GENIUS FORUMS

When will the the self proclaimed wise come forth and truely transform this world? Hiding comfortably behind computer screens pointing fingers at the dammed and ignorant of this world wont cut it I`m afraid. Your reasoning may be refinded but can you illuminate others? For those who prefer the lifestyle of a hermit content with self contemplation and self loving do do really feel you you are wise? Get out there in to society, in role that wont insult your sensibilities (would a teacher of some sort be too much to ask?) and make that difference in the world you have always hoped to acheive. It`s easy to think your a sage when you hide your life away from the scrutinising eye of thinkers. Expose your life not just thoughts. So will the real wise man please stand up.

Feel better? I would like to be able to say that was a nice little rant, but I'm afraid it was too poorly conceived. I mean, teacher? Teacher of what, exactly? And in what way should a wise person transform the world and what makes you think he has any ability to do any such thing?

insider wrote:When will the the self proclaimed wise come forth and truely transform this world? Hiding comfortably behind computer screens pointing fingers at the dammed and ignorant of this world wont cut it I`m afraid. Your reasoning may be refinded but can you illuminate others? For those who prefer the lifestyle of a hermit content with self contemplation and self loving do do really feel you you are wise? Get out there in to society, in role that wont insult your sensibilities (would a teacher of some sort be too much to ask?) and make that difference in the world you have always hoped to acheive. It`s easy to think your a sage when you hide your life away from the scrutinising eye of thinkers. Expose your life not just thoughts. So will the real wise man please stand up.

Insider. Most here have substituted nihilism and hatred for intelligence, and their public policies would be similar to those of pol pot and adolf hitler. Therefore, I hope they stay in and keep their hatred out of the public sphere.

Perhaps you might like to show the relationship between the "public" policies here and either of those historical figures.

Dan Rowden wrote:Perhaps you might like to show the relationship between the "public" policies here and either of those historical figures.

Actually, no i don't. But the nihilism and elitism here can only come to no good.

How are you defining "nihilism" and what makes you think such a thing is even possible?

Dan Rowden wrote:How are you defining "nihilism" and what makes you think such a thing is even possible?

How are you defining possible?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nihilism

ni‧hil‧ism  /ˈnaɪəˌlɪzəm, ˈni-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[nahy-uh-liz-uhm, nee-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. total rejection of established laws and institutions.
2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity.
3. total and absolute destructiveness, esp. toward the world at large and including oneself: the power-mad nihilism that marked Hitler's last years.
4. Philosophy.
a. an extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth.
b. nothingness or nonexistence.
5. (sometimes initial capital letter) the principles of a Russian revolutionary group, active in the latter half of the 19th century, holding that existing social and political institutions must be destroyed in order to clear the way for a new state of society and employing extreme measures, including terrorism and assassination.
6. annihilation of the self, or the individual consciousness, esp. as an aspect of mystical experience.

About 80% of the total discourse on this site are various justifications for varying definitions of nihilism, as defined above.

This 'nihilism' thing is a common misunderstanding of eternalists.

from "THE SERMON AT RAJAGAHA"


The Buddha, perceiving that the whole assembly was ready as a vessel to receive the doctrine, spoke thus to Bimbisara the king: "He who knows the nature of self and understands how the senses act, finds no room for selfishness, and thus he will attain peace unending. The world holds the thought of self, and from this arises false apprehension. Some say that the self endures after death, some say it perishes. Both are wrong and their error is most grievous. For if they say the self is perishable, the fruit they strive for will perish too, and at some time there will be no hereafter. Good and evil would be indifferent. This salvation from selfishness is without merit.

"When some, on the other hand, say the self will not perish, then in the midst of all life and death there is but one identity unborn and undying. If such is their self, then it is perfect and cannot be perfected by deeds. The lasting, imperishable self could never be changed. self would be lord and master, and there would be no use in perfecting the perfect; moral aims and salvation would be unnecessary.

"But now we see the marks of joy and sorrow. Where is any constancy? If there is no permanent self that does our deeds, then there is no self; there is no actor behind our actions, no perceiver behind our perception, no lord behind our deeds.

