The value of nihilistic thinking

[Santiago Odo]

There are plenty of real problems to wax edgily nihilistic about.

Oh? Can you provide a list?

[Pam Seeback]

Since it is your original, undefiled essence, it is uncovered, not recovered. An important difference of Word, one I assert is the reason you continue to struggle with memory nightmares.

You do not know the Orr sisters.

You avoided the clear metaphysical logic given to you in the first statement, and instead, defaulted to your usual Alex-reply 'launching off' point -- emotionalism. How do you expect your original, undefiled essence be revealed to you as long as you continue to (believe you can) defile it (with the Orr sisters et al)?

[Santiago Odo]

To all appearances I am a hopeless case!

[jufa]

There can be no logic to nihilistic, for nihilism cannot exist when everything is a continuation of The Oneness which constitute not only the eternality of thinking, but also the infinity of being. Surrounded by the continuum of The Living One, and indwelling all within and without the surrounding, the thought of nihilism can be nothing, therefore, but a misnomer in the mind which entertain such a thought, and utter it from windpipe. But this is typical of a metaphoric thinking intellect. It is no different than fishing in a dead sea. What is the logic for fishing in a dead sea? To supply salt to preserve.

Your comment concerning my signature was just your opportunity to change horses in the middle of the stream when you realized your logic has ran it course, and there was no where else for you to go. The problem with your bringing it up was your change of direction did not support the way you were going. Being you could not divert the flow of the stream, you attempted to misdirect readers attention from your dead end.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

[Pam Seeback]

Nihilistkc thinking is a part of the continuation of The Oneness although it is unaware of this truth.

Why do you believe your word are alive and mine are not?

[jufa]

Consciousness knows nothing about lies or truth for it emanates as Oneness. It is whole, perfect. complete, and pure. Nihilism is a condition. There is no condition when all are open for discovering the Oneness of them self. How do you purify One?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

[Pam Seeback]

Consciousness knows nothing about lies or truth for it emanates as Oneness. It is whole, perfect. complete, and pure. Nihilism is a condition. There is no condition when all are open for discovering the Oneness of them self. How do you purify One?

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

If a man (consciousness) asked you, 'jufa, is it true that God is a man in the clouds judging humanity as good or evil, sending him to heaven or hell for eternity?', would you not tell him so as to relieve or end his suffering that his way of thinking is not true and why? Yes, you could tell him to go find out for himself and walk away, but how is this an expression of the Shepherd of the Christ?

The way that has been shown to me is that as long as the seeker of oneness realization remains in the dialogue/conversation then only the highest good -- the opening up of wisdom of oneness -- can come of the exchange. For me, the modern idea of 'my truth' and 'your truth', 'lets all get along' to me, is wrong/false thinking. There is one truth, that of oneness and anything that is said that contradicts this single truth is therefore not true. I see myself as a mystic-philosopher, not as a mystic-preacher, perhaps this explains our different ways of expressing oneness.

How to you purify One? You don't. However, you do purify ignorance of One -- how you do this is entirely on you.

[Santiago Odo]

If a man (consciousness) asked you, 'jufa, is it true that God is a man in the clouds judging humanity as good or evil, sending him to heaven or hell for eternity?', would you not tell him so as to relieve or end his suffering that his way of thinking is not true and why? Yes, you could tell him to go find out for himself and walk away, but how is this an expression of the Shepherd of the Christ?

One of the reasons you, Pam, do not understand much of what I write is because of *cultural ignorance*. This sounds like an insult but it is not intended as such. You deal in refined abstractions and what you communicate, what you seem to desire to communicate, are truths that can be seen only if they are seen in an abstract manner. You wish to present paragraphs that appear structurally sound and with which one must give assent.

You are solipsistic insofar as your understanding is totally geared, or only geared, toward explaining your inner relationship to yourself, to your view of things, to your own processes. In relation to that *project* no one can argue with you. Your vision of yourself can only be taken as sound.

It is when you seek to extend your personal solipsistic view to a larger world and to insist on your personal strategy as a tool for a larger analysis, that your solipsism seems, to me, to fail.

