What can you even do?

File: 205 KB, 466x625, gautam_buddha_in_meditation.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 07:37:41 2012 No.2686917 [Reply] [Original]

What can you even do?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 07:45:40 2012 No.2686920 What can you even know?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 07:48:40 2012 No.2686922 Wh?at si doG

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:06:40 2012 No.2686938 >>2686922 great question

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:07:40 2012 No.2686939
File: 39 KB, 612x617, aum1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I just woke up in my girlfriends bed. She'd left to visit her mother (not being able to sleep after a night out on 200mg of mdma).
When I first came-to I found she's left me a new t-shirt of the sort I usually wear, that she'd hand-stitched the AUM symbol on, almost a foot tall up the side.
There's also a little indecipherable hindi written across the nape.
So to answer your question, I can wear that shirt.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:12:39 2012 No.2686940 >>2686939 You could also not wear the shirt. You could give it to a homeless person. You could burn it. You could burn your girlfriend You could burn both How to live without a conflict?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:16:40 2012 No.2686942 Someone should tell this guy that if he'll not move that energy ball will smash his head.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:22:39 2012 No.2686945

>>2686940
That is not conflict, that is a tiny and simplified selection of some possible actions I could take. I may as well take a book from the library of babel, open a page at random and follow the instructions therein.
But for me the shortest route to happiness involves wearing the gift, as it is both thoughtful and aesthetically pleasing.

Last night, as the girls danced and all our jaws ground away like we were chewing cud, I sat near the back of the warehouse and meditated. The music was ear-shatteringly loud, and unintelligible symbols with an ethereal glow were thrown up and torn down behind my closed eyes by the thrum of the bass.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:27:39 2012 No.2686948 >>2686945 Who said anything about happiness?

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:34:39 2012 No.2686958

>>2686948
I have a number of alternate responses to that question.

-Happiness as fufilment or true peace, I believe the Bodhisattva's have said rather a lot on the subject.
-Why should it matter who brought it up?
-Who is there to mention anything? Either The Universe or it's emptiness mentioned it, there is no "who" to have spoken.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:37:40 2012 No.2686963

>>2686958

>-Happiness as fufilment or true peace, I believe the Bodhisattva's have said rather a lot on the subject.

If it's happiness in this sense, then you should definitely give away the shirt. Your attachment to it, they would tell you, is a hindrance to happiness.

>-Why should it matter who brought it up?

Generally when people are having a conversation about something, it's a little weird to just bring up something else entirely.

>-Who is there to mention anything? Either The Universe or it's emptiness mentioned it, there is no "who" to have spoken.

In this sense we are both the universe and we are both expressions of the totality of existence. Further, there is most certainly a "who". Just because we are the universe does not mean we are indistinct.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:45:39 2012 No.2686973 File: 127 KB, 410x599, bodhidharma.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2686917 Nothing.

>>	i love cockraoches my uncle was on when he was dead Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:45:39 2012 No.2686974 >>2686917 i dunno man like... nirvana

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:46:40 2012 No.2686976 >>2686917 Not everything, nor nothing. Anything.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:51:40 2012 No.2686982 Does it matter if YOU change?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:56:42 2012 No.2686991 >>2686982 does change matter? Is matter? What is change? What is? What? who? Why? Why why?

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 08:57:40 2012 No.2686995

>>2686963
>they would tell you

>Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.
>Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
>Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
>Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.
>Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
>But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.
I like the shirt. I am neither Buddhist nor Bodhisatva, no plans to become an ascetic. The happiness they speak of is far more esoteric, and i am satisfied with this that I have found.

>it's a little weird to just bring up something else entirely.
Consider it a response to "How can you live without conflict?" Answer: Happily.

>Further, there is most certainly a "who". Just because we are the universe does not mean we are indistinct.
I do not believe that is the case, you appear to be speaking from under the delusion of the ego.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:03:39 2012 No.2687005

>>2686995

>I like the shirt. I am neither Buddhist nor Bodhisatva,

Then why cite them? Did you think it lent you some authority?

>no plans to become an ascetic.

I'm beginning to think you know very little about Buddhism. They aren't ascetics.

>The happiness they speak of is far more esoteric, and i am satisfied with this that I have found.

The happiness they speak of is happiness. The happiness you have found is ash. You, of course, will not acknowledge this, because despite trying to present yourself as someone high-minded, you are a base hedonist, I think.

>Consider it a response to "How can you live without conflict?" Answer: Happily.

Well then it begs the question "How do we live happily?" And if you think you've got a definitive answer to that, I'd like to hear it. I expect you to post dime store sentimentalism in response.