"Now attend and listen: The senses meet the object and from their contact sensation is born. Thence results recollection. Thus, as the sun's power through a burning-glass causes fire to appear, so through the cognizance born of sense and object, the mind originates and with it the ego, the thought of self, whom some Brahman teachers call the lord. The shoot springs from the seed; the seed is not the shoot; both are not one and the same, but successive phases in a continuous growth. Such is the birth of animated life.

kowtaaia wrote:This 'nihilism' thing is a common misunderstanding of eternalists.

No. The problem is nihilists hate being properly identified as such.

What didn't you understand about "the self is an illusion." ?

kowtaaia wrote:What didn't you understand about "the self is an illusion." ?

I understand it. I reject it.

Why can't you recognize that your point of view is accurately described as nihilism?

1. total rejection of established laws and institutions.

Yes, well, whatever is crap needs to be rejected by the individual, don't you think?

2. anarchy, terrorism, or other revolutionary activity.

These are unneeded and counterproductive, except for the last; one must revolutionize one's own perspective.

3. total and absolute destructiveness, esp. toward the world at large and including oneself: the power-mad nihilism that marked Hitler's last years.

The opposite is true; instead of destruction, one's emphasis must be growth, of understanding.

4. Philosophy.
a. an extreme form of skepticism: the denial of all real existence or the possibility of an objective basis for truth.

Who here is denying "real existence." Who here is arguing for the non-possibility of "an objective basis for truth"?

b. nothingness or nonexistence.

No, emptiness, or non-inherent existence, which are quite different.

5. (sometimes initial capital letter) the principles of a Russian revolutionary group, active in the latter half of the 19th century, holding that existing social and political institutions must be destroyed in order to clear the way for a new state of society and employing extreme measures, including terrorism and assassination.

Does anyone here espouse these terrorism and assassination, even in metaphorical terms?

6. annihilation of the self, or the individual consciousness, esp. as an aspect of mystical experience.

Who speaks of annihilation? Transcend old viewpoints and values, perhaps, and die to ego's control and emotionalism, but these have naught to do with destruction.

millipodium wrote:

kowtaaia wrote:What didn't you understand about "the self is an illusion." ?

I understand it. I reject it.

Why can't you recognize that your point of view is accurately described as nihilism?

...because the end of the illusion of self is NOT nothingness or nonexistence, but rather the manifestation of the world as it is in truth.

kowtaaia wrote:

millipodium wrote:

kowtaaia wrote:What didn't you understand about "the self is an illusion." ?

I understand it. I reject it.

Why can't you recognize that your point of view is accurately described as nihilism?

...because the end of the illusion of self is NOT nothingness or nonexistence, but rather the manifestation of the world as it is in truth.

Gibberish. In practical, normal verbiage, you're a nihilist.

You people are laughably pathetic in your refusal to be accurately described.

millipodium wrote: Gibberish. In practical, normal verbiage, you're a nihilist.

Your posts are impotent.

kowtaaia wrote:

millipodium wrote: Gibberish. In practical, normal verbiage, you're a nihilist.

Your posts are impotent.

Your intellect is bereft of depth and significance.

millipodium wrote:

kowtaaia wrote:

millipodium wrote: Gibberish. In practical, normal verbiage, you're a nihilist.

Your posts are impotent.

Your intellect is bereft of depth and significance.

im‧po‧tent :–adjective
1. not potent; lacking power or ability.
2. utterly unable (to do something).
3. without force or effectiveness.

kowtaaia wrote:

millipodium wrote:

kowtaaia wrote:

millipodium wrote: Gibberish. In practical, normal verbiage, you're a nihilist.

Your posts are impotent.

