You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
(nobody)
...and 425 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614083
Today 3
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
A thread about nothing
 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 20:49 [#02206078]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to pulseclock: #02206074



select the run feature as your attacks are useless against
the many pokemon armed with a lv 10 sarcasm beam


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-13 20:52 [#02206080]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to AMPI MAX: #02206078



yes the RUN feature, which i usually forget i have until
it's too late, and i never prepare myself with Xltronic
balls containg Full HP as i am diseased with the Act On
Impulse virus. I will battle my way through the dark cave
instead, i like the random unknown ghost battles.


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2008-05-13 20:53 [#02206081]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



watch out for the elder geist.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-13 20:55 [#02206083]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to glasse: #02206081



yes i will rue the day we cross paths


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 20:58 [#02206084]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to pulseclock: #02206083



Beware cuntychuck he has an insufferable twat pseudo punch
attack


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2008-05-13 21:03 [#02206087]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



i think i will go vent off a bit w some halo or maybe a
movie


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 21:05 [#02206088]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to glasse: #02206087



Halo? You have a wife you fool (unless it's halo 3 cos the
guns are so perfectly rendered n'all)


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2008-05-13 21:06 [#02206090]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



yea its 3. my wife is asleep.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-13 21:08 [#02206092]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker



yep me too, im going to liberty city. i think we ran out of
things to say :)


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 21:08 [#02206093]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to glasse: #02206090



Happy shoot'n.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-13 21:10 [#02206094]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to rockenjohnny: #02206092



me too maybe, i was gonna goto Lardossia or The Other People
PLace and drift into sleep, but there's work for Niko to be
"doink" (Russian slang for doing)


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 21:10 [#02206095]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to rockenjohnny: #02206092



You did but not me cos I AM MORPHEUS.


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 21:13 [#02206096]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to AMPI MAX: #02206095



Don't tell me you cheap buncha tarts are going to leave me
and cuddle up with youre next gen gaming? I have an xbox :(
Stay with me: You know, i think scientology is alright and
that your rubbish on existence is all crap, please discuss


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-13 21:15 [#02206097]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to AMPI MAX: #02206096



hahah i'd rather discuss the abnormality of tom cruise's
personal stabiltiy, but Niko is cooler, sorry Ampi, i bid
you adieu


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 21:17 [#02206099]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to pulseclock: #02206097



NOOOO. Leaving me now makes you all philosophy pussies! You
can't leave!


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-13 21:20 [#02206100]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to AMPI MAX: #02206099



you should just make some more fat beats for us to be
jealous of! WITH your Xbox to boot!


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2008-05-13 21:21 [#02206101]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



ok well, cx you probably don't want to read most of that.

seriously though, i relate to what you were saying, and if
you know how i believe then you know i believe the wolf is
actually real. it might mean something similar to you or
completely different I don't know, but to me the whole
people turning into the wolf thing is a sign of the wolf
coming to you through people. i would say just give a good
hard look at all the things in your life maybe there is
something bad for you going on, whatever that may be.


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-13 21:32 [#02206102]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular



I'm not sure of the wolf. It sounds like it means something
specific. Beware 'the teeth' however......
(this is my demon, first personified in a dream. It just IS
teeth. I have heard of a few cases of teeth dreams and they
mean bad things). All can be overcome if you don't let your
own 'TEETH' trick you into thinking they are your friend.
This means realising your anxieties and defeating them! You
can do that
*presses play on self motivational montage music tape*


 

offline cx from Norway on 2008-05-14 00:11 [#02206111]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular



lol in fact i did read the entire thread.
and what im most compelled to do is reply to the buddhism
post by rockenjohnny or whatever.

from what people tell me about it, buddhism seems like a lie
to me.
i believe that there wouldn't be consciousness without the
accumulated experience of stimuli, and memories, and that
there is no difference between the external world, and the
consciousness.

in other words one can never get rid of any ego, because any
moment you perceive the world, you automatically create an
ego.
this is because of a function in the brain, where if i
perceive a bottle of coke, i KNOW im not that bottle of
coke, hence ME is created.

furthermore, even if you can 'tone down' the ego, you're not
really toning it down anyway.
the ego is an accumulation of all your stimuli and memories,
and the current experience you're in, no matter what it may
be, so to escape that is death and nothing else.


