But your answer or my answer is irrelevant. Can the question answer itself? Then there is nothing artificial about it. Can thought keep out? If you and I as the two separate thinkers involved in this enquiry can keep out of it, why can’t thought? Each thinker is dependent upon the answer for his continued existence. But if there is no escape from the question, the question itself becomes the basis of our relationship. Our answers provide only the artificially intelligent solutions. Whereas all the intelligence is in the question.
What makes you think there are thinkers separate from the thoughts?
We lack the intelligence to see our self-deception, so we have artificial intelligence to stand in for what’s missing.
They are not. That’s the point. Can you stop being a thinker? Not can you - will you stop? Will you keep out of it? While this question remains unanswered, you are out of it. Then you are the question.
And what is the universal mind if not one immense question?
If ceasing to be a thinker is an act of will, a deliberate and decisive act that the conditioned brain can choose to execute, it’s nothing new, and it bores me.
I’m not sure that you have even tried it out. Your answers are all too quick and too clever. Try it and see. Find out what it means when there is only the question with no answer attached. It is the answers that bore us, surely, not the questions.
The limited personal mind of the thinker is constantly seeking answers to its questions in order to garner some elusive sense of security. But when there is only the asking of a question without any search for an answer, the mind undergoes a tremendous change. From then on, the mind itself is its own security and intelligence. Try it and see.
It’s not a technique because no one “does it”, or makes it happen. Thought stops when its limited utility is realized.
So the reader is to assume the writer’s mind has undergone “a tremendous change”. Boring…and annoying. Please peddle yourself somewhere else.
So they say.
Say it or not, it’s logical.
No, the reader, the thinker - the entire movement of thought as the ‘me’ - has been asked to keep out so that there is only the question and therefore no entity in search of an answer. This entity is limited, whatever it is, however much it has read and researched; its answers must also be limited. This is simple enough; it doesn’t need repeating ad infinitum.
What is the point of making a single assumption except to keep alive a dead fragment of thinking? This is the boring and annoying element: the fixed, dead conclusion. But ask yourself any fundamental question without ever escaping from it into ideas and you will see what happens.
-
Logic is for the right situation a miraculous tool of understanding. But it only goes so far.
-
Thought that is utilitarian might be stymied if it realizes the scope of its utility. But utilitarian thought is just one bandwidth of the spectrum of what thought can (and does) do.
-
To what extent can thought realize its limits? On what does the answer to this depend?
Inquiry, you seem really fired up these days! Did you reach a personal tipping point in your Gesamtweltgeistanschauungsprozeß? If so, would you share what’s going on with you?
As I explained to Paul Dimmock, thought is artificial intelligence. That means it can learn, and mistakes are the best teachers. Every time thought acknowledges a mistake, it corrects itself, learns what not to do, which means learning to do less rather than more.* The artificial intelligence of thought, through self-knowledge, realizes that it is useful up to a point, and incoherent past that point.
Inquiry, you seem really fired up these days! Did you reach a personal tipping point in your Gesamtweltgeistanschauungsprozeß? If so, would you share what’s going on with you?
I’d tell you if I could speak German.
Yes, German is definitely the language of existential tipping points.
May I ask why human beings always want other human beings to show them spiritual evidence, when they could find that evidence themselves? What do they think they will get from a supposed evidence provided by another beyond a mere image of what they are after? Why do most human beings need to know in advance what they will find once they enter a spiritual path or path of self-knowledge? Is it that the majority of human beings are afraid of the emptiness that the spiritual path or path of self-knowledge provides, and that is why they need to fill their saddlebags with images and concepts before embarking on the march?
1 Like
We’re doing what the brain does naturally - refining its worldview through the retelling of its own stories. And together, we are continuing the age old tradition of storytelling, sharing myth around the campfire.
1 Like
As you, Paul Dimmock (presumably), have seen…that is what’s boring.
What is the point of making a single assumption except to keep alive a dead fragment of thinking?
What is the point of constantly reminding the reader that you know and understand what the reader does not?
Let’s face it, some come here to teach, not so much to learn. As you so rightly pointed out in another thread. “There are teachers and there are learners.”
But I am curious why you bother continuing to do this dance with this particular individual, if you know he is not interested in learning but is here to teach? It has already been pointed out several times, either we see it or we do not. But why continue to point it out and continue to do this back and forth with this particular individual?
I do it because he demonstrates how K-forums can be used to make a mockery of the teaching by mimicking the teacher. If no one else feels this should be addressed, I wonder why, because his trivializing and twisting of the teaching to serve his pathetic purpose does harm to those who aren’t familiar enough with the teaching to see his shtick for what it is.
It has already been pointed out several times, either we see it or we do not.
This is true of the teaching. How many times must we pore over and discuss K’s words before we have no further need to? I don’t know about you, but I “get it”, verbally, conceptually, intellectually, but not actually, and that’s all that really matters. If you don’t see how the K-mocker is sowing confusion and misunderstanding, you don’t “see it”.
I prefer more gentle words, not so harsh. Plus I know, as you shared before, you have had several of your posts flagged. So we have to tread carefully here, and try to be respectful.
I personally see some of what you are pointing to here in this thread and how some become K clones or what not. They do seem to talk like K and imitate him and act like a teacher.
But as you say, we all get it intellectually, verbally, conceptually, but what really matters is getting it actually. I think these individuals get that too, but they think or feel they have actually seen it actually. But most of us question that too. We suspect they have not actually on a deep level got it.
But I still think the best approach is to not engage with certain individuals if we get nowhere and are continually butting our heads against a wall. We have to move together, learn together, or else it is a waste of time.
I’m not butting my head against a wall - I’m doing what I feel must be done, and it doesn’t feel like getting “nowhere” because there’s nowhere to get - I’m doing it because no one else is.