| Author
|
A thread that Hos nothing to do with music but all at the same time
|
illusions
Erebus
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
626
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 12:51
|
bukboy - are you fighting again ?
And im sure there will be plenty of people that are not gonna like that you just discredited all of Eastern Philosophy.
Open minds are the way forward  |
|
|
tokolosxi
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
15
Posts :
117
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 14:19
|
You can count me as one of them.I wonder if Bukboy has ever been to the East!
Happy Days! |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 15:47
|
Well my arguments against eastern philosophy are simply -
indian history is what 6000 years old?
chinese? 1000s b4 christ?
What did they get for it? stagnation and farming communities?
Then the french revolution comes around. Says no to god and king, capitalism happens and the world is transformed in hundreds of years by occidental philosophy. Unprecedented levels of prosperity, new technologies. Clear closed and shut case to me which approach is superior.
Im not fighting. Just cant stand mystics. |
|
|
|
Dharma Lab
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
342
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 18:47
|
Quote:
|
On 2006-12-29 15:47, bukboy wrote:
Well my arguments against eastern philosophy are simply -
indian history is what 6000 years old?
chinese? 1000s b4 christ?
What did they get for it? stagnation and farming communities?
Then the french revolution comes around. Says no to god and king, capitalism happens and the world is transformed in hundreds of years by occidental philosophy. Unprecedented levels of prosperity, new technologies. Clear closed and shut case to me which approach is superior.
Im not fighting. Just cant stand mystics.
|
|
Not to be too argumentative, but prosperity & technology do not supply happiness, it is our mode of thinking that does. Living in the U.S., the pinnacle of technology & capitalism, I see unhappy people everyday, and not because they lack comfort.
Thinking only in terms of what you can directly experience is like going thru life with only 1 eye open. Even Einstein was quoted as feeling the theory of relativity inside far before he could ever express and prove it. The same man refused Quantum Theory, in favor or cold, hard equations. The quantum theory set out by Bohr, Heisenberg, & even Einstein's work, has yet to be refuted today.
I agree, a lot of theoretical discussion may yield no tangible results in your life. Even Buddha disliked discussing metaphysics, as it didn't help people most of the time, only caused further seperation. A single ego, however, is a very narrow way to view the world. I think context plays an important role, & is often forgotten when theoretical and abstract discussion begins to fly...
 Keep The Faith,
Christian K. |
|
|
|
unproject
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
54
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 18:49
|
Quote:
|
Well my arguments against eastern philosophy are simply -
indian history is what 6000 years old?
chinese? 1000s b4 christ?
What did they get for it? stagnation and farming communities?
Then the french revolution comes around. Says no to god and king, capitalism happens and the world is transformed in hundreds of years by occidental philosophy. Unprecedented levels of prosperity, new technologies. Clear closed and shut case to me which approach is superior.
Im not fighting. Just cant stand mystics.
|
|
Eastern and Western Philosophy both have their own weak and strong points. Therefore claiming one totally pwnz the other is simply childish and a most terrible form of generalization.
The French Revolution is, well its a revolutionary cornerstone in the history for sure but its definitely not the only reason behind the economic and technologic advancement of today's modern countries. That goes much deeper.
Ah also, about one of your two killargh arguments... China is definitely not in stagnation and no farming commmunity any more. Look up for their recent economic growth data. |
|
|
|
Dharma Lab
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
342
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 18:55
|
Quote:
|
China is definitely not in stagnation and no farming commmunity any more. Look up for their recent economic growth data.
|
|
You've got that right....
Keep The Faith,
Christian K. |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 19:09
|
Yes China is no longer stagnating after adopting western pragmatic economic policies including ruthless industrialisation. But b4 that?
I personally have never seen a benefit that was not physical. Mental crutches like spirituality might work but only in ways that could also be explained by other approaches like long term self-interest, pro-active behaviour, drive to creativity. All very human non-spiritual mature aspects that do not need explanations stemming from spirituality.
The whole of oriental philosophy is an unclear mishmash of unclear statements that are open to interpretation. After reading some very intelligent occidental logical writing like hume and kant and seeing the accomplishment, the former vanishes in impact or validity.
In any case what can u say that oriental philosophy has achieved or am I being a spoil sport for being insistant on results that are clear, definite and reproducible? |
|
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 21:07
|
I think that your concept is a believable one in a strictly spiritual sense..like some have said it sounds physically impossible, but I understand what you're saying with being the product of generations before you. Maybe this energy that is passed along can be in the form of wise words from your elders, or even daily events that involve some kind of a "transfer" like this..
Try not to turn this into a philosophical conversation...you believe what you believe, and that's ok  |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Dec 29, 2006 23:06
|
I think what he wrote could mean absolutely anything.
U are interpreting his words in ways that are not linearly related to what he said.
I think ur version sounds like the collective strife and effort that went in2 making our genes and culture. And it sounds a lot better than saying some life energy that just hangs around after death.
But at the same time uve sapped the sensational aspect from his statement which was the main reason Y it sounded profound to him in the 1st place.
So which is it, are u right and he was expressing himself badly (i.e. he should learn to use english correctly) or are u wrong and not really interpreting his statement correctly? |
|
|
|
Freeflow
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
60
Posts :
3709
Posted : Dec 30, 2006 02:43
|
i dont understand why it would be so strange to believe in a life force, even if it might be lots of details to it.
sure there is a force or more correctly force´s that made all this happen. call it what you want, believe in what you want.
there is probably not a dude with long beard with white clothes that made it all happen
|
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Dec 30, 2006 18:00
|
I have to notice that the same people from topic to topic feel the need to argue any kind of "right brain" perspective. It looks like your ego is trying to make sure that you're not going to even consider that point of view. Cause you know that you can't change our mind and the only thing you can do is to make sure that you don't change it
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Dec 30, 2006 20:48
|
Quote:
|
On 2006-12-29 23:06, bukboy wrote:
I think what he wrote could mean absolutely anything.