 

offline cx from Norway on 2008-05-14 00:12 [#02206112]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular



about the wolf;

the wolf can be almost anyone.
but more than anything it's an uncertainty about the
external world, one where many dark/evil possbilities
arise.
hold up.


 

offline J198 from Maastricht (Netherlands, The) on 2008-05-14 01:33 [#02206122]
Points: 7342 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



the illusion of reality

warning: might leave you more confused than before.


 

offline Gwely Mernans from 23rd century entertainment (Canada) on 2008-05-14 01:59 [#02206123]
Points: 9856 Status: Lurker | Followup to J198: #02206122



interesting program.
"dont try to understand it, just marvel at it" lol


 

offline J198 from Maastricht (Netherlands, The) on 2008-05-14 02:14 [#02206124]
Points: 7342 Status: Lurker | Followup to Gwely Mernans: #02206123 | Show recordbag



marlowe was kind enough to let us know about this
documentary in his 'bbc - atom' thread.

you can find part one and two in google video by searching
bbc atom, while part three isn't labeled as such.

the one i just linked to summarizes many things from the
first 2 parts so you could still watch it on its own.


 

offline cx from Norway on 2008-05-14 02:43 [#02206131]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular



thanks, i watched it, but these scientific concepts are
nothing new to me to be honest.
i already knew about most of it although the history behind
antimatter was new to me.

it isa very good docu though.


 

offline Gwely Mernans from 23rd century entertainment (Canada) on 2008-05-14 03:11 [#02206141]
Points: 9856 Status: Lurker



It's funny that the guy talking about atoms is made of atoms
and he needs you to observe him to even make him exist.


 

offline cx from Norway on 2008-05-14 03:12 [#02206143]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular | Followup to cx: #02206111



to elaborate on the buddhism point.

the basic idea is: can you visualize, conceptualize or grasp
in any way your own ego, self and i, without referencing
external objects?
we know that babies when they are born do not have a sense
of depth, and this this depth is created as the brain
receives more stimuli. we may be able to say the same thing
about the self, in the sense that the ego is developed and
evolves based on the external world.

when i think about my self, i think about autechre, my face,
my arms, my cigarettes, my dreams, people around me that i
know or dont know, basically everything around me and inside
me in my head.

if buddhism is about not seeing the world through an ego,
but rather seeing it more for what it 'is', then how can you
escape all this and see reality from an objective viewpoint,
since a subject can't by definition be objective? wouldn't
an objective observer really not observe anything at all, or
maybe everything at once?

i don't know the details of buddhism, but something is not
right the way i see it.


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 06:45 [#02206196]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular



I personally feel that buddhism is a perfectionist ideal
that just isn't for me. It's the difficulty of 'circumstance
and react' that keeps life varied and constant. I want to
get angry, feel jealous, feel unhappy. It's the FIGHT
against these aspects of yourself that define you, not the
mathematical process of deconstructing it. Realising
yourself sounds nice and there are aspects of the general
philosophy i would like to embrace, but all in all I dispise
the meaningless thing i imagine myself becoming. I want
there to be bad times and good times, confusion and resolve,
the petit little flickers of 'completion' in a life
otherwise full of uncertainty of myself. I want to fight
these things knowing I could easily lose. These ups and
downs define me, 'total completion' is just too total for it
to truly be what i have defined as me! Leave me with my
sicknesses, leave me to cultivate the goodness in myself.
Thats the whole point of my time on this planet.
Plus buddhism is for gays n pussies


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 07:09 [#02206199]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker



i agree that to pursue the monastic path is an extreme
decision. its one which i have considered in the past, but i
value interpersonal and intimate relationships so its not
something i currently desire.

all the same, i think its important and useful to question
the role of ego in our daily lives, and to be conscious of
the decisions we base upon it. we make egocentric judgements
when we are convinced that we know what is best. in reality,
one size does not fit all.

if we can question the role of ego in our lives, we become
more open to the perspectives of others. its very liberating
to know and to accept when one is wrong, to be open to the
knowledge that one's own truth is not absolute. self
awareness derived from a questioning nature amounts to real
freedom.


