GENIUS FORUMS

Dennis Mahar wrote:Knickers was introduced by Leyla, 'knickers in a twist'. Riffing on a theme.

Suddenly things got meaning and origin again with Dennis, when he wants briefly to set a "wrong" right.

When I introduced the pun "size does matter" the context was the Last Man and masculinity, like with Nietzsche's flee hopping around making everything small and meaningless. Leyla put it again in another context of helium balls which I think was a wrong interpretation (confusing values with objects). Then came you with Nietzsche getting into L's knickers. Meaning you're a frustrated dried up Zen artist. That's about it!

Of course the Dennis defense will be that now it's meaningless again, "under the bridge" since that's where he lives. Or even denying there was a discussion in the first place: complete annihilation! A safe place to hide. Be a man and admit you lacked attention and got over-excited. Next time keep yourself inside dedicated Zen and poetry threads where you can hunt for lonely hearts. Bye Dennis!

This statement here Diebert:

The moment you, your consciousness, lands on anything, there will be discrimination. You'll have to be aware, exact and move on at the right time.

That's accurate enough except for the word discrimination, I think the word differentiation gets it better in the first instance.
Discrimination tends to suggest a judgement about a differentiation.
What didn't have significance is discriminated into a basket such as right, wrong, good, bad.

When I say its empty and meaningless that its empty and meaningless I'm referring to all the justifiers showing up.
Another way of saying that is 'nothing is broken' which the justifiers suggest something was.

A statement written or spoken as somehow calculated to offend has to have in place a possibility that takes offence.

It's clearly 'affectivity' that is a trouble source.

Dennis Mahar wrote:Discrimination tends to suggest a judgement about a differentiation.

You should try to be a bit more discriminative! Would do you good and improve your writing. That's all about being able to judge yourself with scrutiny: getting quality!

Now I'll stop reading you for a while so don't expect a response. If you want change, you'll have to allow for the possibility something is fucked up, to prevent stagnation. The opposite is true as well: allowing for things to be alright even when "technically" fucked up, also to prevent stagnation. But how to master both directions? It's not something to be answered now. Over time it can be made clear.

There's no logic to support anything is fucked up.
There's no possibility of 'brokenness'.

There's not a hair on a head out of place anywhere anytime.
How could there be?

Yet there's almost everyone who will list hundreds of things wrong in their lives, their suffering, and all their stresses to you.

Your lucky enough to understand the truth of the matters, yet they clearly have many issues anyway, being so unaware of the meaning making.

You can't deny they all think things are broken. If that's not true, then already their perspectives and efforts are wrong/delusional.

Let's quote the man shall we, paraphrased

"Being unaware of these 'blemishes'/ 'taints', they are thus unable to resolve them."

Ignoring that there's a problem, or being unable to confront it, is to accept and remain in suffering, it's the problem most face.

Genius. Pure genius. If everybody just stopped thinking, then everything would be perfect and in accordance with ultimate reality.

Really, that's what we need. So many people think nowadays, it's no wonder we're in such a mess. Yes--yes! we need a world of non-thinking humans instead!

You know, like a new species of cow, or something.

Moo.

What are you on about? I didn't refer to anything remotely close to what you are talking about. I said Dennis's perspective that nothing is broken isn't agreed upon by the millions whining about what's broken in their lives.

Now you're just making up things, holding a grudge?

If "things weren't broken" you'd have nothing to complain about and no reason to say Dennis was speaking the truth.

Jesus fucking Christ...

Dennis is parodying a truth. It hasn't actually sunk into him fully. So, when he speaks, it resonates with people. But, when it comes to using it to express wisdom, rather than just stating it, he can't do it. So he twists truth toward, and particularly appeals to, nihilistic tendencies.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:You can't deny they all think things are broken. If that's not true, then already their perspectives and efforts are wrong/delusional.

and

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:Ignoring that there's a problem, or being unable to confront it, is to accept and remain in suffering, it's the problem most face.

At least we could agree that problem is being perceived and a fix is laid out. But it seems always somebody else's problem or this or that limitation! What might be good is to take a step back and see that distinguishing anything already creates at root "problem". One thing leads unavoidably to another and the resulted thinking is problematic as it now differentiates between good and evil, problems and fixes, this whole wheel of change that makes the world go round. Perhaps some desire for quality is possible in this, understanding properly causality, changes, nature of self and so on.

But it remains like in a shop: you touch it -- even look at it -- you break it and now you own it! Just hope you got some credit on you. As non-dualism goes nothing is broken, nothing is unbroken, nothing is broken and unbroken and nothing is neither. But that might not be the peaceful crutch us mortals are looking for.

Leyla Shen wrote:If "things weren't broken" you'd have nothing to complain about and no reason to say Dennis was speaking the truth.

Yeah but the thing is, I agreed with exactly that and expressed the same point. Even if 'broken' is only a perspective, that still leaves millions of people with delusion who will attest otherwise, only proving their problem or brokenness. Hence the quotes 'blemish' and 'taint' which are things that need to be recognized and resolved, not ignored.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:But that might not be the peaceful crutch us mortals are looking for.

Agreed, have to be realistic, to be unaware there is something wrong is what leaves so many people wallowing in their own...emotional and mental filth. Even if it's not anyone's fault, I have no sympathy for the ignorant that complain and cry while clinging to what is causing their suffering.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:Even if it's not anyone's fault, I have no sympathy for the ignorant that complain and cry while clinging to what is causing their suffering.

You should have sympathy simply because you just complained and cried about something you're thinking about as a problem, something you rather see go, which is also your suffering.

It's necessary opposition though, don't get me wrong.

Nietzsche and the great thinkers write or speak out of an always/already context that isn't necessarily spoken and yet implicit in their speaking.
Thoughts and Reality.

what you've got is:

subject/predicate
conceptualising mind
meaning maker

Most people haven't noticed the 'act' of conceptualising mind, they just use it and run with it and it goes where it goes.
That's not broken.
It is what it is and isn't what it isn't.

If you are of a philosophical bent then the predicates are interrogated.
Are the predicates certain or sustained by a regress of justifiers.
That's not broken.
It is what it is and isn't what it isn't.

More importantly is an access to Spirit, priomordial to any 'acts' of meaning making.
Spirit IS, that's certain.

So what is Spirit?

You don't get a predicate on that.
Quit fishing.

You said Spirit IS, that's certain. Yet "spirit" is meaningless in itself, explain what you are referring to. Quit avoiding.

You want a subject/predicate OK?

I gave you one.
Spirit IS, that's certain.

What's primordial to that?

It's my meaning.
It's my story and I'm sticking to it.
I'm not gonna justify it to you.
I 'get' it.
all roads lead to Rome.
ineffable silence.

Dennis Mahar wrote:What's primordial to that?

Sounding good.
Is it dependently originated? What is it caused by?

Sounding like a fundamental to me.

Sounding like a fundamental to me.

The odd thing is you have to have something fundamental in mind in order to say that.
What's on the menu?

I know the buck stops with me.
Sue me.

No need :) I'd be on the defence along with you.

Dennis Mahar wrote: I 'get' it.
all roads lead to Rome.
ineffable silence.