there is then the paradox where millions upon millions of the faithful have thought themselves into believing in immortality and salvation, yet they exhibit all the signs of being terrified in the face of death "here and now" that any number of nonbelievers do.

Why are they not able to sink down into the comfort and consolation that comes from knowing that infected or not, dying or not, the "Lord is thy Shepherd"?

Though, sure, to the extent that Buddhists here can in fact calm themselves down by thinking and feeling the sort thing that Namgyal has managed, they are clearly a hell of a lot better off than I am.

Consider Psilocybin which "can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance”. If it can help patients with terminal cancer as has been experimentally demonstrated [see below], maybe it can help you.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_r ... taries.pdf

https://maps.org/other-psychedelic-rese ... r_patients
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8621
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Wed Apr 01, 2020 9:32 am

felix dakat wrote:Consider Psilocybin which "can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance”. If it can help patients with terminal cancer as has been experimentally demonstrated [see below], maybe it can help you.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_r ... taries.pdf

https://maps.org/other-psychedelic-rese ... r_patients
Yes, there's a way to reduce the fear of death that is now getting current and supportive scientific research backign it up.

If we look at a statement like this....

Though, sure, to the extent that Buddhists here can in fact calm themselves down by thinking and feeling the sort thing that Namgyal has managed, they are clearly a hell of a lot better off than I am.
one might this this a viable option for old iamb.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Wed Apr 01, 2020 5:32 pm

felix dakat wrote:Consider Psilocybin which "can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance”. If it can help patients with terminal cancer as has been experimentally demonstrated [see below], maybe it can help you.


We're done not done yet.

Let me get this straight...

My attempt on this thread to understand how Buddhism might be an important component in my quest to grasp the most enlightened understanding of human morality on this side of the grave and the fate of "I" on the other side of the grave, may well be facilitated by ingesting magic mushrooms?

Hmm...

On the other hand, I still have members of my family who insist it was precisely the psychedelic drugs that I did ingest all those years ago that explain the way I am today. That, for example, all the arguments I raise in my signature threads are completely moot. It's just run-of-the-mill brain damage.

Of course their own drug of choice is still a God, the God, our God. And, like me, Buddhists will be "left behind".
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Thu Apr 02, 2020 9:33 pm

iambiguous wrote:
felix dakat wrote:Consider Psilocybin which "can occasion mystical-type experiences having substantial and sustained personal meaning and spiritual significance”. If it can help patients with terminal cancer as has been experimentally demonstrated [see below], maybe it can help you.


We're done not done yet.

Let me get this straight...

My attempt on this thread to understand how Buddhism might be an important component in my quest to grasp the most enlightened understanding of human morality on this side of the grave and the fate of "I" on the other side of the grave, may well be facilitated by ingesting magic mushrooms?

Hmm...

On the other hand, I still have members of my family who insist it was precisely the psychedelic drugs that I did ingest all those years ago that explain the way I am today. That, for example, all the arguments I raise in my signature threads are completely moot. It's just run-of-the-mill brain damage.

Of course their own drug of choice is still a God, the God, our God. And, like me, Buddhists will be "left behind".


Pardon me. When you said
Of course there is then the paradox where millions upon millions of the faithful have thought themselves into believing in immortality and salvation, yet they exhibit all the signs of being terrified in the face of death "here and now" that any number of nonbelievers do.

Why are they not able to sink down into the comfort and consolation that comes from knowing that infected or not, dying or not, the "Lord is thy Shepherd"?

Though, sure, to the extent that Buddhists here can in fact calm themselves down by thinking and feeling the sort thing that Namgyal has managed, they are clearly a hell of a lot better off than I am.


I thought you were terrified of death. So I cited evidence that demonstrates that psilocybin effectively treats death anxiety. Turns out you just want to argue against religion as you perceive it. Carry on.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8621
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Thu Apr 02, 2020 10:58 pm

felix dakat wrote:I thought you were terrified of death. So I cited evidence that demonstrates that psilocybin effectively treats death anxiety. Turns out you just want to argue against religion as you perceive it. Carry on.
He takes no responsibility for what he writes and especially what he implies. So, he implies a lot. Here he is implying a 'been there, done that' in relation to mushrooms, though he has not done what has been done in those studies in relation to mushrooms. So, he implies things through his family's views and what he has experienced. He implies that your suggestion is silly, despite the science. He implies that it is obvious that people are simply making stuff up, though he cannot know this. He implies that religious people do not face death with any comfort from their religions and fear it in precisely the same way that non-believers do. But he doesn't quite say it. cake and eat it too stuff. There are so many implcit positions and arguments which he need not take responsibility for and if any reacts to any of these it is as if they are being silly rather than simply responding to him. His implicit positions are contradicted, often, by his formal ones. It's all at the level of PR and politics. And for what. To get to mock and play to the gallery. A bit of bitter pleasure before he dies.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Apr 03, 2020 5:23 pm

Beyond true and false
Buddhist philosophy is full of contradictions. Now modern logic is learning why that might be a good thing
Graham Priest

Interestingly, Kant made a similar move. He distinguished between two notions of noumenon, the realm beyond the senses: a positive one and a negative one. According to him, only the negative one is legitimate. We cannot talk about things of this kind; we just need to be aware of them to mark the limit of what we can talk about. Pardon? In explaining what they do, are we not talking about them? Well, yes, of course we are.