U are interpreting his words in ways that are not linearly related to what he said.
I think ur version sounds like the collective strife and effort that went in2 making our genes and culture. And it sounds a lot better than saying some life energy that just hangs around after death.
But at the same time uve sapped the sensational aspect from his statement which was the main reason Y it sounded profound to him in the 1st place.
So which is it, are u right and he was expressing himself badly (i.e. he should learn to use english correctly) or are u wrong and not really interpreting his statement correctly?
|
|
I'm saying that I could see scientific aspects of what he said impossible or not making sense, but that the ideas are more believeable in a spiritual sense.
I agree with the part of being a "product of previous generations" and all related to that..I doubt he's talking about physical energy transfers here. |
|
|
|
bukboy
Hyperboreans
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
803
Posted : Dec 30, 2006 20:48
|
Touchée - That really stings. From a hippy whose most lucid argument is Nyaah Nyaah Nyah Nyah Nyaah - we're not gonna listen to u.
This is very fucked up maannn. |
|
|
|
l337
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
55
Posts :
817
Posted : Dec 31, 2006 14:53
|
Quote:
|
On 2006-12-29 01:22, sy000321 wrote:
Quote:
|
It's obvious that consciousness operates independently from our body and is capable to survive human death (near death experience etc.).
|
|
unproven and not scientifical
|
|
the second law of thermodynamics is also unproven, it just cant be disproved...and therefore is scientific....
on the same note one cannot disprove that people have near death expierences...
make what you want of what i just said 
also i am not sure if any of you have ever had a outer body expierence or have had an astral projection expierence
when you expierence these things my friends... your mind changes for what is fact and what is not as well as what science can prove or dissprove for that matter
i have had expierences which are unxplainable yet have been very real, you then just except that this is part of reality, because it is...
the 2nd law of thernodynamics does state an increase in entropy, however there is another law that energy cannnot be created or destroyed...
entropy is just a grand loss of heat(which is energy) in laymans terms, or rather the diminishing of energy, not the destroying of energy, that energy is still going somewhere, it is not evaporating into nothing, as energy cannot be destroyed, it just is, as one sun dies another is born.... you get my drift
we are all energy creatures, and we live because of our body energy as well as our internal "soul" energy which defines us as you we are in this life and who we were...
i think i am going to leave it at that for now...
these are my beliefs, none of them may be right and i dont expect any of you to agree, just read the parts about laws and energy, because that is what is important here
nice thread btw |
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Dec 31, 2006 18:13
|
All of the science is based on ideas that so far have not been disproved. Even our "basic" understanding of matter is based on idea of atom. But than again we see that the atom is 95% empty. Even nucleus is empty. So how can empty space make hard matter? How can that be a basis of science when the fundamental idea has not been proved?
And have you noticed "that thing" with 95%? Like 95% of human DNA is junk and 95% of the space is empty and 95% of the atom is empty and we use only 5% of our brain what makes the rest of 95% of unused human brain. Also our senses and science can register only 5% of electromagnetical spectrum (lumines matter) while the other 95% we can't see or register with any technology.
Is there a message in this? I don't know... but if you do your homework you'll find out some amazing stuff.
The term "atom" it self has a meaning that has nothing to do with today science. Greek term "atomos" is: A = not, and TOMOS = cut. So indivisible or uncuttable are asumptions... "not cut" or "don't cut" is the obvious meaning.
Science has "proved" that Greeks ware wrong... atoms can be split. Well that is an asumption as well. What if the science is using a word electron to describe what greeks refer to as atom? The greeks stated that atoms are divided by empty space?
"Given that all matter is composed of atoms (the ultimate and unchanging particles), then all changes must be as a result of the movement of atoms. However, in order to move there must be a void-a space entirely empty of matter-through which atoms can move from place to place."
Isn't that just how electrons behave? How can we be sure that we use the word atom to describe the same thing that greeks had in mind? Is it proven? I don't think so.
But the mainstream religion is equaly ignorant and upside down. It's also using terms that are completly wrong. For instance "lucifer" is simply the ancient name for planet Venus. She brings light because Venus rises just before the Sun does. The green flags with "moon" and the star are the flags of Venus. Colour of Venus is green and the flag has crescent of Venus and the star of Venus.
Christ is from Greek word Christós, which means literally The Anointed One. To "Anoit" is to "grease with OIL" and Anoited One is "greased with OIL". Any hidden story here? ... I don't know. Do your homework.
Term "Church" comes from Scotish "Kirk" and back to the Greeks (again) from godess that tempt people to her home, hypnotise them to become animals and feed of them. What the fuck should that mean?
All the stories go back to some for of trinity (vishna, brahma, shiva). "IS" (isis, ishtar), amon (amen, aum, ohm, on) "RA" and the god of Saturn "EL". So believing in Saturn you became ELder or ELected. ELevated in society and a part of ELite. Maybe out of that we have a children of IS, RA and EL? I don't know! Do your homework!
So I believe this should be enough for every1 to get interested in the origins of their belifes. Nevermind is it science or religion. Those are the 2 sides of a single coin made for you to flip them while you waste your life seeking the truth in dialectic society based on false dualism.
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
