Starbuck wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:06 pm
As Ben Iscatus said recently, when you find a mythology that resonates its like appreciating a piece of art. You contemplate and tweak and it gives you space for reverence and meaning - thats why I suggested a sub forum for Bernardo where we can do that. I dont really go for the butting of heads in other parts of the forum, where people defend and impose wildly different worldviews.
Thanks for keeping your comments mostly tied around BK's view. Did you actually read BK's paper that is the subject of this post?
My own views are ever-changing and there were many years when I would have been attracted to BK's views. Views like his no longer resonate with me. Reducing the world to mind (or matter) doesn't in the end provide answers. There aren't any answers.
"Before Enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water".
100 percent agree.
In rare moments, Bernardo says that his philosophies are breadcrumbs compared to the realisation of the realised. The joke being that no-one gets realised
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:25 pm
"Before Enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water".
Yeah but, what gets enlightened?!
Btw, frankly I'm hurt that my long pertinent comment that took a good half hour to compose didn't get a response ... I guess whatever it is that gets enlightened and transcends such petty hurt feelings, is still a work in progress on this end
I think you nailed, everything I've said here is a reiteration of your post , but less succinct!
Re: Bernardo's Shared World Problem
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:11 pm
by Ben Iscatus
Views like his no longer resonate with me. Reducing the world to mind (or matter) doesn't in the end provide answers. There aren't any answers.
I agree that there aren't any final solutions for metaphysical questions.
If truth is transcendent and unbounded, it can't be bounded by a single solution. But while exploring all the bounded interpretations, some will deeply resonate, others will be "ugh!" (sorry, Dana, couldn't resist - but I didn't say which were "ugh", did I?!)
Views like his no longer resonate with me. Reducing the world to mind (or matter) doesn't in the end provide answers. There aren't any answers.
I agree that there aren't any final solutions for metaphysical questions.
If truth is transcendent and unbounded, it can't be bounded by a single solution. But while exploring all the bounded interpretations, some will deeply resonate, others will be "ugh!" (sorry, Dana, couldn't resist - but I didn't say which were "ugh", did I?!)
Oh, the Unfathomable GodHead (UGH) model doesn't resonate? How come?
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:25 pm
"Before Enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water".
Yeah but, what gets enlightened?!
Btw, frankly I'm hurt that my long pertinent comment that took a good half hour to compose didn't get a response ... I guess whatever it is that gets enlightened and transcends such petty hurt feelings, is still a work in progress on this end
I think you nailed, everything I've said here is a reiteration of your post , but less succinct!
Are you ready to give up any notion of spiritual progress? To realize you are already there even though it didn't turn out like you expected?
Re: Bernardo's Shared World Problem
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:54 pm
by Soul_of_Shu
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:44 pm
Are you ready to give up any notion of spiritual progress? To realize you are already there even though it didn't turn out like you expected?
I think Jim has been getting into Anna Brown (so to speak), with the nothing to do, nowhere to go, no-one to be schtick.
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:44 pm
Are you ready to give up any notion of spiritual progress? To realize you are already there even though it didn't turn out like you expected?
I think Jim has been getting into Anna Brown (so to speak), with the nothing to do, nowhere to go, no-one to be schtick.
Wow! Anna Brown. I didn't know you could money from nothing but I might need to look into it.
Re: Bernardo's Shared World Problem
Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:26 pm
by Soul_of_Shu
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:17 pm
Wow! Anna Brown. I didn't know you could money from nothing but I might need to look into it.
Normally I might draw the line here (with a mea culpa self-slap on the wrist), but hey, since you're the topic starter, who am I to interfere with a budding love affair
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:44 pm
Are you ready to give up any notion of spiritual progress? To realize you are already there even though it didn't turn out like you expected?
I think Jim has been getting into Anna Brown (so to speak), with the nothing to do, nowhere to go, no-one to be schtick.
She seems a little too much into the easy parts and misses the chopping wood part.
Jim Cross wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 9:44 pm
Are you ready to give up any notion of spiritual progress? To realize you are already there even though it didn't turn out like you expected?
I think Jim has been getting into Anna Brown (so to speak), with the nothing to do, nowhere to go, no-one to be schtick.
She seems a little too much into the easy parts and misses the chopping wood part.
But I guess that part doesn't sell as well.
It fun listening to that stuff but its still more blah.
I actually think Bernardo ideas lead to this stuff - we only call it mind or mental to distinguish it from the idea of matter which has grabbed the culture. But if its all one thing then Mind or mental is redundant. It's just THIS happening. You could call it cornflakes instead of mind and it wouldn't matter.
