Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
User avatar
Imadrongo
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:52 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Imadrongo »

Ryan,
The psychological violence happening within oneself is all that needs to be ended.
Why? Are we back into a mind-body duality or are you just trying to conceal the rest of it: "after his psychological violence is over with his physical violence will be gone too!"?
However, such emptiness of mind can only be attained if one is free from all attachments, as attachments are the ultimate cause of violence.
Only abiotic entities can be free of all attachment. Even sages are either attached to survival or they are about to join the abiotic. The Will to Death!
User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Ryan Rudolph »

Neil,
Why?
Look at the world. Sages do not contribute to the chaos, they are a force of deep inward order. The more young males that are able to understand the nature of wisdom, the better the world will be.
"after his psychological violence is over with his physical violence will be gone too!"?
physical violence is caused by psychological violence. Physical violence is fuelled by toxic thoughts, but if those thoughts end, or if they are at least analyzed as worthless, then physical violence is no longer possible.

However, to do that one needs to understand the relationship between toxic thoughts and outward attachments in the world. They co-exist together always.
Only abiotic entities can be free of all attachment.
All the attachments that are detrimental to spiritual strength need to go. IE: attachment to financial security, power, wealth, respect from others, attachment to women, attachment to drugs, – basically everything worldly goes out the window.
User avatar
Imadrongo
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:52 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Imadrongo »

Ryan / Others,

What is violence necessary for? Growth. Happiness. Overcoming. Accomplishment. Action. -- LIFE.

What do you inherently believe will make a "better" world? No violence, growth, suffering, pain, "bad stuff", icky stuff, etc.

It comes down to a value judgment.

You value non-suffering as #1. Why? Presumably you suffered lots in life and want to run away from it. Presumably you are too weak to fight for happiness and overcome suffering and just want a free ride of complacent, stagnant society where nobody ever sheds a tear or jumps for joy. Presumably you want equality because without it you are somewhere near the bottom. Presumably you want to drag everyone down to this level in the search for non-suffering.

There is nothing I detest more than this value of non-suffering.

There isn't really much more to say on this topic. Either you are a Christian moralist and want peace on earth, or you are not weak, selfish, resentful, passive, and hostile towards life.
User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Ryan Rudolph »

Neil wrote:
There is nothing I detest more than this value of non-suffering.
That is because all your happiness depends on it. Of course, if you value the pursuit of happiness, you will also value pro-longed suffering to attain it. However, a sage sees them as one undivided movement. Yin is Yang. Pleasure is pain. Suffering is happiness. This is the most difficult truth for people to realize because if threatens ones entire way of living…
User avatar
Imadrongo
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:52 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Imadrongo »

Ryan,
NM: There is nothing I detest more than this value of non-suffering.

RR: That is because all your happiness depends on it.
Yes. But where does your happiness come from? From fighting violently against violence?! Do you really support the end or are you just in it for the means? If you possess the strength to fight violently against violence why not realize the contradiction here and fight for something else? Why not fight against weakness rather than promote it?
RR: Of course, if you value the pursuit of happiness, you will also value pro-longed suffering to attain it. However, a sage sees them as one undivided movement. Yin is Yang. Pleasure is pain. Suffering is happiness. This is the most difficult truth for people to realize because if threatens ones entire way of living…
I see them as the same thing too. For sure. But that doesn't mean I will refuse to experience either and become an ascetic. There is no "becoming one with nature". We are already one with nature, whatever nature happens to be (we quite frankly have no clue).
User avatar
Ryan Rudolph
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Ryan Rudolph »

Neil,
There is no "becoming one with nature". We are already one with nature, whatever nature happens to be (we quite frankly have no clue).
I don’t we are already at one with nature. Look at little children. They are irrational little devils for the most part.
Yes. But where does your happiness come from? From fighting violently against violence?! Do you really support the end or are you just in it for the means? If you possess the strength to fight violently against violence why not realize the contradiction here and fight for something else? Why not fight against weakness rather than promote it?
Ironically, spiritual strength is not considered strong as defined by people’s conventional values. This is because they have excessive needs and wants from this world. Their fantasies sustain their tolerance for plight, but a sage is naturally distrustful of his fantasies, he is constantly questioning this ‘good life’ that everyone is blindly chasing after.

When the mind finds emptiness, this state gives a sort of regeneration. But no happiness, as humans typically define it.
User avatar
Imadrongo
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:52 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Imadrongo »

Ryan,
NM: There is no "becoming one with nature". We are already one with nature, whatever nature happens to be (we quite frankly have no clue).

RR: I don’t we are already at one with nature. Look at little children. They are irrational little devils for the most part.
So they are not one with nature? Or are they? Please say either way. And why must nature be "rational"?
Kevin Solway
Posts: 2766
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Kevin Solway »

Neil Melnyk wrote:There is no "becoming one with nature". We are already one with nature, whatever nature happens to be (we quite frankly have no clue).
"Nature" is everything. This is a matter of definition, and once you accept the definition then you know exactly what it is.

A person who is said to be "one with Nature" is a person who is wise enough not to fight against Nature. An unwise person gets upset when things don't go their way, or rejoices when things do go their way. By contrast a wise person is unmoved by all these things.

A rock, or a totally unconscious person, is also unmoved, but they are not wise (being unconscious).
And why must nature be "rational"?
Nature is all things, by definition. And wise people are rational, also by definition.
Ignis Fatuus

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Ignis Fatuus »

.
Last edited by Ignis Fatuus on Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Kevin Solway
Posts: 2766
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Kevin Solway »

Ignis Fatuus wrote:Aren't emotions part of nature. Are they not logical?
Emotions are logical in the same way that madness is.