The Gorampa/Kant predicament is, in fact, inevitable. If one wishes to explain why something is ineffable, one must refer to it and say something about it. To refer to something else is just to change the subject.


Basically, this revolves around the extent to which, given any particular aspect of any particular set of circumstances, human language is or is not able to capture it more or less wholly.

Noumenon: "In Kantian philosophy a thing as it is in itself, as distinct from a thing as it is knowable by the senses through phenomenal attributes."

Thus, using our reaction to a particular context involving the coronavirus, what actual components of human interactions can be encompassed as "things as they are" as opposed to things as "[they are] knowable by the senses through phenomenal attributes."

Now, from my frame of mind, philosophers/ethicists will either take their premises and conclusions there or they will not. And, to the extent that they don't, their "technical" assessments have little or no use value or little or not exchange value at all.

The same with Buddhists who speak of karma, enlightenment, reincarnation and Nirvana. At what point does language fail them? At what point do they take that existential leap to sets of assumptions that "for all practical purposes" are "ineffable"?

And that's before the part where language itself gives way to actual demonstrable proof regarding the existential parameters of karma, enlightenment, reincarnation and Nirvana.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Apr 03, 2020 5:37 pm

Of course there is then the paradox where millions upon millions of the faithful have thought themselves into believing in immortality and salvation, yet they exhibit all the signs of being terrified in the face of death "here and now" that any number of nonbelievers do.

Why are they not able to sink down into the comfort and consolation that comes from knowing that infected or not, dying or not, the "Lord is thy Shepherd"?

Though, sure, to the extent that Buddhists here can in fact calm themselves down by thinking and feeling the sort thing that Namgyal has managed, they are clearly a hell of a lot better off than I am.


felix dakat wrote:I thought you were terrified of death. So I cited evidence that demonstrates that psilocybin effectively treats death anxiety. Turns out you just want to argue against religion as you perceive it. Carry on.


Well, for one thing I don't have access now to the drugs I once had access to back then. And, besides, they are still included in that list of substances cited in "Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act". In fact, existentially, my imploded world is very, very different from what it once was.

What do you suggest?

And how many times do I have to note that in a thread devoted to "getting" Buddhism, my interest revolves almost entirely around morality here and now and immortality there and then.

And, from my frame of mind, you won't go there. At least not pertaining to a particular set of conflicting behaviors in a particular context. In either a God or a No God world. As you understand it.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Apr 03, 2020 5:38 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
felix dakat wrote:I thought you were terrified of death. So I cited evidence that demonstrates that psilocybin effectively treats death anxiety. Turns out you just want to argue against religion as you perceive it. Carry on.
He takes no responsibility for what he writes and especially what he implies. So, he implies a lot. Here he is implying a 'been there, done that' in relation to mushrooms, though he has not done what has been done in those studies in relation to mushrooms. So, he implies things through his family's views and what he has experienced. He implies that your suggestion is silly, despite the science. He implies that it is obvious that people are simply making stuff up, though he cannot know this. He implies that religious people do not face death with any comfort from their religions and fear it in precisely the same way that non-believers do. But he doesn't quite say it. cake and eat it too stuff. There are so many implcit positions and arguments which he need not take responsibility for and if any reacts to any of these it is as if they are being silly rather than simply responding to him. His implicit positions are contradicted, often, by his formal ones. It's all at the level of PR and politics. And for what. To get to mock and play to the gallery. A bit of bitter pleasure before he dies.


We'll need a context of course.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby phyllo » Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:35 pm

We don't need any more spam, of course.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11864
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:40 pm

phyllo wrote:We don't need any more spam, of course.


Look, I didn't drag you down to retort mode so much as you allowed me to drag you down to retort mode.

Next up:

Fish: Like shooting objectivists in a barrel.

He said in jest. :wink:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby phyllo » Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:44 pm

Stop your spamming.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11864
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:57 pm

phyllo wrote:Stop your spamming.


Just out of curiosity, given that spamming is defined as...

...the use of messaging systems to send an unsolicited message, especially advertising, as well as sending messages repeatedly on the same website...

...how would you go about demonstrating that this is what I am doing on this thread?

On the contrary, over and again, I have included arguments raised in philosophy magazines and scholarly journals that aim to explore Buddhism in anything but "spam" mode.

Instead, I suspect that, slowly but surely, my arguments are chipping away at yours. And it pisses you off. And then when you get pissed off at me you say things like "Fuck you"...and resort to retorts like this one.

Here though I can only extrapolate from my own past experiences with objectivists. It is what "here and now" I have thought myself into believing is true about them "in my head". But no more than that.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:12 pm

iambiguous wrote:
On the contrary, over and again, I have included arguments raised in philosophy magazines and scholarly journals that aim to explore Buddhism in anything but "spam" mode.

