What Book or Person Influences You?

[mensa-maniac]

What book or Person Influences You?

Who or what do you believe in, in this whole world? Is it Prince Charles, Chuang Po, Bhagavad Gita, Nietzche, Obama, the Queen, MaDonna, the Pope, who influences you?

Just wondering who is reading what these days, the computer has made readers and writers out of us all!

I'm influenced by the humor and intelligence shown on TV comedy shows such as Laugh-In, or Stand-up comedy shows. Some of these people have real talent with the ability to captivate their audience winning their affection. And Laugh-In is hilarious, the things these people come up with are so funny, they fool people then let them know they're on camera, it's a must see.

[parasympathetic]

This is easy.
Homer Simpson.
Too real to be fake.

[Animus]

Finished reading:

Dante's Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri
The Guinea Pig Diaries by A.J. Jacobs
Lonliness as a Way of Life by Thomas Dumm
The Builder and the Plan by Ursula Gestefeld
Human Nature and De Corpore Politico by Thomas Hobbes
Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu
The Odyssey by Homer
Kim by Rudyard Kipling
Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Sunryu Suzuki
An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? by Immanuel Kant
Lila by Robert Pirsig

Reading:
My Stroke of Insight by Jill Bolte Taylor
The Way of Nowhere by Nic Turner and Nick Udall
The Marx and Engels Reader
The Bhagavad Gita
History of God by Karen Armstrong

Recommend:
All

"you may be a petty asshole," he says, "but at least you're
not a secret petty asshole." - The Guinea Pig Diaries

"Thee o'er thyself I therefore crown and mitre!" - Dante's Divine Comedy

"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity.
Immaturity is the inability to use one's own understanding without
the guidance of another." - An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment

"Mothers have not the wisdom of our years. If a child cries they say the heavens are falling. Now a grandmother is far enough separated from the pain of bearing and the pleasure of giving the breast to consider whether a cry is wickedness pure or the wind." - Kim, Rudyard Kipling

""At this turning point begins the putting off of mortality and the putting on of immortality, a work preceded by putting away the false self-conception and intentionally forming and holding the true one in its place. Exercise of the power of choice makes of the exsitent soul an individual." - The Builder and the Plan

[mensa-maniac]

Finished reading:

Dante's Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri
The Guinea Pig Diaries by A.J. Jacobs
Lonliness as a Way of Life by Thomas Dumm
The Builder and the Plan by Ursula Gestefeld
Human Nature and De Corpore Politico by Thomas Hobbes
Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu
The Odyssey by Homer
Kim by Rudyard Kipling
Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Sunryu Suzuki
An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? by Immanuel Kant
Lila by Robert Pirsig

Reading:
My Stroke of Insight by Jill Bolte Taylor
The Way of Nowhere by Nic Turner and Nick Udall
The Marx and Engels Reader
The Bhagavad Gita
History of God by Karen Armstrong

Recommend:
All

"you may be a petty asshole," he says, "but at least you're
not a secret petty asshole." - The Guinea Pig Diaries

"Thee o'er thyself I therefore crown and mitre!" - Dante's Divine Comedy

"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity.
Immaturity is the inability to use one's own understanding without
the guidance of another." - An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment

"Mothers have not the wisdom of our years. If a child cries they say the heavens are falling. Now a grandmother is far enough separated from the pain of bearing and the pleasure of giving the breast to consider whether a cry is wickedness pure or the wind." - Kim, Rudyard Kipling

""At this turning point begins the putting off of mortality and the putting on of immortality, a work preceded by putting away the false self-conception and intentionally forming and holding the true one in its place. Exercise of the power of choice makes of the exsitent soul an individual." - The Builder and the Plan

Mensa asks: Hi Animus, what do you think about Bhagavad Gita's wisdom? I have two of Bhagavad Gita books. I would like a recommendation of a good Zen book.