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 07:37 [#02206203]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to rockenjohnny: #02206199



I think ego wouldn't be a problem if we could all just
relate to it. If we could talk fluently to that part of
ourselves we could face our demons with clarity, we could
make the right choices. Making the right choices is life,
there are so many choices to be made but only a handful are
right. So life is a rocky journey of good descision making,
the bad ones have repercussions that must be avoided. If
humanity was in touch with its ego and confronted itself,
forgetting short sighted mindsets, then the right choices
would be made. Then the Nazi's just wouldn't have happened,
nobody likes Nazi's.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-14 07:42 [#02206204]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to AMPI MAX: #02206196



What you're saying makes sense, you want to be able to
connect with ALL people and emotions and feelings, but the
mind works like a box full of wires, if you just want one
wire out of the tangled up mess, you're going to HAVE to
figure out how to rearrange the OTHER wires as well,
Bhuddist monks must take some sort of Vow to do this, but
anyone can do this in you're daily life, it's your choice.

What i mean with the box of wires analogy is that you can't
have feelings without ego, you can't have knowldge/wisdom
without experience. As soon as you FEEL something, you will
ultimately be preparing yourself to feel the oppostie way
about something else, maybe.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 07:55 [#02206206]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker



i do agree, i find it hard to imagine an existence without
some kind of egoistic filter. we can see the lengths
buddhist monks go to in pursuit of non-self: uniform
appearance, shaved heads and simple lifestyle are all
undertaken to nullify the ego.

i like your box of wires analogy, pulseclock; for me it
indicates both the nature of the mind, and also a means to
approach to it. opening up the box is an active process of
self-awareness. each time one opens up the box they become
more familiar with the contents; in time, the connections
can be traced, understood, and even rewired.

i find it interesting to consider when perception would be
like without ego, supposing it is possible. could it allow
for a more profound awareness of the nature of things - one
without distortion or preconception? its quite a different
argument from the idea that perception is conditional on the
filter being in place ..


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-14 08:28 [#02206213]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to rockenjohnny: #02206206



I think if we ever do achieve perception with the ego being
absent (excluding the fact that this probably DOES happen)
It probably won't be remembered, atleast not long-term, It's
probably the bits and pieces of "time" throughout life that
more or less pass us by.


 

offline yoyoyo from cornwall on 2008-05-14 08:39 [#02206219]
Points: 1543 Status: Lurker



vinyls


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 08:46 [#02206220]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to pulseclock: #02206204



It's not so much 'understanding' eachother and ourselves in
a complete sense, it's evaluating the nature of both things.
I feel you are not supposed to untangle your wires cos the
massive ball of knots is YOU. Your mission is to personally
and slowly untangle small bits of these through events and
contemplation and finnish life with a good rating on the
happy chart. Your highscore is how content you managed to
make yourself before your existence is complete. The only
other aspect is that you have a duty (which is a remarkable
built in machanism) to help others in their quest to achieve
a nice score on 'Gods game of pain and smiles'. All that
matters is passing a piece of yourself on and ensuring that
it does good somehow. START NOW


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 08:49 [#02206221]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular | Followup to yoyoyo: #02206219



YOYOYO is happy about vinyls and has passed that joy onto
me: he has made a GOOD choice, therefore he has earnt
himself a point. Carry on like this and God will favour you


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-14 08:54 [#02206223]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to AMPI MAX: #02206220



the last thing i will say is that what you are saying
pertains to YOU, and should be an opinion held by YOU,
that's a problem for ME because i choose to see life
differently

you're basically saying that they way Bhuddist monks live is
wrong, or not fufilling, but it's their choice, their life,
just like nazis

but with the nazis and others, (slave trade, other horrible
situations) were a result of powerful authority figures who
pressured their views and opinions about life onto others.

you can do with whatever you want in your box of wires, but
like you said I am in my own box, so therfore, my contents
are my responsibility.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 09:12 [#02206227]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



How can there be a non-self? We are not the same as other
animals, they have non-self.

Thought has imprisoned the mind, and I'm extremely doubtful
whether you can strip away the layers and completely
uncondition yourself. Try it sometime, you will fail.

You have to assimilate yourself into this culture or you
will go mad - this man made machine is too powerful to
resist.

