GENIUS FORUMS

crow wrote:
Ever since I arrived here, against my better judgement, I've been attacked, insulted, undermined and condescended-to.
Only one guy has been benevolent.

maybe they're testing your ego.

Where is the great madman David Quinn the days? Is he still alive; does he write?

Unidian wrote:This is a place where people throw out words and concepts and see how they fly. A testing ground for philosophical bombs.

Yeah. It definitely needs more beer and strippers. Or something.

Yeah, it was a shame they stopped the Reasoning Show. It was the highlight of this forum.

our finite minds cannot comprehend it[God] doesn't make it illogical. Say what? Again, that makes it illogical by definition. Logic is something done be humans. How can you engage in logic on a subject you can't comprehend. It is self contradictory. Moreover,you have a finite mind. And on your own ...

Cold Cave wrote: Why can't God be an uncaused cause?

Seems to me you answered your own question.

You are positing a God that is illogical by definition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q182-tO8K8A http://www.umsonline.org/SpiritualVideoSatsang/SatsangTranscriptsChristineBreese/12StateOfEnlightenmentPresentMomentEnlightenedHereNowDarshanAwakeAwaken.htm WTF is this shit? Six years you've been reading this website and you haven't learnt a damn thing.

Men are “contaminated” by woman from a very early age. First he craves his mother’s love and attention, and then when he has grown up he looks to replace those same emotional pleasures through relationships with other women. It is therefore a natural thing to want to be involved with women, and if ...

Liberty Sea wrote: Well, even if God is separated from the universe, that doesn't prevent from being infinite.

You need to rethink that, brother.

The God that is everything certainly exists. Aside from the matter of semantics such as existence, being, or wujud, I suppose that would make you a Pantheist, which is by nature a form of Spiritual Atheism anyway. I would consider myself a Pantheist as well, if I am to associate myself with any -is...

Absolute non-existence/Inherent non-existence is impossible, even to conceive, because if you imagine a nothingness, that too is a form in your head. So, absolute nothingness doesn't exist in reality. It only exists as a logical fallacy. Like a married bachelor. My logic dilemma demonstrated why ab...

I'm about to start a regular blog which will feature a higher level of writing than what I do here. More detailed and more schematic. I believe it will comprise my best writing yet. On a technical level, the construction of the site is finished and all set to go. It's just a matter of me being read...

Trevor Salyzyn wrote:How so?

You answered your own question in declaring reality a proper noun.

What is the difference between reality and Reality?

Trevor Salyzyn wrote: This isn't pretentious elitism: if someone does not understand what it means to be conscious of Reality, he is neither conscious of Reality, nor is he a genius.

Perhaps the capitalisation of the word 'reality' is the pretentious/ elitist part?

It is my observation that the posters on this board are attached, in varying degrees, to their prejudice toward what they call "religious" language, so much so that it is closing their ears to the wisdom of metaphor and myth that can take them behind the curtain of their human intellectua...

No worries.

It comes from a book that really opened my eyes up - it is mainly just a list of aphorisms: The Natural State

U.G is great value from my perspective. He is the anti-religious religious guy.

It is the absolute nature of our subjectivity. - I like this extract by U.G Krishnamurti. The natural state is one in which thinking and life are not two things but one. It is not an intellectual state. It is more like a state of feeling, although I use the word feeling in a different sense than th...

1. His first source was also originally my source. (Forgive me for answering here.) That source says explicitly: The law of identity “A is A” is a conviction that things have some identity (whatever it specifically be) rather than another, or than no identity at all. It is an affirmation that knowl...

I've presented three sources indicating A = A is disputed in Nagarjuna, two of them directly - that trumps anyone here, in my view. But on Genius Forum does A = A have some special meaning of which Laozi, Nagarjuna, Aristotle, the authors of the quoted materials, and everyone else alive or dead hav...

G'day Robert. It appears like Mark Twain, reports of your death were greatly exaggerated ;) (Btw, not once in 35 years reading have I ever come across any source, whether J. Krishnamurti or any voice in Daoism, Zen, or Buddhism, who ever wrote a damned thing about A = A, not once! You're bullshittin...

Your point doesn't make much sense. Well then perhaps you haven't thought this as deeply as you could, either. Because the point is rather obvious. I think Elizabeth's underlying idea is sustainable life for as long as possible. Right. But she is advocating that it may be rational to kill extant pe...

It's an extreme idea suited for a crisis. That type of crisis indicates a majority of irrational people, therefore, it's contradictory to expect a rational solution. . It's not a rational solution in any way shape or form. For it to be rational it would mean that you value life that you know alread...

Kunga wrote:flys are attracted to shit

But also meat.

Ethical systems, of which there are already enough, are merely a provisional means of enable people to live together in relative peace Well played, sir. Herd-Instinct. Wherever we meet with a morality we find a valuation and order of rank of the human impulses and activities. These valuations and o...

Kelly Jones wrote:This clarifies things quite a bit regarding Kierkegaard's concept of God.

It still reads to me like he is describing a 'small' God (for want of a better word). In short, a Christian God.