I really can appreciate your quote above "Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's own understanding without the guidance of another." this is one great quote that can't be beaten!

Thanks for sharing.

[Animus]

Finished reading:

Dante's Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri
The Guinea Pig Diaries by A.J. Jacobs
Lonliness as a Way of Life by Thomas Dumm
The Builder and the Plan by Ursula Gestefeld
Human Nature and De Corpore Politico by Thomas Hobbes
Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu
The Odyssey by Homer
Kim by Rudyard Kipling
Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Sunryu Suzuki
An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? by Immanuel Kant
Lila by Robert Pirsig

Reading:
My Stroke of Insight by Jill Bolte Taylor
The Way of Nowhere by Nic Turner and Nick Udall
The Marx and Engels Reader
The Bhagavad Gita
History of God by Karen Armstrong

Recommend:
All

"you may be a petty asshole," he says, "but at least you're
not a secret petty asshole." - The Guinea Pig Diaries

"Thee o'er thyself I therefore crown and mitre!" - Dante's Divine Comedy

"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity.
Immaturity is the inability to use one's own understanding without
the guidance of another." - An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment

"Mothers have not the wisdom of our years. If a child cries they say the heavens are falling. Now a grandmother is far enough separated from the pain of bearing and the pleasure of giving the breast to consider whether a cry is wickedness pure or the wind." - Kim, Rudyard Kipling

""At this turning point begins the putting off of mortality and the putting on of immortality, a work preceded by putting away the false self-conception and intentionally forming and holding the true one in its place. Exercise of the power of choice makes of the exsitent soul an individual." - The Builder and the Plan

Mensa asks: Hi Animus, what do you think about Bhagavad Gita's wisdom? I have two of Bhagavad Gita books. I would like a recommendation of a good Zen book.

I haven't read it through yet.

Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Shunryu Suzuki is good
The Way of Zen by Alan Watts

[mensa-maniac]

Thanks for the recommendation, but isn't Zen Mind meant for the younger generation?
or is it meant for the beginner of Zen studies?

[Animus]

Thanks for the recommendation, but isn't Zen Mind meant for the younger generation?
or is it meant for the beginner of Zen studies?

Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind argues essentially that the Zen Mind is the Beginner's Mind. A Zen Mind is open like the Beginner's, it is Humble like the Beginner's, and so on and so forth...

[mensa-maniac]

I can appreciate some of Bhagavad Gita's wisdom, I prefer hindu philosophy and wisdom.
I love chinese wisdom most over all!

[mensa-maniac]

Thanks for the recommendation, but isn't Zen Mind meant for the younger generation?
or is it meant for the beginner of Zen studies?

Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind argues essentially that the Zen Mind is the Beginner's Mind. A Zen Mind is open like the Beginner's, it is Humble like the Beginner's, and so on and so forth...

Mensa says: That's very interesting, I must get the book--Thanks

[Blair]

I don't know if it influenced me as such,but this is one book I have read recently which I actually found compelling;

http://www.amazon.com/World-Six-Songs-M ... 070&sr=8-2

[Getoriks]

Influence from here:

Kevin Solway
Prince/Blair
David Quinn
And perhaps others...

Influence from elsewhere:

My self (my countless negative attitudes and unproductive actions)
My girl friend (blasphemy!!1)
Jesus
Nietzsche
Socrates
Plato
Pierre Grimes
Michelle Mairesse and Norman D. Livergood of Hermes Press
Betty and Stewart Edward White
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Semi-influence from elsewhere:

Charles Eisenstein
Ran Prieur

Merely useful but potentially misleading information from elsewhere:

Aristotle
Alan Watts
Gurdjieff, P. D. Ouspensky, and Idries Shah
Vijay Prozac and Brett Stevens of the American Underground Nihilist Society
John Michael Greer of the Archdruid Report

Pure nonsense from elsewhere:

Professors
Priests
Eckhart Tolle
Ken Wilber
Helena Blavatsky
This very post/reply
And too many others...