But in the quoted paragraph you present a 'trope' that, according to your own understanding, cannot be *true*. And you further assert that you can be, that you are, the mouthpiece of *Christ*, and you reveal that you do not well understand the Greco-Christian school and a way that was developed to teach people about *this reality*: the world we live in. Consequences. 'Karma' if you wish. And you do not really care about any of that! It is all completely irrelevant to your (solipsistic) project. You wish to extend your limited vision though, to universalize it into larger *truths*.

But there are numerous different ways of understanding this *trope*, and these lead into a territory of conversation in which you cannot participate. You don't want to participate in it. You have nothing to say and nothing, to be frank, to contribute.

You also confuse the term 'nihilism' with an action, or a choice or a strategy, that has worked for you within your internal processes. So far so good. Who could argue? But you are not seeing, and likely will not see and cannot be influenced to see, that the 'nihilism' being referred to is different than the tool that you have employed in a sort of neo-Christian/Buddhist amalgam of techniques.

You set up the *argument* by insisting on a private definition of nihilism. And any *food* that is given you (for example this post) is just that much more energy given to continue in what is your basic mis-understanding.

But, with that said, it is par-for-the-course on this forum and on many fora in general. The endless round of reciting misunderstandings.

[jufa]

[quote- Pam states hypothetically] If a man (consciousness) asked you, 'jufa, is it true that God is a man in the clouds judging humanity as good or evil, sending him to heaven or hell for eternity?', would you not tell him so as to relieve or end his suffering that his way of thinking is not true and why? Yes, you could tell him to go find out for himself and walk away, but how is this an expression of the Shepherd of the Christ?

What could an individual with limited visions of the reality of creation ask another individual passenger, living in the same 4th dimension, questions, and expect an answer beyond the assumption of the question asked? Or, to put it more succinctly, when the Creator "hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation"? what knowledge could be expected when the Creator is the ONENESS who "hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation?" It is such assumptive ignorance on individuals who post such questions of 'if' which speaks to "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

The crux of this sentence is: You cannot honestly believe, or think, a metaphysical intellectual mind, which pose assumptive questions of idealism to any individual of the same ilk, can reach into the invisible and position themselves to answer nihilistic questions of illogical value concerning that which is impossible to reach.

The above also address and nihilate the below quote, being Spirit begat Spirit, and flesh begat flesh. Saying also the law is "everything after its kind," and the flesh mind cannot entertain Spirit discernment.

[quote- Pam]The way that has been shown to me is that as long as the seeker of oneness realization remains in the dialogue/conversation then only the highest good -- the opening up of wisdom of oneness -- can come of the exchange. For me, the modern idea of 'my truth' and 'your truth', 'lets all get along' to me, is wrong/false thinking. There is one truth, that of oneness and anything that is said that contradicts this single truth is therefore not true. I see myself as a mystic-philosopher, not as a mystic-preacher, perhaps this explains our different ways of expressing oneness.

How to you purify One? You don't. However, you do purify ignorance of One -- how you do this is entirely on you.

How to you purify One? You don't. However, you do purify ignorance of One -- how you do this is entirely on you.



Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

[Pam Seeback]

Santiago Odo: One of the reasons you, Pam, do not understand much of what I write is because of *cultural ignorance*. This sounds like an insult but it is not intended as such. You deal in refined abstractions and what you communicate, what you seem to desire to communicate, are truths that can be seen only if they are seen in an abstract manner. You wish to present paragraphs that appear structurally sound and with which one must give assent.

Not assent but argument, resistance, which is why I like you. I really do. :-)

You are solipsistic insofar as your understanding is totally geared, or only geared, toward explaining your inner relationship to yourself, to your view of things, to your own processes. In relation to that *project* no one can argue with you. Your vision of yourself can only be taken as sound.

And you do not yet realize that you are doing the same thing with your project, as is every one with theirs.

It is when you seek to extend your personal solipsistic view to a larger world and to insist on your personal strategy as a tool for a larger analysis, that your solipsism seems, to me, to fail.

Failure is not a reflection of myself that I acknowledge, nor is success. However, I understand their role in the suffering that is the human condition.

