Yes, consciousness creates the circumstances for women and children to regard an event as significant, but because they don’t have any depth of mind, all ‘significant’ events are experienced on only one level – and that is superficially.I wouldn't go as far as saying all events are equal in significance to women and children. Through their attachment to more conscious men, they can see that he does assign different amounts of significance to events. This allows the woman or child to copy his methods and assign varying amounts of significance to individual events or entities. Even though they aren't consciously creating this significance on their own, they still end up regarding events with different levels of significance.Sue: The abused and used underlings don’t suffer in the same way as the men who wronged them, for they only experience life in the most superficial way, and therefore all events are of equal significance.
Because women, children and other animals are basically unconscious, their mental faculties: such as memory and discrimination, are barely formed. This makes their experience of the world a very fluid one – which is worlds apart from the world conscious beings experience. And galaxies apart from the world highly conscious philosophers experience.Of course if no men were around to set an example of what higher consciousness is capable of, woman's lower level of consciousness would view all events (with the exception of death) with similiar significance. Even animals like elephants are conscious enough to sense the greater significance in the death of their kin, compared to other events.
Forgiveness will free you here, Kevin gave you the answer, it does take work and deep discipline. Listen to what he said, ponder his words.my subconscious reminds me that I'm likely to be screamed at, and back-handed, for "talking back".
It just does not work does it? You must challenge yourself beyond just logic(though logic is a key). You must rip into your soul with the vengence of a sumarai. Use forgiveness as your sword of power and it will vanquish all demons and free your mind as a gift."Don't think about it, ignore it, get over it, put on a happy face, the world will never change, we've heard it all before, shut up and go away, etc."
Yes.Kelly Jones wrote:This "love" comes from understanding, which comes from having reasoned.There's no trick. You shouldn't focus on "deconstructing" anything, since that which you are seeking to deconstruct is an illusion.
Rather, simply focus on Truth and love the Truth with all your heart. No complicated deconstruction required.
If the mind is too agitated to be directed towards Truth then you need to work on an egotistical level to stabilize your ego before you can do anything.Sexual attachment is so deep that the Truth cannot be focussed on purely, as long as this agitation has a hold over the subconscious.
Tantra is an advanced practice. It is not for those whose minds are too agitated to focus on Truth. Tantra is the fast-track for the fortunate and gifted - the noble-born. It is for those who already have great stillness and depth of mind.But it doesn't work for those who need to do tantra
Of course if no men were around to set an example of what higher consciousness is capable of, woman's lower level of consciousness would view all events (with the exception of death) with similiar significance. Even animals like elephants are conscious enough to sense the greater significance in the death of their kin, compared to other events.
Rubbish. “Basically†unconscious?Because women, children and other animals are basically unconscious, their mental faculties: such as memory and discrimination, are barely formed. This makes their experience of the world a very fluid one – which is worlds apart from the world conscious beings experience. And galaxies apart from the world highly conscious philosophers experience.
This is a philosophy forum, right?Tantra is an advanced practice. It is not for those whose minds are too agitated to focus on Truth. Tantra is the fast-track for the fortunate and gifted - the noble-born. It is for those who already have great stillness and depth of mind.
That which is called "Tantra" in Buddhism is full of rituals and other irrationalities. That's not what real Tantra is about.Hm. Well, my knowledge of Buddhism is scant, to say the least. But I am beginning to see that this "philosophy" of yours may indeed breach such boundaries and charge head-on into the realms of religion.
That's what modern day Buddhists would have you believe.Am I correct in assuming that in order to be lucky enough, privy to the practice of tantra, one must be recommended by a master as a student of it?
You know, you really do have some good stuff on that site.Kevin: Well, if evil is anything at all, it is ignorance. I can't think of anything else that evil could possibly be other than ignorance, because all bad actions come from ignorance. So ignorance is the fundamental evil in the world.
David: Are you saying a will to ignorance? Or just ignorance?
Kevin: That's even worse. It's bad enough being ignorant but to actually--
Merv: More fundamentally evil than the fundamental evil, you mean?
Kevin: Well, actually wanting to be ignorant is pretty bad. But this too comes from being ignorant. Everybody out there is extremely ignorant. Their whole lives are attachments. They go from one attachment to another, they know none other than attachment. It's not their fault. I'm not blaming them for a minute. It's the way they are. It's the way Nature has made them. It's the way their parents have. . .