Your intellect is bereft of depth and significance.

im‧po‧tent :–adjective
1. not potent; lacking power or ability.
2. utterly unable (to do something).
3. without force or effectiveness.

im po' tant :-ebonics-adjective
1. possessed of great authority
2. siginificant
3. pimp daddylicious

That's a very sad post. :)

The use of sophistry is rife here I see. My point Dan seems to have been lost on you. My apologies. My post may have pricked the conscience of a few, but I fear, as you say, that in part it was poorly conceived.
Let me try saying it another way. In my life I`ve met and known a few people who claimed to be wise. They in fact had dedicated their lives from an early age to discovering the truth and no doubt had a clear understanding of the nature of reality. However as the years passed and my own thought and experienced matured I began to realise that their lives didn`t aspire to the ideals they held.
One particular person I know has spent the greater majority of his life condemning and demonising the values of femininity and women in general. He then went on to commence a long term relationship( years and years) with a single mother of two. When questioned about this relationship he would remark " I`m having a bit of a holiday". Then at a time of his convenience he up and left, apparently absolving himself of any karmic effects. I know the children which rightly or wrongly looked at him as a father were devestated. What should I make of such a man?
I digress. In my previous post I mentioned the job as a teacher( of any discipline ) as a vocation. This is just a example, if you broadened your horizons I`m sure you could find other possibly more suitable options. Finally yes I do believe the wise can have a considerable impact on transforming society. I believe the wise have the responsibility to illuminate others. This wont happen by ponificating on the net. Aquiring the skills and techniques to effectively transmit your knowledge to mankind is the real challenge. Let go of your self and attend to your flock.To do this will be no easy task, but are you up for it?

insider wrote:The use of sophistry is rife here I see. My point Dan seems to have been lost on you. My apologies. My post may have pricked the conscience of a few, but I fear, as you say, that in part it was poorly conceived.
Let me try saying it another way. In my life I`ve met and known a few people who claimed to be wise. They in fact had dedicated their lives from an early age to discovering the truth and no doubt had a clear understanding of the nature of reality. However as the years passed and my own thought and experienced matured I began to realise that their lives didn`t aspire to the ideals they held.
One particular person I know has spent the greater majority of his life condemning and demonising the values of femininity and women in general. He then went on to commence a long term relationship( years and years) with a single mother of two. When questioned about this relationship he would remark " I`m having a bit of a holiday". Then at a time of his convenience he up and left, apparently absolving himself of any karmic effects. I know the children which rightly or wrongly looked at him as a father were devestated. What should I make of such a man?
I digress. In my previous post I mentioned the job as a teacher( of any discipline ) as a vocation. This is just a example, if you broadened your horizons I`m sure you could find other possibly more suitable options. Finally yes I do believe the wise can have a considerable impact on transforming society. I believe the wise have the responsibility to illuminate others. This wont happen by ponificating on the net. Aquiring the skills and techniques to effectively transmit your knowledge to mankind is the real challenge. Let go of your self and attend to your flock.To do this will be no easy task, but are you up for it?

Again. I must strenuously object. Some here are anti-agriculture, due to all the nutrients it provides that pesky vermin known as Man. You mention yourself the same horrors of another who was a nihilistic net sophist. Why would you abjure demons such as these to strive toward efficacy?

insider wrote:One particular person I know has spent the greater majority of his life condemning and demonising the values of femininity and women in general. He then went on to commence a long term relationship( years and years) with a single mother of two.

I agree, that seems hypocritical.

I believe the wise have the responsibility to illuminate others.

Why?

I'm not anti-agriculture - - I just think that ever since it was implemented, man has been lead to create bigger and bigger problems for himself.

For those who can think critically, these big problems lead to big solutions, and so, in that sense, any problems that man creates for himself, are opportunities for education, further enlightenment.

By studying the problems of man, I am convinced that he would be better off if he focused more on establishing forest gardens, maximizing perenials that produce food, maximizing tree crops and laying back on the annuals. Rabits, bird game, fish, dear and maybe goats might all be worth focusing on.

By doing so, we would reduce labor greatly, however, we might want to start waning the population down a bit, and eliminating superflous labor and products.

Just step into wallmart, your typical supermarket, or your typical mall and see how superflous the products are.

The human population is alot like the products at wall mart.

Most of them are useless and would be better off not existing.