 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 473 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614087 Today 0 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
do you know what you are doing when you say or think the words "my life" ? you are taking the posessive word, "my", and then the object or experience "life", and seperating them . think about that for a moment. you say, "there is me", and then there is "the experience of being alive" so if your "me" is seperate from "life", where is your "me" in that instance? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hold on there now, woah |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"me" is the abstraction one creates of oneself due to the brains ability to abstract the self from other objects in reality, and indeed other objects in reality from each other. how or why the brain does this is unknown, but a common argument is the hard problem, whether or not the self is hard emergence or soft emergence. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
wow that was DEEEEEEP. Let's try to reach 100 on this chaps, cos if there's one thing we need more of..... it's this. Why not try to use the following words in your follow up posts: self-actualisation objectification freudian cognitive Vibert |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Did you give your demo CD to DJ Krush? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the cognitive self-actualisation of the freudian mind strives to be objectification of vibert |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Anyway, I've got a dissociative disorder so I can't really answer this question from your planet. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
why do things exist as opposed to nothing existing at all? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"the brain abstracts the self from other objects" what are you talking about? Thought IS the self, thought generates the self, sustains the self. It also warps the self. The brain isn't thought, even if it houses thought. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ego is the self |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i did actually. he recognized me too which was weird |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what's self? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Im still pissed that nobody could post me a picture of the GESCOM HAT, I mean I had pretty much a full day of Gescom, came home, and wanted to see the hat. "My life sucks" ....Monoid 2008 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
life is a mystery, everyone must stand alone. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
my me is.... where me is, i mean |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you should consider not making life so difficult for yourself with irregular thought patterns. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i meant the mind.. sorry about that. consciousness is a process between the environment and the brain, which gives rise to the mind. and thus the abstraction of self from reality. OK!?@?# |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
read Richard Dawkins' God Delusion - he explains all about it in there, how there are two different types of people and how they view one's sense of self. Also he explains there's no God so none of this matters. Cos nothing does. I feel a guilt free killing spree coming on... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
dog life, gonads |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Consciousness is also thought. The relationship between thought and your environment is always corrupt. Your senses (see, hear, taste, touch, smell) alert you to your environment, but that's purely a physical process - then thought comes, makes an observation on it and files it (consciousness). However, that observation is always warped, because thought it always incomplete, contradictory and conditioned. Thought obstructs you from interpreting anything clearly, only your senses can respond clearly to stimuli. Because of thought we're almost incapable of experience truth or reality as it actually is. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I hate Dawkins, he's a berk. He's no different to any other religious fundamentalist. What's the difference? Both trying to force feed their opinions on everybody else. It's futile. And he doesn't have an open mind either, you can see that quite clearly by watching his programmes. His ideas are completely fixed, his conclusions immoveable. If Dawkins wants to do something good for the planet, he should go away and say nothing. Anyone with half a brain knows what's what - we don't need him to patronise us. Does he really think his 6-part series will change the minds of some looney ragheads? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i both sense and think you're a bellend |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
If Barcode wants to do something good for the planet, he should go away and say nothing. Anyone with half a brain knows what's what - we don't need him to patronise us. Does he really think his thread posting will change the minds of some looney ragheads? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Such a pity you can't employ that single brain cell to come up with a counter-argument. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
cogito ergo sum, sum res cogitans |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I agree with you Barcode he is a berk. But he's also right and he's absolutely nothing like some fucking crazy fundamentalist Christian or Islamic nutcase. That's a stupid, ignorant thing to say. He backs his arguments up with sound scientific evidence, not some fucking myth about a sky fairy. I concede he's arrogant and his attitude is agressive but there's no getting away from the fact he's correct. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if you really want to get a hold of dawkins viewpoint lecture is pretty good (sorry for the ton of ted links). I think he can be a little aggressive but the point is, why is it bad to be openly anti religion. We spend alot of time trying to pander t people avoiding talking about religion because we feel its not right to offend someones god, but they on the other hand have no such restrictions. I think he understands its impossible to argue with someone of a religious disposistion but its a really frustrating sittuation. the common ansswer from most agnostic people is to simply not bother argueing, but that fact is religion manages to play a huge role in our every day lives and we are unable to criticise this. The idea of open mindedness is a bit of a twisted logic aswell. Not in terms of Dawkins, but people of a scientific, fact based mind set tend to answer with sceptisism. But simply retorting that it is closed minded to disagree is quite frankly stupid. There is no reason to live your life on the premisis of "you never know". It avoids the point. The fact is "yes" you may never know a certain yes or no to such questions as religion, aliens or gorvernment conspiracy or whether Johns mum is a lesbien but there are too many possiblilities to embrace all of them. Why not choose the ones that have a much more solid backing than the "what if's" in life. Im really not very good at explaining my ideas about this stuff but I hope at the least the jist makes sense. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what does 'bell end' mean, are you somehow implying i have a big butt? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you guys ever read U.G. Krishnamurti? he's fucking awesome |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Your bell end is the end of your penis, helmet if you will. Now consider "Your Bell End" you are taking the posessive word, "your", and then the object "Bell" ding-dong and "End" the finale the last point. think about it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
THIS THREAD MENG THIS THREAD |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
helmet. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
haha |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
