I don’t need systematic logic to see what I’m not. Whole Observation is the only tool necessary there. And I need symbols to communicate that observation if I wish to tell someone, and I need to be able to arrange those symbols in a manner that makes sense, so the intellect is necessary. However observation is primary.Logic can be used in other ways too. For example, it can be used to clear away what we are not, leaving exposed our true nature
For instance: I observe that I'm attached to the sexual experience because I feel anxiety when the experience is gone, so I deprive myself of the sexual experience until the anxiety subsides.
So one needs to be able to observe the relationship between things, which only requires clear observation.
Moreover one also needs a subtle understanding of the english language to be aware of phenomena that are occuring. One is only able to observe something if the language is understood first, so language is vitally important for clear observation or insight to occur.
Quinn wrote:
I don’t know about your infant consciousness, but what I do know is the intellect itself is limited because thought is limited, and because logic is used by thought, it is also limited. Thought is not the instrument to touch god, that is the only point I’m trying to make.It is an illusion borne out of the reawakening of infant consciousness.
Quinn wrote:
I don’t see adult, infant, uncle, aunt or any sort of animal consciousness there. What is see is that humans are either deluded or they have a clear mind. There’s no layers, levels, ladders to climb, or any of that.The path to enlightenment also leads us away from the rigid structures of adult-consciousness, but in the opposite direction to infant consciousness. One transcends adult-consciousness through heightened rationality and clarity of insight, rather than through trying to put an end to one's higher faculties and resting in an animal-type consciousness
You either believe that the intellect/thought can show you the nature of reality or you don’t.
And you've either conditioned culturally, or conditioned by pleasurable things or your not.
Its fairly black and white.
Quinn wrote:
I don’t understand this limitless of knowing, what are you limitless in knowing?And yet, my own knowing, borne out of intellectual activity, is limitless
Quinn wrote:
Again this example can be resolved using whole observation. I'm able to understand the essence of the spaceship without logic. If I watch the discovery channel, I will quickly learn that a spaceship is able to fly into space because I observe the function it serves by watching it fly into space. Notice no logic there. Only observation.If I were to define a spaceship as a children's tricycle, then I would naturally reach the conclusioin, using logic, that space ships can never fly up into outer space.