Is the monk who sits on a mountain top or takes a vow of
silence or chastity for 10 years living in truth? How can
chastity be truth, it's the complete opposite of what nature
designed you for. The Buddhist's suppress reality. If you
want to renounce the ego you have to destroy thought
outright - if you destroy thought outright you cannot
function, you would not even know who or what you are.

Buddhism is simply another belief system, it may be more
appealing as it is non-violent and accepts scientific
thinking. But belief itself is the contaminator, it's that
what atrophies the brain.

Can we ever live with true intelligence? Collectivity. That
means accepting things as they are, without judgment,
without outer reform. If intelligent perception can
instantly mutate the individual's thinking then wider reform
will come naturally. Any attempt to force change creates
conflict, and we're back to square one.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-14 09:18 [#02206232]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker



" Any attempt to force change creates
conflict, and we're back to square one. "

I agree

Now isn't that the theme to almost everybody's life


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 09:29 [#02206241]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02206227



well, studying the mind through meditation is a
long-established practise with proven results. people
wouldnt do it if it didnt work.

its very subjective to state that any process is destined to
fail, that assimilation into cultural norms is crucial; or
for that matter, what is and isnt natural behavior.

furthermore, how could knowledge of the mind be dervied from
a suppression of reality? wouldnt an acceptance of all
objective and subjective factors be required?

theres nothing strictly 'buddhist' about the process.
awareness of the self and the transendence of ego differ
greatly from the rigours of control and dogma.


 

offline cx from Norway on 2008-05-14 09:39 [#02206247]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular | Followup to Barcode: #02206227



I think that in no matter what circumstance you are in, the
basic functions of your brain works the same.
That means, you are still observing from a self, and you are
still living a day to day life, even if you are a monk with
a shaved head in the mountains.
The stuff about losing connection to your self and seeing
the world more objectively is a higher emergent level of
consciousness, like when monks sit in sanctuaries.
The fact that they see it as a contrast to western
consumerism doesn't surprise me, but I'm also disappointed
that they do.

The fact is that a human will always consume, regardless of
if it is with money, thought or physical things like
gardening.
The main function of a human is to consume, anything and
everything.
And the mere act of shaving your head is a type of
consumption, because you're actively doing something based
on a belief, you are CONSUMING an impulse to do something.
The self is in essence processing a problem that it sees,
namely hair in this instance, and then removing it.

And I feel this is not very unlike western life of a typical
person, because the ideas that emerge on top of the
consciousness itself, are all the same, except the symbols
and meanings are different.
Shaved head, monestary, mountain, meditation, clothing,
peace and quiet, are all the exact same thing as walmarts,
room with lots of computer games, stress and malls.
But you can't escape the true nature of your brains
processing of stimuli.

So yeah, I believe we have to separate the thought process,
from the function of the brain, the way it works so to
speak.
The symbols we create are all mental constructs, and they
are all different, while the underlying functionality of the
brain, makes us all the same.
In that sense nothing really matters, and it doesn't, but
the point is to drop the values we create, and rather see it
more objectively.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 09:56 [#02206255]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to cx: #02206247



i agree entirely that environments, cultural norms and
symbols exact partial influences upon psychological
development. that is not to discount their relevance.

a child raised without nurturing stimuli suffer dramatically
impaired development. research has found that these
shortcomings become increasingly difficult to overcome once
the brain begins to mature.

on a less tangible level, i have a slightly different take
on perception to you. you describe perception as having its
origin in the self. my understanding is that perception
occurs naturally, and is filtered by the self.

for me, the development of the mind during childhood, as i
have described, reinforces this idea. children who are
nurtured or neglected perceive the behavior of others
differently, and respond accordingly. the perception was
there to begin with; it is tempered by the sense of self,
which itself is conditioned by the environment in which it
resides.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 09:57 [#02206258]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



I would agree almost entirely. It's only your cultural
upbringing that dictates where you direct your impulses. But
I'm not sure you can separate the thought processes. As
Krishnamurti said, the observer is the observed. How can
thought separate from thought and examine it? This is an
illusion. I think we're banging our heads against a brick
wall if we think this is achievable.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 10:05 [#02206262]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02206258



from experience, i must say that its entirely possible to
objectively observe thought. during meditation, one
exercises detachment from physical sensations and mental
contents. again, this is an act of 'letting things be', of
not engaging them; it is unlike rejecting or blocking out
stimuli.