But in the quoted paragraph you present a 'trope' that, according to your own understanding, cannot be *true*. And you further assert that you can be, that you are, the mouthpiece of *Christ*, and you reveal that you do not well understand the Greco-Christian school and a way that was developed to teach people about *this reality*: the world we live in. Consequences. 'Karma' if you wish. And you do not really care about any of that! It is all completely irrelevant to your (solipsistic) project. You wish to extend your limited vision though, to universalize it into larger *truths*.

When I was speaking to jufa, I was using language he uses for the sake of understanding. I also used the concept 'oneness' which is not one I use for myself. It is not that I don't care about 'karma' or 'sin' or 'darkness', as a matter of fact, these things are the only things I do care about. It may not seem so to you, but I was once suffered deeply because of my awareness of the gravity/weight of mankind reflected in my own personal gravity/weight and it is just because I have that I can speak with such authority on how to be free. And the way is not through the institutions or cultures that are responsible (on the surface) for causing such ignorance, nor is it to become attached to a guru or a sage or love or bliss, but to be willing to stand in the blaze of Life Itself. Just words, I know, but I ain't pointing to the moon...

But there are numerous different ways of understanding this *trope*, and these lead into a territory of conversation in which you cannot participate. You don't want to participate in it. You have nothing to say and nothing, to be frank, to contribute.

But that can't be true because once again, here you are. But 'nothing to say and nothing, to be frank, to contribute', what you mean is that I have nothing to offer according to your project. But there is much to say about finding the light in the sun of oneself, but in order for these words to come forth, they must come because of dialogue between two who seek or have found this light. I sense in you, just because you can't/won't/don't stay away, a seeking of this sun. If I am wrong, then do not answer this post.

You also confuse the term 'nihilism' with an action, or a choice or a strategy, that has worked for you within your internal processes. So far so good. Who could argue? But you are not seeing, and likely will not see and cannot be influenced to see, that the 'nihilism' being referred to is different than the tool that you have employed in a sort of neo-Christian/Buddhist amalgam of techniques.

Poopy-doopy Alex. I stand on the top of the mountain having climbed to its summit, a long and painful climb may I add. Any nihilistic thoughts I entertained happened long ago, but because I care about those caught in its grip of intensity, I come to speak of its value. Everything on the path to ending the suffering of the weight of the human condition has value.

You set up the *argument* by insisting on a private definition of nihilism. And any *food* that is given you (for example this post) is just that much more energy given to continue in what is your basic mis-understanding.

So your understanding of nihilism is not a mis-understanding of nihilism? My view is singular, my view is existential, this is the wise and truthful way. Where you try to blend 'views' and think and rethink upon their individual merits coming up with a soup-of-stuff to sort through with the hopes that a few tablespoons will be swallowed, I stand in my fire and speak. Again, if you are not seeking to have your soup evaporated, stay outta the sun or at least, put on sunglasses. :-)

But, with that said, it is par-for-the-course on this forum and on many fora in general. The endless round of reciting misunderstandings.

And, if you take a moment and read between your own lines, you would catch the wisdom that is suggested here. But that requires you set aside your devotion to DDD & K (did you catch the meaning of the third D?). There is no room for devotion to a cause or a person if one wants to stop misunderstanding who/what they are. Yes, misunderstanding who/what THEY are. Cause this is the darkness Alex, the cause of all that 'karma' and 'sin' and 'despair' and 'hate' and 'greed' and 'lust'...the belief that you misunderstand me or that I misunderstand you. It's bollocks I tell, you bollocks! Find that essence of you you wrote about and the notion of misunderstanding will arise no more.

I realize I am speaking very boldly here, but enough of the pussy-footing around. The only way to break free of the prison of one's revolving thoughts, including revolving spiritual thoughts is to throw them into the Fire... The Buddha spoke of the raft that carries one to the shore of NIrvana and that once one stands on the shore, they must release the raft and never look back. If you, Alex want to carry your raft of culture around, that is your choice. But please know that those who do not want to carry their raft, by whatever name it bears, will seek and find the way to push it away and not pick it up again. Atlas is weary, Sisyphus is exhausted. The earth can be dropped and not shouldered again, the rock can be allowed to roll down not to be pushed up again, yes, they can!