One definition of spam as it is used in a broad sense is

The term has leaked out to the world at large, where it means low-value high-volume


What Imabiguous does is take nearly random bits of online copiable texts related to Buddhism and makes precisely the same kinds of appeals to incredulity in relation to them, hoping to pull in someone to demonstrate some concept (like Karma) that Iambiguous has little interest in. The high volume is how much all of this posts end up in the 2 or 3 grooves of all of this posting. The added irony in relation to Buddhism is that Buddhism is an extremely experiential tradition, where one of the fundamental ideas as practiced all around the world is that experiential practice comes first. Iamb's whole process is spammy because there is no real interest in Buddhism. There is no sense that he understands that he plucks quotes from different strains of Buddhism and that the quotes are more of less ‘in the middle of Buddhism’. IOW there is no building up from basic ideas and practices, it’s just grabbing some random topic which is not meant to serve as a start to understanding Buddhist concepts or practices.

I think the term trolling is better than spamming. But his posts certainly have high volume low value and are extremely repetitive.

He may not be consciously disingenous, but disingenuous it is. He wants to learn about something about Buddhism, is how he presents his 'interest', but he is utterly uninterested in what the experts of that something would suggest he do to create a foundation for understanding Buddhism. And what those with more experience have suggested in the thread.

It's a farce carried out not to understand Buddhism but to create a dynamic where someone takes the bait and tries to explain nirvana, say, to someone who has no interest and no foundation.

Iamb is a spammer.

Or that's a contraption I came up with because it's so irritating he spams.

You have to love his cake and eat it too: insult the person, say what he obviously believes. Then add a disclaimer.

In a heterosexual relationship the equivalent would be something like...
Iamb's girlfriend complains that he doesn't really listen to her.
He says shes a fucking bitch.
Then he adds: I have thought about the fact that my thinking you are a fucking bitch is a contraption that I get in relation to women who call me on stuff.
Then he goes back to not listening to her.

That's the kind of mindfuck cake and eat it too in writing like this.....
Instead, I suspect that, slowly but surely, my arguments are chipping away at yours. And it pisses you off. And then when you get pissed off at me you say things like "Fuck you"...and resort to retorts like this one.

Here though I can only extrapolate from my own past experiences with objectivists. It is what "here and now" I have thought myself into believing is true about them "in my head". But no more than that.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:14 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
On the contrary, over and again, I have included arguments raised in philosophy magazines and scholarly journals that aim to explore Buddhism in anything but "spam" mode.

One definition of spam as it is used in a broad sense is

The term has leaked out to the world at large, where it means low-value high-volume


What Imabiguous does is take nearly random bits of online copiable texts related to Buddhism and makes precisely the same kinds of appeals to incredulity in relation to them, hoping to pull in someone to demonstrate some concept (like Karma) that Iambiguous has little interest. The high volume is how much all of this posts end up in the 2 or 3 grooves of all of this posting. The added irony in relation to Buddhism is that Buddhism is an extremely experiential tradition, where one of the fundamental ideas as practiced all around the world is that experiential practice comes first. Iamb's whole process is spammy because there is no real interest in Buddhism. There is no sense that he understands that he plucks quotes from different strains of Buddhism and that the quotes are more of less ‘in the middle of Buddhism’. IOW there is no building up from basic ideas and practices, it’s just grabbing some random topic which is not meant to serve as a start to understanding Buddhist concepts or practices.

I think the term trolling is better than spamming. But his posts certainly have high volume low value and are extremely repetitive.

He may not be consciously disingenous, but disingenuous it is. He wants to learn about something about Buddhism, is how he presents his 'interest', but he is utterly uninterested in what the experts of that something would suggest he do to create a foundation for understanding Buddhism.

It's a farce carried out not to understand Buddhism but to create a dynamic where someone takes the bait and tries to explain nirvana, say, to someone who has no interest and not foundation.

Iamb is a spammer.

Or that's a contraption I came up with because it's so irritating he spams.

You have to love his cake and eat it too: insult the person, say what he obviously believes. Then add a disclaimer.

In a heterosexual relationship the equivalent would be something like...
Iamb's girlfriend complains that he doesn't really listen to her.
He says shes a fucking bitch.
Then he adds: I have thought about the fact that my thinking you are a fucking bitch is a contraption that I get in relation to women who call me on stuff.
Then he goes back to not listening to her.

That's the kind of mindfuck cake and eat it too in writing like this.....
Instead, I suspect that, slowly but surely, my arguments are chipping away at yours. And it pisses you off. And then when you get pissed off at me you say things like "Fuck you"...and resort to retorts like this one.

Here though I can only extrapolate from my own past experiences with objectivists. It is what "here and now" I have thought myself into believing is true about them "in my head". But no more than that.


We'll need a context of course.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 35724
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

PreviousNext

Return to Religion and Spirituality



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users