GENIUS FORUMS

David: It has nothing to do with accepting the reasoning of another individual. It is all about understanding the nature of non-duality in one's own mind. I said nothing about accepting the reasoning of another individual , but ones own, and that acceptance is what you call the leap . It is one thi...

Loki: After all, the object and the smell of the object are two different things. David: If we arbitrarily decide that is the case, then sure. Arbitrarily speaking of course… for when exactly would it be that we do not arbitrarily decide I wonder… would the claim of arbitrariness of boundaries, be ...

So do you see yourself as some kind of enlightened facilitator or midwife? In other words, are you saying that the doubts and misgivings you express are not your own, but rather come from the desire to help people make their own breakthroughs in understanding? Do you see your role as being a kind o...

David said, When we eat a peach, we conceive of the peach as being the whole fruit plus its inner seed. We don't normally think of the peach as being merely the outer edible bit surrounding the seed. Likewise, a smell-consuming animal might have no reason to think of the outer edible bit of the lea...

I can’t exactly see the logical reason to jump from ‘no things exists inherently ’ , which means that things do exist but in relation (relative), or say dependent on other THINGS, to “therefore nothing ultimately exists’ ??? To me, saying that ‘nothing ultimately exists' is synonymous to saying ‘ u...

Loki: After all, the object and the smell of the object are two different things. David: If we arbitrarily decide that is the case, then sure. Arbitrarily speaking of course… for when exactly would it be that we do not arbitrarily decide I wonder… would the claim of arbitrariness of boundaries, be ...

I can understand, sort of, when Kevin says "The distinction "existence/nonexistence" is inappropriate when applied to the infinite, which is beyond distinctions", but I'm far from grasping it fully. I understand the words, but I can't really make sense of them. Is this where lan...

BMcGilly07: The most useful definition of existence that I have come across is, "existence is that which appears before the mind." Well, fine, that does make sense since something has to appear to something other than what that itself is, and according to the above, 'existence' is jsut li...

I post what I'm thinking. So, if another person thinks the same thing, then... Do you see why such issues would arise? By no means am I doing this on purpose... I am honest in that sense. Well, all I can say is that I did not think what you thought but reacted to what was said, and only as interpre...

Marco: To make it easier, you can translate the term "function" with the term "dependent of. Velocity is defined by S/T( like miles/hours) but being Time a function of space it automatically tells you that velocity is still a function of space. Well defined, and hence well adjusted t...

Jehu, the biggest gaping hole that I see in this inquiry is that none are aware, so it is like the absolute holding all the strings to all the puppets who essentially have no individually based conscious responses at all, so there can never ever be any meaningful comparison or essential value altho...

Ignius: Darren Brown? Yeah, I've heard of him... Why do you bring this up? I don't get it. Among other similar thoughts, to mention a few, you said… Then why does it feel like they're trying to program me (in some way)? I think that eventually there's going to be a science based on this. I'm sure t...

David If you want to encourage people to comprehend the true nature of existence, then it can help to introduce terms such as "ultimate reality". For example, we can define "ultimate reality" to mean existence as it really is, as opposed to what deluded people imagine existence ...

David: As has been said before, one can distinguish it (the infinite) from its ("internal") parts.

Fine.

Marco: Actually ct is not a function of time! C is a velocity (s/t), and if you put the equation dimensionally. you get: (s/t) .t= s which show you that ct is a function of Space! And if you look at it very well, it tells you that Time is just an illusion or appearance originating by "change o...

David: All we can say is that wherever there is existence, there is ultimate reality. There can never be anything beyond ultimate reality. Which seems to leave open the possibility of when and where there is no existence, then what happens to ultimate reality? However, I don’t see the need to intro...

. Ignius, in my opinion, from what little I gather from your unsuccessful effort to explain yourself at least, I think you need to talk to someone like Derren Brown. Do you think that might help? Who knows, you might be the next Derren Brown in the making. Since there was some mention of hypnosis an...

. Jehu, the biggest gaping hole that I see in this inquiry is that none are aware, so it is like the absolute holding all the strings to all the puppets who essentially have no individually based conscious responses at all, so there can never ever be any meaningful comparison or essential value alth...

Robert: I was referring to the Totality, of which there can only be one (until we think up two... ). Well, with all due respects, we did think up ONE to begin with, didn’t we? And I’m generally told that that’s not a totaling or adding up of ALL that there is, which I doubt, for then it holds no de...

. Iolus, I hope you don’t mind me addressing some of the points jehu makes to you, since it does concern my argument as well. I do apologize to Jehu for arguing so un-academically, but actually my English is not that good, so I have to resort to such crude way of pointing out inconsistencies, as I s...

. Loki, no disrespect, but my questions were actually address to Dan, who made that argument in the video, and who may NOT hold the same views as yourself; so according to HIS view and philosophy, he has been dishonest, which is no surprise really, since most of the profound philosophers of truth mo...

BH: If it is not possible to conceive of a thing, can it be meaningful to discuss whether or not it exists? Is this what you are saying, Sapius? No, and Robert has responded to it appropriately. My response to the following should give you the idea of what I’m getting at. BH: My point is that the h...

Loki: This is what I'm struggling with. I want to resolve this with absolute certainty, but I can't figure out if a thing can have an inside without an outside. Sometimes I feel that it's possible to be inside something that has no outside. Steven: That makes sense. A self contained within a spacet...

I just watched Rowden's God Does Not Exist youtube vid. Nice video, but then, am I to believe that a thought or an idea does not exist ? Well, what I gather is that at least unless a thing has a definitive form like the illustrious cup example used in the video, it does not exist, so I think a thou...

Jehu: Just because things do not partake of an absolute existence, it does not follow that they do not exist at all. Who says that they do not exist at all??? ONLY that thy are dream like, so what good reason do “I”, (a dream entity of the Absolute; “one” with no intrinsic causes; “one” that is NOT...