[Pam Seeback]

[quote- Pam states hypothetically] If a man (consciousness) asked you, 'jufa, is it true that God is a man in the clouds judging humanity as good or evil, sending him to heaven or hell for eternity?', would you not tell him so as to relieve or end his suffering that his way of thinking is not true and why? Yes, you could tell him to go find out for himself and walk away, but how is this an expression of the Shepherd of the Christ?

What could an individual with limited visions of the reality of creation ask another individual passenger, living in the same 4th dimension, questions, and expect an answer beyond the assumption of the question asked? Or, to put it more succinctly, when the Creator "hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation"? what knowledge could be expected when the Creator is the ONENESS who "hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation?" It is such assumptive ignorance on individuals who post such questions of 'if' which speaks to "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

The crux of this sentence is: You cannot honestly believe, or think, a metaphysical intellectual mind, which pose assumptive questions of idealism to any individual of the same ilk, can reach into the invisible and position themselves to answer nihilistic questions of illogical value concerning that which is impossible to reach.

The above also address and nihilate the below quote, being Spirit begat Spirit, and flesh begat flesh. Saying also the law is "everything after its kind," and the flesh mind cannot entertain Spirit discernment.

[quote- Pam]The way that has been shown to me is that as long as the seeker of oneness realization remains in the dialogue/conversation then only the highest good -- the opening up of wisdom of oneness -- can come of the exchange. For me, the modern idea of 'my truth' and 'your truth', 'lets all get along' to me, is wrong/false thinking. There is one truth, that of oneness and anything that is said that contradicts this single truth is therefore not true. I see myself as a mystic-philosopher, not as a mystic-preacher, perhaps this explains our different ways of expressing oneness.

How to you purify One? You don't. However, you do purify ignorance of One -- how you do this is entirely on you.

How to you purify One? You don't. However, you do purify ignorance of One -- how you do this is entirely on you.



Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

Can you tell me definitively what the 4th dimension is? No. So the very logic you are using to break through your perceptions of my 'place in the emanation model of Consciousness is now being returned to you. The fire of Spirit was there at the beginning, it is there at the end, there is no beginning or end., nor is there a fire. :-)

[jufa]

Pam asked: Can you tell me definitively what the 4th dimension is? No. So the very logic you are using to break through your perceptions of my 'place in the emanation model of Consciousness is now being returned to you. The fire of Spirit was there at the beginning, it is there at the end, there is no beginning or end., nor is there a fire. :-)

Pam my Dear, you are the 4th dimension of the Oneness you are attempting to deny by believing you exist in 1- time, 2- space, 3 - distance, 4- matter, when the reality of you begins and ends in the invisible second you are birth/die in in the continuum of the invisible second which is always ONE. In other words, it is your belief in a mirage.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

[Pam Seeback]

My Dear jufa, I see no distance, I see no space, I see no time, I see no matter. I am the forms I make. And in order to come to realize I am the maker of forms, it was necessary to remove all forms of identity attached to my consciousness by those yet caught in the throes of ignorance. In order to remove ignorance of identification with form, nihilistkc thinking, for me, was a necessary condition. I see your conditions of belief in emanation of Oneness in the same light.. You may not see these conditions with your eye of sight, but you do think of them which makes them a cover on your awareness, albeit a subtle one.

There IS no emanation any more than there IS nihilism. But without their help, it is doubtful the Single Eye would be realized.

[jupiviv]

This thread seems to be devolving into a mystical quasi-erotic discourse between Pam and Jufa, and we just can't have that.

My Dear jufa, I see no distance, I see no space, I see no time, I see no matter. I am the forms I make. And in order to come to realize I am the maker of forms, it was necessary to remove all forms of identity attached to my consciousness by those yet caught in the throes of ignorance.

But what's going to happen to all the ignorant ones? You created them (being the maker of forms) and that is what they will realise if they wish to cast off their ignorance, yet in doing so will become even more ignorant by the very standard of enlightenment *you* have established. Outrageous sadism!

Pam my Dear, you are the 4th dimension of the Oneness you are attempting to deny by believing you exist in 1- time, 2- space, 3 - distance, 4- matter, when the reality of you begins and ends in the invisible second you are birth/die in in the continuum of the invisible second which is always ONE. In other words, it is your belief in a mirage.