Merv: It's certainly true of me.
Kevin: Well, this is what I call evil, so congratulations, you're evil. We all have this devil in us. It's quite natural. I think accepting this is one of the most important steps. It's actually the first of the Noble Truths, isn't it - the knowledge of ignorance, or the knowledge of suffering. Knowing you've got a disease is the first step of getting rid of that disease. So I go out into the world and rather than telling people they're all enlightened, I tell them they're evil.
I sense something beneath your words.My exploration of this topic is exactly about dealing with sexual attachment, which is driven by the biological instinct to reproduce and bond with sexual mates. It's not by chance that such attachments are deconstructed, Scott. Being explicit about the reasoning used by philosopher-types is the whole purpose of my questioning of David...
That's all I can see as well. And all I can see of you is that you are wishing you were her, for whatever reason.I am clarifying the issues that are rarely discussed on this forum. Typically misogyny is mistaken as men's education, or for males only, without being explicit as to the nitty-gritty of how females become masculine. As far as I can see, Sue has been scratching the surface.
Because it's scary to preach against something and then be fully conscious of your doing it. When you try to be honest and truthful, it doesn't happen. Honesty and truthfulness must happen to you.What happened to David's projected second part, Psychology of the Ego, of The Wisdom of the Infinite? Why doesn't Sue write about her psychotherapy and thought-processes? Why doesn't Dan write about what it's like to continue to live with a female, and Kevin about his reasoning for and experiences of "marriage" to another? I'm damned if I submit to this lack of honesty about one's existential development on the subject of love.
But what causes the unconscious mechanisms of cause of effect to function as it does? you could say it has no cause, but isn’t that highly intelligent? an uncaused body of cause and effect that creates the conditions for consciousness to emerge through matter…??For the record I define nature as the Totality, God, and/or the Universe. More to the point, although evolution seems to create more complex organisms over time, there are still many instances where nature simplifies itself. An example of a of this in the manner we are speaking would be a mass extinction. Complexity is always fluctuating. Also, I still don't understand your reasoning behind the idea of increasing atomic complexity having to be driven by consciousness. Cause and effect, an unconscious event(s), is constantly increasing and decreasing the complexity of all things within nature.
I'm probably out of touch here but I thought she was expressing amusement that Kelly was effing the ineffable in bringing up the fact that at one time you & Kevin & Dan were all living with women while continuing to sneer at others in similar situations. It was pretty funny, though at the time I found it more grotesque than hilarious.DavidQuinn000 wrote:Marsha wrote:
What on earth are you talking about, Marsha?PLEASE DON'T EXSPOSE ME!!! DON'T QUESTION!! LOVE THE TRUTH WITH ALL YOUR HEART AND DON'T EXPOSE ME FOR THE LIAR THAT I AM!!
HAHAHHAAAAHHAHHAHHAAAHhaHHAHHHHAAHHHAHHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Makes me want to throw up. PATHETIC.
-
Cause and effect is its own cause followed by an effect which then causes something else to happen, and so on and so on for infinite. To our minds something like conscsiousness does seem quite amazing because when we look at the world around us and out into the darkness of space, we see 99.9999999999...% unconsciousness making up the universe.cosmic_prostitute wrote:But what causes the unconscious mechanisms of cause of effect to function as it does? you could say it has no cause, but isn’t that highly intelligent? an uncaused body of cause and effect that creates the conditions for consciousness to emerge through matter…??
There are plenty of things that happen in nature with no intervention from consciousness. An example would be our planet orbiting the sun causing us to percieve the effect of night and day, which in turn sets of a number of different cycles on our planet. All these events are manifested solely through cause and effect.cosmic_prostitute wrote:I suspect that an uncaused body of cause and effect cannot exist without consciousness as the driving force/mechanism.
I wouldn't go as far as saying it's a purpose, because again, purpose would imply that the totality is conscious. Although it does seem that by producing little specs of consciousness such as ourselves, every so often, gives the totality a way of reflecting on itself through us.cosmic_prostitute wrote:the purpose of the universe is to produce consciousness, it is a consciousness generating system.
Cause and effect isn't the body itself, its just the best way to describe how all finite things are manifested within the totality. Something like consciousness is very rare indeed. The complexity of the organism that consciousness can exist in requires an ever so strict balance of elements to the surrounding environment. I would say that consciousness is probably the most unique phenomenon in the universe.cosmic_prostitute wrote:Is it only consciousness that is able to bring into existence an uncaused body of cause-effect as a means to produce more consciousness?
Certainly nature deals out different levels of consciousness to each person. I agree there is no absolute man or woman, though it is mostly women who get the short end of the stick when it comes to achieving significant consciousness. The problem is how men make such poor use of any consciousness they have, consequently sinking down to the levels of woman.Leyla Shen wrote:Nick wrote:
Of course if no men were around to set an example of what higher consciousness is capable of, woman's lower level of consciousness would view all events (with the exception of death) with similiar significance. Even animals like elephants are conscious enough to sense the greater significance in the death of their kin, compared to other events.
Sue responded:
Rubbish. “Basically†unconscious?Because women, children and other animals are basically unconscious, their mental faculties: such as memory and discrimination, are barely formed. This makes their experience of the world a very fluid one – which is worlds apart from the world conscious beings experience. And galaxies apart from the world highly conscious philosophers experience.
It is not men who set the example of what higher consciousness is capable of, but nature that facilitates any such example and its effect/s to whatever degrees in men, women or children.
There is no such thing as an absolute man -- or woman.
I tire of this superficial “Woman†rhetoric when rendered at the expense of Truth.
.
Well, yes, I can certainly see the funny side of that. But I still have no idea what Marsha is talking about, given that none of us has ever hidden those sorts of things in our lives. I'm not even sure if it was the three of us that Marsha was refering to. It just seemed like an hysterical outburst directed aimlessly at nothing in particular. It's becoming an all-too-common offering from her these days and I'm starting to tire of it.I'm probably out of touch here but I thought she was expressing amusement that Kelly was effing the ineffable in bringing up the fact that at one time you & Kevin & Dan were all living with women while continuing to sneer at others in similar situations. It was pretty funny, though at the time I found it more grotesque than hilarious.
I'm probably out of touch here but I thought she was expressing amusement that Kelly was effing the ineffable in bringing up the fact that at one time you & Kevin & Dan were all living with women while continuing to sneer at others in similar situations. It was pretty funny, though at the time I found it more grotesque than hilarious.
Would you mind detailing this "significant consciousness" -- how it might manifest; what, exactly, you mean by it. Do you mean wisdom? From there, I plan to contemplate how it is that "mostly women get the short end of the stick." And, from there, how it is that you (qualitatively and quantitatively) differentiate the manifestations "men making poor use of any consciousness" and "unconscious females."Certainly nature deals out different levels of consciousness to each person. I agree there is no absolute man or woman, though it is mostly women who get the short end of the stick when it comes to achieving significant consciousness. The problem is how men make such poor use of any consciousness they have, consequently sinking down to the levels of woman.
When I said significant consciousness I meant consciousness capable of a more in depth understand of reality and the world around us. I would in fact describe this as wisdom, or a spiritual understanding of God. The reasoning behind me thinking women get the short end of the stick would be their lack of original ideals compared to that of men, through out history. Ideals such as politics, religion, science. sports and other things that have shaped humanity. Now although some of these things can be very useful at maintaining the lives and structures of humanity, they don't necessarily promote wisdom or a higher understanding of reality. Which would in turn explain that although these things were originaly a man's domain, women are in fact capable of stepping in and carrying out the duties required, explaining my reasoning behind men not making good use of their consciousness.Leyla Shen wrote:Would you mind detailing this "significant consciousness" -- how it might manifest; what, exactly, you mean by it. Do you mean wisdom? From there, I plan to contemplate how it is that "mostly women get the short end of the stick." And, from there, how it is that you (qualitatively and quantitatively) differentiate the manifestations "men making poor use of any consciousness" and "unconscious females."
Does it not? I think the fact of the matter is most men are too attached to power and pleasures of the flesh. Basically things that satisfy their egos. They will do anything to block out reality for fear of their evil ways being exposed. Where on the other hand, for women, pleasures of the flesh and happiness are all they know, making them innocent of any wrong doing. An indicator of this is that generally, when men are confronted with Truth that might expose them they become irate and fearful. Where women on the other hand remain rather stable because they don't see themselves as having anything to be exposed as evil or ignorant. They are essentially, in their own minds, enlightened.Leyla Shen wrote:Does the fact that no more than a relatively minute amount of biological males throughout the whole of history could be said to have been enlightened somehow prove beyond doubt that all biological males possess consciousness and are merely "making poor use of it"?
.