as such, during meditation the stream of consciousness
becomes apparent. thoughts stream by like passing traffic.
we have the choice to engage with individual thoughts, to
travel off on a tangent. alternatively, one can remain still
and watch things pass by. it takes practise, but its
definitely possible.

i find it amazing to see how much 'stuff' is in there. im
actually planning to do a visual study of stream of
consciousness. i find that certain artists have explored
this, i just hadnt looked at it that way before. certainly,
there are literary examples: kerouac springs immediately to
mind.



 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 10:08 [#02206266]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to rockenjohnny: #02206262



i was looking at brett whiteleys art recently. the vast,
sprawling panels of 'alchemy' really do reflect an
interrelated stream of consciousness. its such a good
representation of how the mind works.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2008-05-14 10:16 [#02206276]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker



Found this quote of Sun Ra from a Drexciya fan-site,

“Man has to rise above himself...transcend himself.
Because the way he is, he can only follow reproductions of
idea’s, because he’s just a reproduction himself. He did
not come from the creative system, he came from the
reproductive system. But if he evolutes himself, he will
come up from the creative system. What I’m determined to
do is to cause man to create himself by simply rising up out
of the reproductive system into the creative system . Darwin
didn’t have the complete picture. I’ve been talking
about evolution too but I’ve spelt it e-v-e-r.”



 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 10:21 [#02206281]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



Again, your thoughts are not separate from you. You talk as
though there is a separate entity in you observing the
thought. It is a bit like the dog looking in the river and
thinking it's looking at another dog. Human think they are
mentally sophisticated enough to achieve it, and that's the
illusion.

Besides, thought is completely contaminated by your culture,
so even if thought could examine itself it would be the
contaminated looking at the contaminated, and would achieve
nothing.

The search to self-discovery only ends when you realise that
there is nothing to discover.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 10:25 [#02206288]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker | Followup to pulseclock: #02206276



He's contradicting himself. He says that "man can only
follow a reproduction of ideas" - quite right. Then he says
man can evolve to become creative, how can he possible do
that when his entire knowledge base consists of second hand
information? It's a nonsense. Besides, what is the creative
system he is talking about, there is no creative system in
humanity, as every human is merely a reproduction of ideas.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 10:29 [#02206292]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02206281



no, i wouldnt say that thought is separate from the mind.
they are an indispensable part, but nonetheless, not
representative of the entire mind. thoughts arise from the
mind; the mind is not a separate 'entity' at all.

sincerely, if the mind stopped at thought alone then we
would not be able to achieve an awareness of the stream of
consciousness. that, of course, is not the case!

i would also hesitate to say that the mind is completely
contaminated by culture. cultural norms are undoubtedly a
major influence in cognitive development, but there is more
to the world, more to experience, than norms alone.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2008-05-14 10:39 [#02206303]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



The mind is the container of thought. If the mind stops, all
thought stops. I would have to disagree though, the mind is
completely contaminated by culture, I am not talking merely
about the traditions of culture, but everything you think
and know has been imposed on you. It's inevitable. Every
scrap of information is passed on to you, from birth and
that pool of information is entirely second hand knowledge.
Then from that contaminated pool you make what you think are
you own decisions, but they are inescapably influenced by
the conditioning of others. You build a massive library of
contaminated knowledge, full of prejudices, fears, truths
and untruths. There is no clear thinking there at all. And
from that base thought is supposed to examine thought and
clear it up? Impossible.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2008-05-14 10:53 [#02206311]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02206303



i agree that we are conditioned by cultural norms. but we
should also accomodate direct experiences. these include all
all kinds of somatic responses, an even the experience of
thought itself.

its certainly true that thought is conditioned by cultural
norms. accordingly, the mind's experience of reality is
conditioned by thought. but look at it the other way around:
consider also the mind's experience of thought itself, as i
have described in my last few posts.

that is the means by which to examine thought objectively
and to observe all of the external influences as they are,
for what they are. from experience, ill say that its
absolutely possible.


 


Messageboard index