Alas but we lost souls would take somewhat more than an Invisible Second to read this gracious proclamation of our existence within it. I adjure the Paraclete of the Invisible Second to bestow forthwith an homily instantaneous enough to seem *silent* to those who might in its absence commit a most lascivious apostasy of elongation.

[jufa]

Pam, jupiviv, "By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." And "In the street of the blind, the one-eyed man is called the Guiding Light". - The Genesis Rabbah. These two phases walks us to hear Sacrifice for change is effect. A change of mind makes room for the sacrifice effect. To alter word situations and imaginary mental images which mind has idealize as realities form of reality. But when a mind is caged in intellectual wisdom it will not, cannot take responsibility to acknowledge, from the very second it became cognizant of it circling interpretation, comprehend how to escape the norm, or status quo of human intellectual prejudice which came, saw, and conquered and separated our willpower to return to the our core essence.

This does not mean one sets out to change the structural platform of what is, that is impossible, It mean one can no longer be a follower of philosophers, religions, psychology, nor they say syndrome idealism. It is saying One has comprehended the Oneness which constitute our being is not part time, and we now take responsibility, full time, to discover the Soul which emanates Itself only in the invisibility of the Oneness with no conditioned forms transparent to our human mind. There is the rub. It is going through the mind to get beyond the mind, that Soul Oneness can eliminate all the mask which keeps us from realizing we are the Holy Grail.


Never give power to anything a person believes is their strength - jufa

[Pam Seeback]

jupiviv, everyone is the invisible maker of forms, however, not everyone knows this.

jufa, I have been speaking of realizing (not returning to, how do you return to that which you are?) our core essence throughout this entire thread. You say one must go through the mind to go beyond the mind to discover our core essence-- your vision of Oneness and emanation is as much a part of the going through as is nihilistic thinking is a part of the going through, just as is every 'thinking about' the core essence a going through.

What lies beyond the mind of images and belief and model-building that is our core essence? Wisdom. And we cannot be of wisdom until the images, the beliefs and the model-building is completely cleared away. I am still in the process of clearing away the gunk, but day by day, by the grace of Wisdom, it is happening.

[jufa]

jufa, I have been speaking of realizing (not returning to, how do you return to that which you are?)

Pam you answered your own question == "realizing. . .that which you are."

Pam, your core, as everyone's core, and changes not, has never changed is the Oneness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit you are. Your divine Soul is who you are. Your divine Spirit is who you are. Your divine Life is who you are. The core here is 'your'. Now there is your divine life, the 1st heaven. Your divine Spirit, the 2nd heaven. Your divine Life, the 3rd heaven. You are the Son of Oneness. You are the Spirit of Oneness. You are the Life of Oneness. The core here is == 'realizing' this. You cannot realize That beyond what you claim to be 'thee, me, and I' until you == 'realize' thee, me, and I' are also One. And as long as you accept this human mind interpretation to be your reality, you will go somewhere looking in books, religion, philosophy, psychology, societies acceptance, and the cosmic universal mind dominance collective determinism to be the 4square circle which house your surrendered willpower, stayed, in the garden of ignorance.

Everyone enter this dimension to find themselves. There is nothing else to find. Everyone entered this world as mercenaries to annihilate the pretender's claim the 4th dimension, and all occurrences within it is real. You made a Covenant with life/death to enter this wheel within a wheel, or circle of repetition. And your purpose, as all mankind's, is to go through the mind and 'realize' reality is in the invisibility of That beyond the mind. Because men do not seek to annihilate the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th dimension by merging them into One Consciousness Life, Spirit, and soul, they will continue going somewhere in their minds and imagination looking for something that is not there.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

[jupiviv]

jupiviv, everyone is the invisible maker of forms, however, not everyone knows this.

Do you mean everyone together or individually? Regardless of which it is, the same question is begged i.e. what is ignorance and why does it exist. Whether we are all "making forms" as parts of a whole or each by themselves, there is no reason for any ignorance to exist, including ignorance of the non-ignorant state. You are attempting solve the problem of ignorance by (implicitly) assuming that it doesn't really exist, when it clearly does!