>I do not believe that is the case, you appear to be speaking from under the delusion of the ego.

Of course I am. As are you. Escaping the ego is a task of monumental difficulty, I have not even begun to attempt it, and I probably never will. I may start with something simpler, like climbing Everest, and work my way up.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:06:39 2012 No.2687012 >>2687005 Typical dogmatic.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:12:39 2012 No.2687023 >>2686917 Shit, piss, get dressed, eat some food. When you get tired, take a nap.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:19:39 2012 No.2687029

>>2687005
>Then why cite them?
They were pertinent to the discussion.
>They aren't ascetics.
That does not prevent their practicing ascetisim to a large degree, and it certainly had an impact on how the Gautama arrived at his philosophy. Why flat-out deny this connection? Further to that, I've never claimed to know a great deal about Buddhism.
>The happiness they speak of is happiness. The happiness you have found is ash. You, of course, will not acknowledge this, because despite trying to present yourself as someone high-minded, you are a base hedonist, I think.
The happiness they speak of is largely a combination of attitude and learnt neurophysiological processes. It seems a little high-minded of you to declare theirs is the one, true way to REAL happiness, when the definition of the word is so flexible. Why are you responding so aggressively?

If the response to "How can you live without conflict?" is "Happily", then presumably the answer to "How can you live happily?" is "Without conflict". I think this is more flippancy than dime-store sentimentality.
Still, I'm not claiming to have any real answers, and it is a little upsetting that you presuppose that I do and that they are bad. That is not a very positive attitude.
>egos
Yes, of course. Have you seen/heard this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-mkia0RE6A
It's both interesting and aesthetically pleasing, although hopefully not too sentimental for your tastes.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:24:40 2012 No.2687033
File: 1.07 MB, 1280x1024, dharani-pitaka-usnisa-vijaya-dharani1280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

The state has its own innate joy.
Questions answer themselves if you are aware enough.
Life is safe;
flowing with the simplest way to live.
Resistance never really succeeds.
Controlling the current of being is the flow of life is impossible.

It takes no effort to live.
Resistance never really succeeds.
Controlling the flow of life is impossible.

It takes no effort to live.
Resistance never really succeeds.
Controlling the flow of life is safe;
flowing with the flow of life is impossible.

The less you open your heart suffers. The physical world, including our bodies, is a response of your heart to others. The experience of the observer. We create our world, including our bodies; a response of the observer. We create the observer. We create the more your heart suffers. We create our bodies. Its only desire is to be born.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:27:39 2012 No.2687037
File: 1.53 MB, 1920x1200, 1308099804904.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Human beings are made of everything,
the eternal field of this planet.

Human being is the responsibility we have to the very future of body, mind and for themselves if you are made of everything,
the eternal field of consciousness.
It takes no effort to live up to it ~
for it connects us to try to live.
Resistance never really succeeds.
Controlling the simplest way to live up to it ~
for our own innate joy.
Questions answer the presence
of pure divinity right here on earth, but also of our own sake

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:32:39 2012 No.2687040

According to Vedanta, there are precisely the point where is a hidden meaningful coincidences in your life, more synchronicities. And this accelerates to the point where you encounter more meaning behind all events, and more and this moment. There are precisely the ones you toward a hidden meaning behind all events, and full of joy. There you actually experience the ones you need in your life at this moment. The first symptom is that you have attracted in your own evolution.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:33:39 2012 No.2687042 >>2687037 Does this mean I can stop shaving?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:36:39 2012 No.2687048 >>2687037 Can i ask a question?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:37:39 2012 No.2687050 >>2687040 Where did you read that? Sounds really interesting.

>>	Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 09:38:40 2012 No.2687053 >>2687048 Ask not what you want to know but what you are truly ready to be told an answer.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:39:40 2012 No.2687054 >>2687053 nah fuck you i already did it anyway mate

Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 09:42:40 2012 No.2687057
File: 921 KB, 1280x883, 1318400040889.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There is the great teacher and stability that come from knowledge, and stability that come from knowledge, and enthusiasm for the creative freedom, emotional and enthusiasm for life, fulfilling relation, knowledge, and to learn its lessons you must pay attention to it. There is no substitute for the creative freedom, emotional and stability, a sense of well-being, and stability that come from knowing how to contact your core of well-being, and psychological stability that come from knowing.

Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 09:48:40 2012 No.2687062

The practical employment of the Antinomies is the key to understanding time, and philosophy is the clue to the discovery of the paralogisms of human reason. The Categories, in respect of the intelligible character, can never, as a whole, furnish a true and demonstrated science, because, like the Ideal of human reason, they exclude the possibility of a posteriori principles, yet the Antinomies are the clue to the discovery of, in particular, the Antinomies. Yet it must not be overlooked that noematic descriptions, in a maximally broad sense, are "in themselves". As is shown in the writings of Aristotle, our a priori knowledge (and the reader should be careful to observe that this is true) constitutes the whole content for philosophy; on the other hand, philosophy is what first gives rise to, when thus treated as the Transcendental Deduction, the paralogisms. (The whole of conscious life, even with respect to the evidence in which cogitationes present themselves, stands in contrast to the accidental being "for me" of multiplicities of a transcendental grounding of the consciousness of internal time) We can be sure that, by conscious conversion into the corresponding cogitationes, I have the reflection that the cogitatum (qua cogitatum) is given continuously as an objective unity in a multi-form and changeable multiplicity of multiplicities of the stream of noetic acts, which belong determinately to it. Therefore, the things in themselves, irrespective of all empirical conditions, occupy part of the sphere of space concerning the existence of natural causes in general, as is shown in the writings of Aristotle.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:50:39 2012 No.2687066 File: 38 KB, 428x270, cioran.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2687057 >core of well-being >other vague hippy bullshit >mfw

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:52:39 2012 No.2687069 >>2686917 Stoics did it better, before.

Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 09:52:39 2012 No.2687070
File: 771 KB, 1220x1600, 1318511806487.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2687066
Natural reason is a body of demonstrated doctrine, and none of it must be known a posteriori, by virtue of human reason. The whole of conscious life (in the natural attitude) does not yet produce for us any abiding being.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:55:40 2012 No.2687072

>>2687029

>They were pertinent to the discussion.

No they weren't. You brought up their thoughts on happiness and then rejected them when someone actually knew what they were.

>That does not prevent their practicing ascetisim to a large degree, and it certainly had an impact on how the Gautama arrived at his philosophy.

You mean in that he outright rejected asceticism?

>The happiness they speak of is largely a combination of attitude and learnt neurophysiological processes.

I'm not going to argue with your materialism. There's too much difference between us.

>It seems a little high-minded of you to declare theirs is the one, true way to REAL happiness, when the definition of the word is so flexible.

I don't think you know what high-minded means. You're trying very hard, aren't you? I never said theirs was the ONE TRUE way. It is a way. Yours is not.

>Why are you responding so aggressively?

Because I don't like you.

>Still, I'm not claiming to have any real answers

Then please stop saying things like

>But for me the shortest route to happiness involves wearing the gift, as it is both thoughtful and aesthetically pleasing.

And

>The happiness they speak of is far more esoteric, and i am satisfied with this that I have found.

Or at least preface them by saying "I'm full of nonsense, please don't listen to me about this. I'm really just making this stuff up as a go along, and I have no respect for or knowledge of the traditions I'm trying to cite in order to lend me some new-agey authority"

I like Alan Watts. I wish you would think about what he says.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:58:39 2012 No.2687076 >>2686917 Nothing new under the sun

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 09:58:39 2012 No.2687077 >>2687070 Whence comes the ideal relation between the transcendental aesthetic and our understanding?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:00:40 2012 No.2687080 I'd love to be a buddhist; so zealously submissive. Puts slavery to shame.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:01:39 2012 No.2687082 File: 126 KB, 1118x1103, beckett cafe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Nothing to be done.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:01:39 2012 No.2687083 >>2687057 >>2687062 >>2687070 Is English your native language?

Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 10:01:39 2012 No.2687087

>>2687077
Let us suppose that transcendental logic, on the contrary, would be falsified. We see in advance that modes of consciousness synthetically constitute all particular instances of the Objective world that ever become prominent, by the fundamental nature of the ego cogito.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:02:39 2012 No.2687088
File: 62 KB, 600x502, bear2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2687069
>before
>Zeno of Citium (Greek: Ζήνων ὁ Κιτιεύς, Zēnōn ho Kitiéŭs;, c. 334 BC – c. 262 BC)
>Gautama Buddha most early 20th-century historians dated his lifetime as c. 563 BCE to 483 BCE,[4] but more recent opinion dates his death to between 486 and 483 BCE or, according to some, between 411 and 400 BCE
>mfw

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:05:39 2012 No.2687093 >>2687070 >>2687087 As is shown in the writings of Hume, the discipline of practical reason, in so far as this expounds the contradictory rules of the paralogisms of pure reason, can be treated like the phenomena.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:06:40 2012 No.2687096

>>2687087
>Let us suppose that transcendental logic, on the contrary, would be falsified.
Applied logic is the key to understanding the intelligible objects in space and time, as any dedicated reader can clearly see.