[mensa-maniac]

Influence from here:

Kevin Solway
Prince/Blair
David Quinn
And perhaps others...

Influence from elsewhere:

My self (my countless negative attitudes and unproductive actions)
My girl friend (blasphemy!!1)
Jesus
Nietzsche
Socrates
Plato
Pierre Grimes
Michelle Mairesse and Norman D. Livergood of Hermes Press
Betty and Stewart Edward White
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Semi-influence from elsewhere:

Charles Eisenstein
Ran Prieur

Merely useful but potentially misleading information from elsewhere:

Aristotle
Alan Watts
Gurdjieff, P. D. Ouspensky, and Idries Shah
Vijay Prozac and Brett Stevens of the American Underground Nihilist Society
John Michael Greer of the Archdruid Report

Pure nonsense from elsewhere:

Professors
Priests
Eckhart Tolle
Ken Wilber
Helena Blavatsky
This very post/reply
And too many others...

Mensa says: Now this is what I want to see, you've provided exactly what I've wanted to see and more. I ask you why do you think Professors possess pure nonsense?

Mensa's lecture to Getoriks

Why do you think a Professor is titled Professor, it's because they profess to know things, and had the intelligence and knowledge to earn and obtain that title for themselves. You are purely being disrespectful of all professors by saying that comment.
And lets not forget the confidence these professors have in themselves enough to risk their ideas to the ridiculing of smart asses just learning. All professors are intelligent enough to know that their students have their own ideas, and many know that some students have greater ideas than they have, that's what makes them great professors!

Just because You and the Professor differ on the same topic, it only means that one of you has a more logical answer than the other, or both are not logical answers at all, which would make both answers illogical, and if both answers are illogical they are both nonsense, compared with a logical answer.

So essentially both parties believe the other is full of nonsense, because both parties believe they are logically correct, when they may both be illogically incorrect. It wouldn't help to bring in voters to side with each party, because then we'd have illogic against illogic. The only thing that can straighten both parties out, is to produce one logical answer!

[Animus]

Finished reading "My Stroke of Insight" by Jill Bolte Taylor. I had originally avoided reading it, out of doubt about its quality. My girlfriend gave it to me as a Christmas gift and I read it Monday night. Superb book. Worth the read.

[Animus]

So, I'm working on "The Essence of the Bhagavad Gita Explained by Paramhansa Yogananda As Remembered by His Disciple Swami Kriyananda" which conceives of the Gita as an allegory for the mind, with the key characters representing key aspects of the human psychological experience. For example; Arjuna is given as the faculty of "self-control" and "Kunti, the mother of the first three Pandavas, represents 'the power of dispassion.'" With Arjuna's brothers Yudhisthira and Bhima representing "divine calmness" and "control of the life force , or prana" respectively.

[Getoriks]

I ask you why do you think Professors possess pure nonsense?

Why do you think a Professor is titled Professor, it's because they profess to know things, and had the intelligence and knowledge to earn and obtain that title for themselves. You are purely being disrespectful of all professors by saying that comment.

And lets not forget the confidence these professors have in themselves enough to risk their ideas to the ridiculing of smart asses just learning. All professors are intelligent enough to know that their students have their own ideas, and many know that some students have greater ideas than they have, that's what makes them great professors!

Just because You and the Professor differ on the same topic, it only means that one of you has a more logical answer than the other, or both are not logical answers at all, which would make both answers illogical, and if both answers are illogical they are both nonsense, compared with a logical answer.

So essentially both parties believe the other is full of nonsense, because both parties believe they are logically correct, when they may both be illogically incorrect. It wouldn't help to bring in voters to side with each party, because then we'd have illogic against illogic. The only thing that can straighten both parties out, is to produce one logical answer!

Though I meant it in a humorous manner (I actually plan to be a teacher or professor), I see now that it was nonetheless somewhat a humor of arrogance and bitterness, and for that I thank you and sincerely apologize. =/

[mensa-maniac]

I think you would do great as a teacher, perhaps as a professor too, however make darn sure these are your goal ambitions and not your folks influencing you to follow what they want you to do. It's your life not theirs, they lived their lives already.

It's not one bit fair for parents to turn a blind eye to their kids future endeavors, trying to persuade them to go along with their plans, instead of allowing their children to make their own decisions for their own lives.

Some kids end up bitter and resentful because they didn't follow their own leadership, but instead followed their parents influence. Most parents are well intentioned, and only want the best for their kids, but most don't realize the kids need to live-out their own lives, their own dreams and aspirations, their own intentions, not their parents intentions, to grow and become productive people.

I wanted to be a psychologist, I guess in a way I am a psychologist, just not a paid one. I should have been a teacher, but if I were to go to university now at my age, I would study to be a professor! But, one must know what they are professing otherwise they may profess idiocy!

[Animus]

So, I'm working on "The Essence of the Bhagavad Gita Explained by Paramhansa Yogananda As Remembered by His Disciple Swami Kriyananda" which conceives of the Gita as an allegory for the mind, with the key characters representing key aspects of the human psychological experience. For example; Arjuna is given as the faculty of "self-control" and "Kunti, the mother of the first three Pandavas, represents 'the power of dispassion.'" With Arjuna's brothers Yudhisthira and Bhima representing "divine calmness" and "control of the life force , or prana" respectively.

So, the actual translation of the Gita here is pretty good. However, the author makes countless statements that presume to be fact, which I have previously encountered contrary reasoning and evidence. The author maintains a force known as "Kuntalini" which has it's home in the base of the spine, must necessarily be awakened and ascend the chakras in the spine until reaching the medulla oblongata where it is retracted from the physical world and into the "astral" realms.

A voice in my head keeps reminding me of the possibility of dwelling in a self-created fantasy. One that is both concocted and maintained in the physical brain, but which, to the subjective observer seems to pertain to a non-physical reality. I suppose the crux has been whether or not physical matter antecedes conscious experience, or whether conscious experience antecedes physical matter and therefore is capable of withdrawing from it.

Rational insight and physical evidence both incline me to the conclusion that neither physical matter nor conscious experience can exist in and of themselves, rather both are intimitely and infinitely interwoven (so-to-speak). Matter could no more exist in the absence of some perceptual domain upon which it can make its appearance, as mind could exist without some domain from which to receive impressions. The necessity of contrast guarantees the incapability of mind existing without receiving or otherwise generating its own impressions. Thus, if the Yogi is right, then there must exist some other plane, an "astral" plane which is not removed from physical reality, but which may perhaps be veiled from the one engrossed in physical reality. But the contrary case is also highly probable, that the Yogi merely creates an inner fantasy. Though the Yogi claims this is attained through the cessation of egoic striving, the attainment itself offers many rewards to the ego, namely "Bliss" or "Heaven".

So, while I find this an interesting book thus far (P. 267/568), there are countless claims made by the interpreter which will take a long time for me to mull through. Maybe its just because I'm not familiar enough with Yoga or Hinduism. But at other times the author makes claims about material reality as determined by the international scientific community which I myself know to be hopelessly inadequate or outright false. One such claim is that most of the cells of the body change and are discarded throughout one's life, as a matter of fact, the last book I read made the same claim and was written by a Neuroanatomist, except Jill Bolte Taylor claimed that brain cells, by and large, are not replaced. The same brain cells existing at birth are existing in adulthood. I know they are both missing important details. It is a stripped down version of the facts meant to support their hypotheses. For Taylor it is somewhat forgivable as she lost most of her cognition during her stroke and was only sufficient to write a book on it after 8 years of recovery. Some simplification of facts is to be expected. The Essence of the Bhagavad Gita makes countless factual scientific claims which are not given justice.

It is a bizarre thing when an author begins with the premise that physical matter is unimportant, and then attempts to use evidence from physical matter to make his/her case. The worst case of this I've ever seen was The Spiritual Brain, written by neuroscientists, using neuroscience to prove that neuroscience doesn't matter. It is a very bizarre book, and I'm not sure I can make any sense of it.

[mensa-maniac]

So, I'm working on "The Essence of the Bhagavad Gita Explained by Paramhansa Yogananda As Remembered by His Disciple Swami Kriyananda" which conceives of the Gita as an allegory for the mind, with the key characters representing key aspects of the human psychological experience. For example; Arjuna is given as the faculty of "self-control" and "Kunti, the mother of the first three Pandavas, represents 'the power of dispassion.'" With Arjuna's brothers Yudhisthira and Bhima representing "divine calmness" and "control of the life force , or prana" respectively.

So, the actual translation of the Gita here is pretty good. However, the author makes countless statements that presume to be fact, which I have previously encountered contrary reasoning and evidence. The author maintains a force known as "Kuntalini" which has it's home in the base of the spine, must necessarily be awakened and ascend the chakras in the spine until reaching the medulla oblongata where it is retracted from the physical world and into the "astral" realms.

A voice in my head keeps reminding me of the possibility of dwelling in a self-created fantasy. One that is both concocted and maintained in the physical brain, but which, to the subjective observer seems to pertain to a non-physical reality. I suppose the crux has been whether or not physical matter antecedes conscious experience, or whether conscious experience antecedes physical matter and therefore is capable of withdrawing from it.

Rational insight and physical evidence both incline me to the conclusion that neither physical matter nor conscious experience can exist in and of themselves, rather both are intimitely and infinitely interwoven (so-to-speak). Matter could no more exist in the absence of some perceptual domain upon which it can make its appearance, as mind could exist without some domain from which to receive impressions. The necessity of contrast guarantees the incapability of mind existing without receiving or otherwise generating its own impressions. Thus, if the Yogi is right, then there must exist some other plane, an "astral" plane which is not removed from physical reality, but which may perhaps be veiled from the one engrossed in physical reality. But the contrary case is also highly probable, that the Yogi merely creates an inner fantasy. Though the Yogi claims this is attained through the cessation of egoic striving, the attainment itself offers many rewards to the ego, namely "Bliss" or "Heaven".

So, while I find this an interesting book thus far (P. 267/568), there are countless claims made by the interpreter which will take a long time for me to mull through. Maybe its just because I'm not familiar enough with Yoga or Hinduism. But at other times the author makes claims about material reality as determined by the international scientific community which I myself know to be hopelessly inadequate or outright false. One such claim is that most of the cells of the body change and are discarded throughout one's life, as a matter of fact, the last book I read made the same claim and was written by a Neuroanatomist, except Jill Bolte Taylor claimed that brain cells, by and large, are not replaced. The same brain cells existing at birth are existing in adulthood. I know they are both missing important details. It is a stripped down version of the facts meant to support their hypotheses. For Taylor it is somewhat forgivable as she lost most of her cognition during her stroke and was only sufficient to write a book on it after 8 years of recovery. Some simplification of facts is to be expected. The Essence of the Bhagavad Gita makes countless factual scientific claims which are not given justice.

It is a bizarre thing when an author begins with the premise that physical matter is unimportant, and then attempts to use evidence from physical matter to make his/her case. The worst case of this I've ever seen was The Spiritual Brain, written by neuroscientists, using neuroscience to prove that neuroscience doesn't matter. It is a very bizarre book, and I'm not sure I can make any sense of it.

Mensa says: Animus, I think it's great that you're studying Bhagavad Gita, although I've had these two books for many years and study them occasionally, I just now am understanding what you're saying about Arjuna being the faculty of self-control. It's amazing how quickly I learn, once someone points something out to me. Keep up the good work, knowledge is power, and more powerful is the expression of it!