I am realising that this desire to go *around* problems, rather than *through* them, is the cornerstone of modernity, of all modern life and thought.

[Pam Seeback]

jufa: Pam, your core, as everyone's core, and changes not, has never changed is the Oneness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit you are. Your divine Soul is who you are. Your divine Spirit is who you are. Your divine Life is who you are. The core here is 'your'. Now there is your divine life, the 1st heaven. Your divine Spirit, the 2nd heaven. Your divine Life, the 3rd heaven. You are the Son of Oneness. You are the Spirit of Oneness. You are the Life of Oneness. The core here is == 'realizing' this. You cannot realize That beyond what you claim to be 'thee, me, and I' until you == 'realize' thee, me, and I' are also One. And as long as you accept this human mind interpretation to be your reality, you will go somewhere looking in books, religion, philosophy, psychology, societies acceptance, and the cosmic universal mind dominance collective determinism to be the 4square circle which house your surrendered willpower, stayed, in the garden of ignorance.

Everyone enter this dimension to find themselves. There is nothing else to find. Everyone entered this world as mercenaries to annihilate the pretender's claim the 4th dimension, and all occurrences within it is real. You made a Covenant with life/death to enter this wheel within a wheel, or circle of repetition. And your purpose, as all mankind's, is to go through the mind and 'realize' reality is in the invisibility of That beyond the mind. Because men do not seek to annihilate the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th dimension by merging them into One Consciousness Life, Spirit, and soul, they will continue going somewhere in their minds and imagination looking for something that is not there.

But it is you who is looking for something that is not there: your imagined finding of yourself and your 7 dimensions of Oneness and your 4square human mind that must be merged into the One. Also what is also not there is the covenant you say I made with life/death to enter this wheel within a wheel. I am not divided, how than would I speak to life/death and how do I enter (anything)?

What is formed beyond the imagining intellect of dimension and minds and life/death and may I add, dividing words such as the word you used above, 'condemned?' The Word of Wisdom that knows of One. That is all. No heavens, no dimensions, no human mind, no life/death, and certainly no condemnation. What is the activity of the Word of Wisdom that knows of One? Lovingly kicking Ignorance of One in Its ass! :-)

[Pam Seeback]

jupiviv, everyone is the invisible maker of forms, however, not everyone knows this.

Do you mean everyone together or individually? Regardless of which it is, the same question is begged i.e. what is ignorance and why does it exist. Whether we are all "making forms" as parts of a whole or each by themselves, there is no reason for any ignorance to exist, including ignorance of the non-ignorant state. You are attempting solve the problem of ignorance by (implicitly) assuming that it doesn't really exist, when it clearly does!

I am realising that this desire to go *around* problems, rather than *through* them, is the cornerstone of modernity, of all modern life and thought.

Making the form "ignorance' and defining it as lack of knowledge of One or the Infinite is not a claim of knowing why it was formed. From the perspective of Wisdom of the Infinite, ignorance is not a problem, rather, it is a formation (or principle) of the Infinite 'Itself.' Think of it this way: in order for Wisdom of the Infinite to be formed, does not Ignorance of the Infinite not also have to be formed? You inferred my assumption of the non-existence (I prefer non-appearance) of ignorance, I assure you, such is not the case -- ignorance of the Infinite abounds!

[Eric Schiedler]

I am realising that this desire to go *around* problems, rather than *through* them, is the cornerstone of modernity, of all modern life and thought.

A conclusion along these lines is needed to complete your analysis of modern denial about the nature of industrial production. While I largely agree that society as a whole values a lack of self-reflection about the finite limitations of industrialization (despite it's inevitable ramifications), it seemed to me that perhaps there isn't anything particularly unique about this collection of delusions as compared to other sets of delusions in previous eras.

However, I think you are on to something. Every so often you find a scientist or a businessman that espouses some combination of Libertarianism, Scientific Materialism and Entrepreneurship (if not outright Objectivism!). To them, a technology is a "language metaphor assembled in consciousness before being made". But when problems arise due to these innovations, they assert that we need even more technologies. According to them, the population is too low, the economy is not yet large enough, and design production is not sufficiently subsidized (or is otherwise actively restricted) to sustain enough technological advancement to solve all of the derivative problems. They aver that highher efficiencies will always be possible and enacted despite the contradiction that the technologies are designed upon models that contain expressions of strict limitations to efficiency.