That is, there is always a reason why people go mad, or why people are emotional. But the reason people go mad, or emotional, is usually that they are lacking in wisdom.
Ignis Fatuus

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Ignis Fatuus »

.
Last edited by Ignis Fatuus on Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Leyla Shen »

How old are you and what are your parents' thoughts on the subject?
Between Suicides
User avatar
Carl G
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Carl G »

I believe Kevin is 46. More about his childhood (though not much about his parents) here:

http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/aboutme.html

:)
Good Citizen Carl
Ignis Fatuus

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Ignis Fatuus »

..
Last edited by Ignis Fatuus on Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

SIEG HEIL

Post by Leyla Shen »

Carl G wrote:I believe Kevin is 46. More about his childhood (though not much about his parents) here:

http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/aboutme.html

:)
Oh, that's just conventional PR. Judging from his beard, he's 743; from his claimed spiritual status, some 5,000 years less 30%.

(This forum needs another cleansing. Hold on to your hat...)
Between Suicides
tooyi
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:25 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by tooyi »

Ignis Fatuus wrote:Aren't emotions part of nature. Are they not logical?
Emotions are a part of nature as anything. They are even logical in the way they arise and pass away.

They are the primitive tool for a human collective to store information, pass it around in the community, organize coherent group behavior, and adapt accordingly into their surroundings.

The trouble is in their circular nature and the feedback from primitive motivators such as adrenaline gland. That limits the applicability and reach of it as an algebra. In particular emotions form a noncommutative algebra where emotional attachment can never be reversed regardless of the causes that give rise to them. The only way to advance is to create new 'politics' that respects the sensitivity of earlier lockdown. This gives rise to very coherent group dynamic when the group is small and immediate survival is key. The strongest can draw authority and use oral and territorial signs to drive the politics to their liking.

The difference between emotions and logic is tiny as they employ the same mechanism. Logic is built on the same primitive platform but what it lacks is the clamp that causes the logical conclusion to be final the moment one thinks of it. To the degree the reality is not matched there is pain and remorse.

To borrow from ideas of fractals and chaos: The variation in the initial conditions can never be satisfied as the rehashing only causes the increase in sensitivity to those initial conditions.

Because of the noncommutativity it is much easier to become attached to prematurely ignorant conclusions employing emotion. The ego is too important to an individual that the natural instinct to create a continuation for the immediate living experience must be preserved, with all cost. Emotions are always a sign of this core or some previously agreed lockdown being threatened one way or another; The lockdowns may even be transplanted to other people, so they will take care of them for you! Emotions are only used for the task they evolved for, preservation of self in the flow of immediate experience.
Let him who has ears hear.
User avatar
Pincho Paxton
Posts: 1305
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:05 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Pincho Paxton »

Kevin Solway wrote:
Neil Melnyk wrote:T

A person who is said to be "one with Nature" is a person who is wise enough not to fight against Nature. An unwise person gets upset when things don't go their way, or rejoices when things do go their way. By contrast a wise person is unmoved by all these things.


And why must nature be "rational"?
Nature is all things, by definition. And wise people are rational, also by definition.
Nature is the opposite to this.
A person who is said to be "one with Nature" is a person with no wisdom at all. A wise person gets upset when they aren't entertained, and gaining knowledge. The wise need their wisom to be fed all of the time. Otherwise they revert to nature.
User avatar
TheChessPlayer
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 2:18 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by TheChessPlayer »

Violance happens when common sensefails and good example of how common sense fails is the movie i once watched of a criminal and murderer who hunted his victims down and tortured them and finally killed them. He didnt know what he was doing he did it because his common sense "a" broke into e and c and e made him do those horrible things because c didnt do anything without e.
Ones who lie are true
User avatar
Rhett
Posts: 604
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:31 am
Location: Australia

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Rhett »

In a war between violence and wisdom, either can win. One of the challenges for those wise is to make good judgements about when violence is likely to be the only way to win, and use it effectively.
xerox

Post by xerox »

...
Last edited by xerox on Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
grub
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:10 am

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by grub »

Wow. I don't even know who particularly to thank for showing everyone how vital violence and agression can be to a philosophical discussion. it just wouldn't have had the same vivacity and inspired passion if tempers hadn't been flaring up a little. I think you've received your answer, doggy. The movement of life is tempered in violence; without being inherently good or evil. The grubworm attacks and ingests its own weight in turfgrass every day in order to live; a lioness grips an ungulate by the throat, crushing its windpipe, it slowly suffocates - staring into the eyes of its greatest fear. Humans, at our best, can transmute violence into passion; without which greatness would not exist.
User avatar
Perishable
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:33 am
Location: California

Re: Violence Totally Unnecessary?

Post by Perishable »

In order for there to be violence...
There must be a disagreement of some sort (Rational or irrational is regardless).
If words cannot manipulate one to turn anothers thought/opinion/choice, then it brings in the physical aspect.

War is a disagreement of which one rejects the choice of another, and is forced to alter the other's desicion.
For the reason that generally, the other's choice is not beneficial the one who disagrees. (But in all, both sides disagree)
One confronts with the force of action.

A: "Don't paint my car red! The color blue is better than the color red"
B: "I think the Color red is better than blue, and it works for me."

In regards, verbal persuasion will take place. Reasoning is always a weapon.
If they don't accept the reasoning, violence takes progresses.

To evalute the revelance of my post to your topic...
Pain is manipulative. People are selfish... Harm done to one's self with acceptance is abnormal.

If some one threatens you with violence, but that threat would be removed with your cooperation of their desires...
Then, if you decide not to cooperate, then it would accept self damage.
But since pain is a stab of morality and most people are percieved as selfish... then they would change their mind of their desicion. Which is why violence exsists as a prime.


I'm not absolute on my opinion.
Enlighten me.
He was a Genius...
Locked