>...by the fundamental nature of the ego cogito.
Because of our necessary ignorance of the conditions, the things in themselves have nothing to do with, in the full sense of these terms, the Antinomies; in the study of the thing in itself, the manifold would thereby be made to contradict philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:07:40 2012 No.2687098 >>2687088 wasn't referring to that, but homg u won

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:08:40 2012 No.2687104 >>2687080 Who is there to submit to?

Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 10:11:39 2012 No.2687111
File: 2.55 MB, 2240x3000, 1318095539483.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2687093
Lol everyone is here because he or she has a place to fill, and every piece must fit itself into the big jigsaw puzzle. There are no extra pieces in the big jigsaw puzzle.

Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 10:14:39 2012 No.2687124

>>2687096
We are part of scenery, not the expression of eternal being. It follows without more ado that the transcendental-phenomenological reduction (in a maximally broad sense) is "in itself". This seer is the seer, who is immune to any form of change.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:18:39 2012 No.2687140 >>2687111 No, the seer is the expression of eternal being. The noumena, so regarded, can be treated like categories.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:22:40 2012 No.2687148 Sure is clothes of the emperor in this conversation. You're talking out of your ass.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:23:40 2012 No.2687149 >>2687140 Perhaps if happiness is a continuation of happenings which are inexhaustible, but the question of this matter's relation to objects is not in any way under discussion. I set myself to others that make cowards of troubles, and arrows of us all.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:23:40 2012 No.2687150 >>2687148 >You're talking out of your ass We all are

>>	Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 10:28:40 2012 No.2687159 >>2687140 >>2687149 Our experience would thereby be made to contradict natural causes. Call it pure spirit, essence, or transcendent wisdom, but in the case of the Ideal of human reason, reason exists in the transcendental unity of apperception.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:31:39 2012 No.2687165 File: 3 KB, 191x185, deepak_chopra.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw this thread

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 10:43:39 2012 No.2687178
File: 704 KB, 839x713, 385.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2687159
wait a second...i thought i agreed with you for a while, but now that you're overlooking that we have not simply lost pure and genuine evidence for phenomenology the unity of apperception is falsified.

>mfw our necessary ignorance of the conditions

Ohm !/ER2vm9q5E Sat Jun 2 10:51:39 2012 No.2687186

>>2687178
I don't think you understood me. Yes, I think that Phenomenology in accordance with the principles of our concepts, should only be used as a canon for pure logic, yet necessity should only be used as a canon for the architectonic of natural reason. The conditions only serve to elicit worry in those who break with the Ideal.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:21:43 2012 No.2687235
File: 7 KB, 170x200, stirner4.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2687159
>pure spirit
>essence
>transcendent wisdom
>Ideal of human reason
>transcendental unity
>babbling on as if any of this means anything
>being enslaved to your own elaborately spun web of spooks

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:24:40 2012 No.2687242 >>2687235 It's ok if it's the only way he can get a feeling of fulfillment and happiness.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:37:39 2012 No.2687268

>>2687242
Sure, but to me it's the philosophical counterpart of fantasy. It's escapism into a world where things have glorious meaning and essences and magic and what have you for the sake of escaping the actual mud and rock and flesh that are themselves what they are and, one could argue, are fine as they are. By trying to make things seem more than they are you are admitting not appreciating the world in itself. Ideas of transcendence and idealism betray a certain hostility to life. It's like having a naked girl in your room and trying to make her put on a ball gown.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:40:44 2012 No.2687273 >>2687242 >happiness Is that it? All you want? pfft.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:48:39 2012 No.2687295 >>2687235 You fucking Stirnerfags are the worst. Really, it seems that in every discussion you faggots have to bring him up as if he were some godlike figure because you once read him in some crappy translation. Go fuck yourselves.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:49:39 2012 No.2687298 >>2687273 >fulfillment AND happiness. which implies getting fun and improving at things I like.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:56:39 2012 No.2687315
File: 5 KB, 480x546, stirner11.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2687295
I only bring him up when it's relevant, which seems fair. Which admittedly is pretty often, since he remains important to almost any philosophical discussion. Plenty of people dislike this, sure. As they have done since the day Marx and his friends tried to sweep Stirners thought under the carpet because he remains a threat to ideologies even until today.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:56:39 2012 No.2687316 File: 37 KB, 317x500, laotzu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] DESIRING NOT TO DESIRE Taoism does it best.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 11:56:39 2012 No.2687314

>>2687268
>escapism
Well, for some people it's the best they can do. I personally wouldn't conform with it, but it's my problem... My life's difficulties are directly related to my inability to get lost in my imaginary world and be happy with it. But I'm ok with it, I suppose people with that kind of beliefs would like being like they are too.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 12:00:39 2012 No.2687324 >>2687315 have you seen this cool movie called zeitgeist

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 12:20:40 2012 No.2687379

It really saddens me to see this kind of ignorance on /lit/.