The belief that humans solve the problems of the natural world are not expressed in any pre-modern text and thus can be said to derive from the modern view that a mechanical model of the Universe is "sufficient" for any human purpose. The ideational spirit is thrown out, despite attempts to thread it back into modern thought through Romanticism, Psychoanalysis, New Age-ism, or Fundamentalism.

Eric Schiedler

[jupiviv]

You inferred my assumption of the non-existence (I prefer non-appearance) of ignorance, I assure you, such is not the case -- ignorance of the Infinite abounds!

I inferred that because that is what follows from your argument. If we are makers of forms as well as those forms themselves, ignorance is just another form we made, and are ourselves. So how can we be ignorant that we made the form of ignorance? Indeed how can we be aware of it? It and all other forms are "us" a priori as well as a posteriori. Awareness or its lack requires some kind of subject/object distinction. For ignorance and knowledge to exist as states of consciousness or being, we cannot be makers of forms in the way you imply.

We are ourselves forms that play our parts in form-making, i.e. causes in the infinite web of causation. Yes, consciousness causes forms and distinctions. But those distinctions cause consciousness, and that is why consciousness causes them! If it tried to cause a distinction that does not cause it back, it would end up with an empty void without any connection to it or anything else, and such a thing cannot exist. You might object that consciousness causes distinctions *first*, so why shouldn't it WIN?! If you do, then I answer: something being or happening first or last presumes progression in time, but the All contains consciousness, time and all else within itself.

Whenever any consciousness causes any form or distinction, it also causes all other forms and distinctions, and all of them cause it, so ultimately it causes everything. It becomes God himself in all his awesome majesty by contrasting A with not-A, but this does not make it more than or superior to a simple act of distinction. Before God it is just what it is, as meek and humble as a trodden lily, and it is God himself precisely because it is just that. It cannot transfigure itself (or anything else) with the aid of its particular finite nature, and that finite nature is its transfiguration. The finite cannot ascend towards the infinite, and the infinite confines itself within the finite.

[jufa]

A pri·o·ri as well as a posteriori are causation of One effect. Effect exist as cause manifesting effect of what cause is. Intent is therefore purposed in the form. Form is manifest purpose/intent. All life is Consciousness' Oneness. Oneness does not constitute all, all is all there is. There is neither ignorance nor wisdom seen or experience for there is nothing to separate either from the Source of all. There is no distinction to garner, nor form of conditions to be realized when Consciousness of One is unconditionally all that is.

We are not a part of life, we are life. We are whole, perfect, complete, and pure when 'realized'. But not in time, space, distance and matter -- we, as whole, perfect, complete, and pure have accept ourselves as temporary players within the infinity of the Second of God, which is all there is here and now -- and what we are here and now.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufe

[jupiviv]

While I largely agree that society as a whole values a lack of self-reflection about the finite limitations of industrialization (despite it's inevitable ramifications), it seemed to me that perhaps there isn't anything particularly unique about this collection of delusions as compared to other sets of delusions in previous eras.

It is unique only in the sense that the things that support it are far better at doing so than their predecessors. Imaginary gods and heroes invented by the priests didn't cure us of disease, old age or small tits, but real trained doctors armed with MRIs and syringes do (to an extent). I guess my point is that the sheer extent and rapidity of our *real* accomplishments over the last century have unfortunately allowed us to ignore and gloss over some of their inconvenient yet non-trivial causes, flaws and limitations with a historically unique degree of pigheadedness.

According to them, the population is too low, the economy is not yet large enough, and design production is not sufficiently subsidized (or is otherwise actively restricted) to sustain enough technological advancement to solve all of the derivative problems. They aver that highher efficiencies will always be possible and enacted despite the contradiction that the technologies are designed upon models that contain expressions of strict limitations to efficiency.

They are most often correct within the narrow contexts they are concerned with. The delusion of infinite resources and prosperity is in the refusal/inability to see the connections between the various contexts, and then reasoning within that larger context. So yes, much like other delusions, but uniquely powerful and prevalent.

The belief that humans solve the problems of the natural world are not expressed in any pre-modern text and thus can be said to derive from the modern view that a mechanical model of the Universe is "sufficient" for any human purpose. The ideational spirit is thrown out, despite attempts to thread it back into modern thought through Romanticism, Psychoanalysis, New Age-ism, or Fundamentalism.

Yes, and I would define the "ideational spirit" as the willingness to be humble before things great and small beyond our understanding or control, and through that humility feel compelled to at least honour certain ideals even if they seem to cause suffering by not pleasantly fitting into our lives. Of course, even this humility was almost universally tainted by delusions, but the material conditions of their lives forced most people to have a little bit of it. I'm not calling for such conditions to be restored or even suggesting that they are more suitable for wisdom than our conditions. But humans need suffering and existential uncertainty - the "sickness unto death" - to feel the need for truth. The uncertainty of a sceptic or new atheist about the broader reality is just an excuse to be excessively certain about things that really matter to them. Their own lives, desires and preferences acquire even greater meaning in an "indifferent" universe, which in fact cannot be partial or indifferent in relation to its constituents. By making themselves irrelevant to the cosmos, they become the gods of their own little irrelevant gaps.

Our greatest crime as an industrial civilisation is our use of reason for unreasonable ends, which we then justify to ourselves as being reasonable precisely because they would not have been successful without the use of reason. And this of course is not historically unique in qualitative terms, but rather unprecedented in vastness and depth. This industrial Babel can no longer be managed or made sense of. The unreasonable ends and their ersatz reasonable justifications have stacked up to the point of becoming a force of nature. The fundamental duplicity at their core is adamantly ignored by all parties, but is slowly driving them insane. Sad!

[Pam Seeback]

You inferred my assumption of the non-existence (I prefer non-appearance) of ignorance, I assure you, such is not the case -- ignorance of the Infinite abounds!

I inferred that because that is what follows from your argument. If we are makers of forms as well as those forms themselves, ignorance is just another form we made, and are ourselves. So how can we be ignorant that we made the form of ignorance? Indeed how can we be aware of it? It and all other forms are "us" a priori as well as a posteriori. Awareness or its lack requires some kind of subject/object distinction. For ignorance and knowledge to exist as states of consciousness or being, we cannot be makers of forms in the way you imply.

We are ourselves forms that play our parts in form-making, i.e. causes in the infinite web of causation. Yes, consciousness causes forms and distinctions. But those distinctions cause consciousness, and that is why consciousness causes them! If it tried to cause a distinction that does not cause it back, it would end up with an empty void without any connection to it or anything else, and such a thing cannot exist. You might object that consciousness causes distinctions *first*, so why shouldn't it WIN?! If you do, then I answer: something being or happening first or last presumes progression in time, but the All contains consciousness, time and all else within itself.

Whenever any consciousness causes any form or distinction, it also causes all other forms and distinctions, and all of them cause it, so ultimately it causes everything. It becomes God himself in all his awesome majesty by contrasting A with not-A, but this does not make it more than or superior to a simple act of distinction. Before God it is just what it is, as meek and humble as a trodden lily, and it is God himself precisely because it is just that. It cannot transfigure itself (or anything else) with the aid of its particular finite nature, and that finite nature is its transfiguration. The finite cannot ascend towards the infinite, and the infinite confines itself within the finite.

I can see why my use of "I" as the maker of forms implied subjective-objective awareness, therefore, it shall be dropped. It seems to me that any reference to a subject of objects or objects of a subject indicates ignorance of the true nature of consciousness. Therefore, I would re-write your last paragraph to read: Causation of forms/distinctions is a dependently originated activity of consciousness or God by way of contrasting A with not-A. And because A is a distinction and not a division (of subject or object), any analysis of form that is assumed to be superior or inferior is an analysis based on ignorance (unawareness) of dependent origination, i.e., the ego construct at work. And because there is no existent subject or objects within the infinite -- only distinctions being caused -- there is no movement within the infinite of the finite, neither up or down or left or right, therefore belief in ascent and descent is false (ignorant) view.

Nutshell summary: The realization of consciousness that distinctions are not subjective-objective divisions is the transfiguration of consciousness from ignorance to wisdom.