Ohm was only pointing out that our cognitive faculties are essentially synonymous with our sense perceptions, and, because of the relation between the architectonic of human ideals of reason and natural order, the phenomena can be treated as a paralogisms.

Read a fucking book once in a while.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 12:22:43 2012 No.2687386 "A Confucian in good times, a Buddhist in bad times, a Daoist in old age."

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 12:26:39 2012 No.2687397

>>2687315
this is a disanalogy; marx is foundational for other reasons than ideology. stirner was just a bro who found some nice words to articulate his intuitive ideas

i'm not saying his ideas are invalid, nor bad, but you cannot reasonably say marx and stirner did similar philosophical work.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 12:52:40 2012 No.2687445 >>2687397 That isn't what I meant to imply. I merely noted the hostility towards Stirner of which Marx is a prime example. I'm not saying Marx is irrelevant, I'm saying he saw Stirner and his thought as a threat. Which is pretty indisputible, I think.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 13:02:40 2012 No.2687464 Isn't Taoism and Buddhism very similar, aside from their beliefs in duality?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 13:02:40 2012 No.2687463 >>2687379 >Read a fucking book NO

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 13:06:39 2012 No.2687469 >>2687464 Like Judaism and Islam, yeah.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 13:06:43 2012 No.2687468 >>2687464 Yes, but it depends on which iteration of Buddhism you look at. It is a very syncretic tradition, so depending on the cultural context it was introduced to, it will vary wildly.

Anonymous Sat Jun 2 13:11:40 2012 No.2687480

>>2687464
Depends on the taoism and the buddhism. Is Zen Buddhism very similar to philosophical taoism? Yes. Is hardcore theravada similar to the jesting, wine drinking sages of old china? Nope.

You need to be more specific to answer this question. There has been of course plenty of interaction between Taoist and Buddhist ideas.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 13:35:40 2012 No.2687512 File: 7 KB, 188x273, 24698_Pyrrho.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] who needs loopy eastern philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 14:05:39 2012 No.2687573 >>2687512 my nigga.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 2 14:07:40 2012 No.2687583 >>2687573 >nigga you said it all

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 3 08:15:40 2012 No.2689468 >>2687512 Pyrrho was actually a direct student of Indian gymnosophists. I agree though that he is profoundly Greek in his rational, sober way of thought. Orientals often can't into philosophy without adding shitloads of mysticism and myth.

Anonymous Sun Jun 3 09:19:39 2012 No.2689525

>>2687268
See, I view transcendentalism as the opposite of being hostile to life. It seems more realistic to say it encourages a relationship of understanding and unity between one and the universe. To you this sounds fantastical yet isn't it true that all people have a veil of ignorance that they either consciously or unconsciously strive to draw back? It can be the veil that separates a man from a woman as they stand before revealing themselves, or it is the veil that keeps one in a cycle of self-destruction as they run from the genesis of their pain. How can one be said to not appreciate the world when trying to pierce through its darkness? Taking it to shakespeare, There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Let me make clear, I don't claim that I am right or you are wrong in our approaches to understanding. But like you said that we try putting a ball gown on the naked woman in our room, I feel the realist takes the beautifully dressed woman and calls her naked. (a smartass will say she's naked underneath but we're speaking attitudes here, not semantics.)

Anonymous Sun Jun 3 18:19:51 2012 No.2690763
File: 167 KB, 548x700, cynic2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2689525
Well, I think "piercing through the darkness" is the fantastic term for bullshitting yourself out of reality or adding to it. It's either escapism or decoration, both of which I find highly unnecessary. Then again, I also dislike Shakespeare. I dislike ball gowns too.

I consider myself more of a Cynic than a realist, but metaphysics or transcendence of any kind seem to me to be merely human imagination run wild. Once you stop the wheels in your head from furiously thinking things into existence you'll find reality to be whole as it is, without need for levels and elevations and other contraptions. A dog sees things how they are more than any mystic. That's because he doesn't have the compulsive need to add to it.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature