Demystifying Quantum Physics

[godnotgod]

I have followed your Western trivialization, distortions, elitist and at least borderline racist caricatures of Eastern wisdom for a long time in many different contexts. Your "universal wisdom" is simply the English websites and English narratives from youtube clips you are capable of recognizing as something like language rather than random symbols or noise.

You can pretend to reduce "Eastern wisdom" to Western trivializations and appropriations as long as such elitist and racist methods appeal to you. Why they would is a mystery, but then I don't really understand the motives behind such racist tendencies or cultural supremacy in general.




How would you know? You trivialize Eastern wisdom by reducing it to youtube and google results. What would you know of actual Eastern masters that you didn't get from the internet?




Of what? The websites that inform the entirety of what you interpret as "Eastern wisdom"? I prefer actual Eastern masters rather than your commercialized, westernized, at least borderline racist sources. You are apparently content to make no such distinctions and could not even if you were so inclined.





I'm not the one reducing eons of disparate cultures into a antiquated racist, elitist notion of the "mystic orient" I got from using google

All of the above is pretty base, and I cannot comment at all on any of it. All I can say is that, as usual, you are way off base, this time in your references to 'racist' ideas that I am supposed to be espousing. The other erroneous allusions you make are to my getting mystical knowledge from YouTube and Google. While I do enjoy using these sources, they are not my primary source. You know nothing about me and what my experiences are. So I suggest you cease and desist, both from your racist allusions and your insistence that my primary source of knowledge is the internet. You're just plain wrong, LOM.

For one, I never alluded to anything resembling the 'mystic orient'. That is YOUR twisted notion you want to foist on me, from the point of view that your academia and knowledge of various languages is somehow superior to what I know. It isn't. It's flawed, but you don't see it, because you're so impressed by yourself and your credentials, which you let everyone here know about every chance you get. It smacks, LOM. High time to get thee to thy QiGong instructor and shed all that wretched excess.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

All of the above is pretty base

That's because your knowledge of "Eastern wisdom" comes from trivial websites in English. You haven't studied under a master. You cannot read or speak any Eastern languages. You have not been trained in any Eastern practice or tradition by any Eastern tradition. You are incapable of evaluating any Eastern writings. You have no access to any actual Eastern texts and if you did you couldn't read them. You exemplify the type of elitist racism that biased Westerners displayed years ago, but which apparently you don't realize how offensive it is.

All I can say is that, as usual, you are way off base, this time in your references to 'racist' ideas that I am supposed to be espousing.

I'm "way off base" because you are familiar with...? Nothing. You could be quoting the KKK and you wouldn't know it if google didn't tell you.

The other erroneous allusions you make are to my getting mystical knowledge from YouTube and Google. While I do enjoy using these sources, they are not my primary source.

I spent years with Eastern masters and Eastern sources. There is not a single Eastern source you can access that isn't the equivalent of what a 12 year old using Google couldn't find.

You know nothing about me and what my experiences are.

Wrong. You understand the English language, for example. You make references that make obvious your background in certain respects. If you would like to argue that your knowledge, familiarity, and experience in Eastern culture and practice is more than that of any trivialization of any internet-fed Western elitist, produce it.

So I suggest you cease and desist

I trained under one of the foremost experts in the world you have mocked again and again and again and again. You cease with your racist bigotry and cultural appropriation and I'll stop calling you out. You continue to pretend that your knowledge of Eastern wisdom is something other than that a 12 year old could obtain with a few hours on the internet AND that this knowledge can inform you as to what I have studied, and I will continue to point out the elitist, racists, bigotry that your posts entail (even if you do not intend them to).

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Repeat: I did not say it was 'irrational'; you did. I said that the nature of the universe is non-rational. That means it is neither rational nor irrational. Yes, you can say certain things about it based on rational thought, but those things do not tell us what the universe actually is. They merely describe behavior and then make predictions based on those observations. But we can indeed have knowledge of something that 'doesn't make sense'. You arbitrarily confine knowledge to things that only fit the conceptual models of the rational mind. Does it occur to you that there is another kind of knowledge that is outside the box, so to speak, of which you are currently unaware, due to the mind's preoccupation with itself? What I am ultimately suggesting to you is that this other kind of knowledge is the one which makes all scientific knowledge actually 'make sense'. You have it backwards.

Why would it occur to me that there is something that has no evidence and has no support what so ever? Does it occur to you that there is the possiblity of an invisible unicorn spreading intangible peanut butter out its behind? And what if I told you that very special spiritual people have told me of its existence and if you only open your mind you will also taste its peanutbuttery goodness?

There is no need for this external "knowledge". Science already makes sense without it.

Let's return to Plato's Cave. The only way the other prisoners can verify that what the escaped prisoner who claims to have seen the Sun is true is for them to go see for themselves. The experience of seeing the Sun is completely unknown to them. In terms of our discussion, the experience of Higher Consciousness is completely unknown to the ordinary man. Actually, it is not unknown, but just not remembered. But the bottom line in terms of your point is that you can go 'see for yourself'.

You see there is some very distinct differences.
1) In platos cave we can simply go to the surface and see the sun. In your case its an undefinable and un-knowable "something" that is somehow "everything" even though we can't "know" what it is because its "beyond our understanding". In plato's example its a purely logical and simple situation. In this one its the case of a baseless claim with nothing to back it up.

2) I can't simply "go" to the surface. Or I could say rather I have and still see nothing.

But you've already demonstrated that it is indeed paradoxical to you, as you choose to label it all just so much 'bull' and 'irrational nonsense'. Really, the universe itself is a kind of 'irrational nonsense' just as it is, yet Science thinks it can make heads and tails of it via Logic, Analysis, and Reason. I mean, don't you think it rather odd that it is even here?; that YOU are even here?

A paradox would mean that its something that I can't grasp. I can grasp it. For example if I told you that I was 10 feet tall, green and could play classical guitar I wouldn't have said anything beyond your "understanding". It wouldn't be a paradox. But at the same time I bet you wouldn't believe me. Same thing here. You have made a lot of claims and given me no reason to believe them. Whats worse is you have attempted multiple times to pass off your retoric as "fact" which it is not. And even then it still doesn't tie in together with QM in the way you seem to want.

Well, I really do sympathize with you, but really there is no trace whatsoever. That is the nature and the mystery of Tao. But though there is no trace; though the Tao is invisible, tasteless, odorless, silent, and formless, its presence is unmistakable. As I said to you, it is as close to you as your next breath, but the moment you decide to intellectualize about it, you will have lost it.

Then how do you know it exists? Direct Experience? That is a "trace" right there. We can actually measure experiences if we do them under an MRI machine.

Ah, but who said the experience is via your brain?

YOUR BRAIN LIES!

I already told you: it is not an intellectual exercise, nor a belief system. What you cannot trust is the rational mind. So the experience of Reality lies beyond Reason. It is because of Reason that Delusion exists. There is a conscious experience beyond both that is called Awakening in which all Delusion evaporates, just as a dream vanishes upon awakening from sleep.

Without your brain you litterally cannot experience anything. Everything you have ever experienced is a chemical reaction in your brain. And you are very very very very very correct. Your brain lies. You cannot trust experiences that cannot be verified.

Again you can make all thse claims about the rational mind and ect ect ect but the one thing you can't get around biologically is your brain not being involved. That is bull and I call it right now.

No one says you HAVE to leave the Cave.

And no one says you HAVE to stop making incorrect analogies that don't fit your intended goal.

That's because you only developed an intellectual 'understanding' of the Tao, but if it cannot be defined because it is beyond words, then it is beyond explanation, and therefore, beyond rational thought.

Beyond explanation and beyond rational thought are two different things. You cannot simply say ipto facto checkmate. The second doesn't follow.

Right, but that particular kind of behavior is Quantum behavior. It does not conform to the classic laws of physics. That Quantum behavior is the behavior of the universe, which are one and the same.

Do you know what "Quantum Behavior" is?

What do you mean by "classic laws of physics"? If you mean newton then they are actually flat out wrong in all cases.

And of course Quantum beavhior is the behavior of the universe. Same with non-quantum behavior such as gravity. What of it?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Yes, it is getting tiresome because you continue to ignore the fact that I am not making my point from that of factual knowledge.

And I don't think there is any way to make a point otherwise. Ergo our impass.

No, it is not a belief that Tao exists. It is direct experience, without belief, just as the experience of the prisoner who escaped from Plato's Cave (which IS the world of Belief) experienced the Sun. His experience is not a fact that can be demonstrated to the other prisoners via evidence. It's reality can only be verified via direct experience.

You really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really aren't getting this. I understand what you are saying. I simply don't have any inclination to believe you. It sounds like nonesense. You can't defend it and in fact you say you CAN'T defend it.

You realize this is in the debate section yes?

Do you deny that you and the tangible universe you live in exist against some kind of background?

Yes. At least to the point that I have no reason to believe otherwise. It is not an inherent problem

Can solids exist without the space around them? Can fish exist without the sea they swim in, and which supports them 100%, without taking any kind of direct action to do so?

Solids exist in the "universe". What the universe expands into is more interesting a question. However it has little to do with your Tao and other such claims.
Again fish exist in a sea. Both are in the universe.

However I ask you this. If our universe has to have something to be "in" and I assume it is the "tao" then what does the "tao" have to be in? And then what is that in? And then that? And then that? Are we in an infinite number of bags in your world view?

Try seeing it this way:

I can try.

You think you live in the real world, but in reality, you are living in a dream, a dream in which everything around you SEEMS real, just as when sleeping and dreaming, everything seems real. It's just that the world you awaken to is just another level of a dream, one in which the illusion is of a higher order than those found in sleep-dreaming. And just as when you awaken from dream-sleep to realize the fact that you were only dreaming, there is another awakening from THIS reality that happens to some people wherein they realize even more clearly that they were just living in a dream world. Not just that, but the person they thought themselves to be, turns out to be a fiction, a dream-character who thinks himself fully awake, but in fact, is only dreaming the role he is acting out. It is from this higher state of awareness, called the Fourth Center of Consciousness, or Self-Transcendence, that one sees the illusion of the Third Level of Consciousness, or Waking Sleep, also known as Identification. The world you thought to be real, is real to you on the Third Level, but from the vantage point of the Fourth Level, it is an illusion.

But what if that state was an illusion and this is the real world? What say you to that?

So no. Saying the Fourth Level exists does not make it so, of course not. It must be experienced for one to know beyond a shadow of any doubt that it is real, and that what we only thought to be real, is but a Grand Illusion.

It seems far more likely and plausable that the Fourth level is the grand illusion here.

That is just the nature of things.

That is not the nature of things.

Surely, if I were able to communicate to you during one of your more vivid dreams while asleep, that the world you were dreaming was not real, you would object profusely,

Hard to say. Weren't you the one talking about how altered states of conciousness are incorrect viewpoints?

I see you advertise yourself as an atheist. From the point of view of Higher Consciousness, you are God pretending not to believe in yourself, LOL.

If god did exist I doubt you would know the world looks like from his vantage point. Though from my perspective you are spouting stuff that makes sense to you and you cling to it so strongly that you reject even logic and rational thought itself to protect it.

 

[godnotgod]

That's because your knowledge of "Eastern wisdom" comes from trivial websites in English. You haven't studied under a master. You cannot read or speak any Eastern languages. You have not been trained in any Eastern practice or tradition by any Eastern tradition. You are incapable of evaluating any Eastern writings. You have no access to any actual Eastern texts and if you did you couldn't read them. You exemplify the type of elitist racism that biased Westerners displayed years ago, but which apparently you don't realize how offensive it is.



I'm "way off base" because you are familiar with...? Nothing. You could be quoting the KKK and you wouldn't know it if google didn't tell you.



I spent years with Eastern masters and Eastern sources. There is not a single Eastern source you can access that isn't the equivalent of what a 12 year old using Google couldn't find.


Wrong. You understand the English language, for example. You make references that make obvious your background in certain respects. If you would like to argue that your knowledge, familiarity, and experience in Eastern culture and practice is more than that of any trivialization of any internet-fed Western elitist, produce it.





I trained under one of the foremost experts in the world you have mocked again and again and again and again. You cease with your racist bigotry and cultural appropriation and I'll stop calling you out. You continue to pretend that your knowledge of Eastern wisdom is something other than that a 12 year old could obtain with a few hours on the internet AND that this knowledge can inform you as to what I have studied, and I will continue to point out the elitist, racists, bigotry that your posts entail (even if you do not intend them to).

Well, I'll tell you what: If you don't stop labeling me a racist, I will be forced to report your unfounded accusations to administration. I have never, ever made anything even remotely close to a racist comment about anyone or anything from the East, or anywhere for that matter. I don't know where you are getting your information, but it appears to me you are making it all up in your own head, based on I don't know what.

You keep telling me about your so-called extensive training, but have never demonstrated even a whiff of real spiritual understanding. You even admitted you reached an impasse with your QiGong instructor, who, BTW, I have never once denigrated in the very least. All I have ever said is that YOU are in need of his further instruction, which is obvious to me, and please note: I am not using Google or YouTube to be able to say this.

I have never pretended to anything. All I have ever done is to state what is the case, which you seem to think one needs to be a walking encyclopedia in order to understand. You can spout all you wish about your extensive training and blah blah blah, but from my point of view, it is just so much excess baggage, and it means nothing. Absolutely nothing.

As for having studying under a master, I have had a master second to none teaching me, who has never spoken a single word to me. If you knew anything at all, you would know that the real master is within. But you don't know that as evinced by your mockery of the source within as being YouTube and Google.

You keep telling me how much you know, but so far have said nothing. Maybe it's just so much hot air.

So besides your silly accusations and assertions and your constant habit of puffing yourself up to make yourself appear larger than you actually are, do you have anything of any real substance to contribute to the discussion, or do you find that attacking the finger that points to the moon too irresistible for you? Don't be misled, now.

 

[godnotgod]

Why would it occur to me that there is something that has no evidence and has no support what so ever? Does it occur to you that there is the possiblity of an invisible unicorn spreading intangible peanut butter out its behind? And what if I told you that very special spiritual people have told me of its existence and if you only open your mind you will also taste its peanutbuttery goodness?

There is no need for this external "knowledge". Science already makes sense without it.

It is not external to anything. 'outside the box' does not mean 'external'; it means beyond your indoctrinated viewpoint. Are you aware that Science is an indoctrinated viewpoint, and that the view I have been suggesting to you is unsullied by any kind of religious, social, or scientific indoctrination whatsoever? Instead of making an attempt to uncover this viewpoint, you characteristically leap for a demand for 'evidence', as if you were the District Attorney. This is not about the District Attorney; it is about seeing things as they are. You don't need a secondary reference in order to see things as they are. When you see things as they are, you see both the foreground and the background together as a single reality. While there is nothing wrong with facts, they need to be interpreted via understanding. Science can't produce that. It only gives us factual knowledge. It gives us all the facts, but tells us nothing about the background to the facts.

The bottom line is that there is nothing to compel you to go taste the peanut butter. You can partake of it or just move on. Either way is just fine. The peanut butter will continue to flow regardless. No one is compelled to prove that it is a reality. Why should they, when the source of the flowing peanut butter is within your own being? If you want proof, go taste.

You see there is some very distinct differences.
1) In platos cave we can simply go to the surface and see the sun. In your case its an undefinable and un-knowable "something" that is somehow "everything" even though we can't "know" what it is because its "beyond our understanding". In plato's example its a purely logical and simple situation. In this one its the case of a baseless claim with nothing to back it up.

2) I can't simply "go" to the surface. Or I could say rather I have and still see nothing.

Well, of course, it's only a metaphor, and metaphors have limitations. But the point here is that Tao is indefinable and unknowable only to the rational mind, but is accessible via the intuitive mind. So the metaphor is that, like the logical mind being able to see and experience the Sun directly, the intuitive mind can likewise see and experience Tao directly. We are using perceptual understanding of something to point to reality that is beyond the perceptual mind. What 'backs it up' is the experience itself, just as what backs up the existence of the Sun is your direct experience of it. You don't require some other evidence to demonstrate its validity.

 

[godnotgod]

You really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really aren't getting this. I understand what you are saying. I simply don't have any inclination to believe you. It sounds like nonesense. You can't defend it and in fact you say you CAN'T defend it.

You really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really aren't getting this, and that is because THERE IS NOTHING TO GET, NOR IS THERE IS NOTHING TO DEFEND, and there is nothing to defend because the Tao does not take up a position of contention; there is nothing to 'get' because you've already got it, or rather, IT (the Tao) has YOU.

Get it?

 

[godnotgod]

Solids exist in the "universe". What the universe expands into is more interesting a question. However it has little to do with your Tao and other such claims.
Again fish exist in a sea. Both are in the universe.

No. The Tao is the universe itself, either of which are Everything in existence, which includes space.

The sea is a metaphor for the background to the manifested universe. It is not 'in' anything, because the background is Absolute.

However I ask you this. If our universe has to have something to be "in" and I assume it is the "tao" then what does the "tao" have to be in? And then what is that in? And then that? And then that? Are we in an infinite number of bags in your world view?

Tao and universe are synonymous, and neither are contained within anything else, because there is no 'something else' to the universe, the universe being Everything that exists. It is The Absolute, and as Absolute, there is no 'other' to which it can be compared.

Those 'bags' are a problem of your rational mind. There are no such bags, because there is no inside or outside.

Look at it this way:

you see the hedge against the hills;
you see the hills against the sky;
but you see the sky against Consciousness.

See? no bags.

 

[godnotgod]

But what if that state was an illusion and this is the real world? What say you to that?

It seems far more likely and plausable that the Fourth level is the grand illusion here.

What if you had a clue? For example, what if, when you awoke from the 3rd to the 4th level, you remembered what you were doing before you fell asleep and began to dream this dream you are now dreaming, which you firmly believe to be reality? What if you remembered that you decided to get involved in the drama of the world, but forgot that you had done so, and became so transfixed by the drama and the role you decided to play, that you came to think it real, rather than the fiction it actually is; that the world you immersed yourself into as the actor was just a set of props against which you are now acting out the drama as an atheist?; that you wondered at one point what it might be like to completely forget that you were God, and to even deny your true nature to the hilt, using every tool of Reason and Logic as any good atheist might to prove you don't really exist? Now, would'nt that add some spice to the situation, to the dream, when upon awakening, to your own surprise, you find that you really really really ARE that which you could not possibly be? That would be quite devilish, I think.

BTW, all of the different levels of Consciousness are right here, right now. It's a matter of degree.

 

[godnotgod]

Academia? I was lucky enough to study under one of the foremost masters of Eastern tradition, thought, and practice in the world. You had google. I studied under another master who's qualifications as such were recognized by the sole inheritor of an Eastern tradition dating back centuries. You misquote Einstein because you can't read German and you can't understand what he wrote when it's translated.


I prefer actual Eastern masters rather than your commercialized, westernized, at least borderline racist sources. You are apparently content to make no such distinctions and could not even if you were so inclined.


You haven't studied under a master. You cannot read or speak any Eastern languages. You have not been trained in any Eastern practice or tradition by any Eastern tradition. You are incapable of evaluating any Eastern writings. You have no access to any actual Eastern texts and if you did you couldn't read them.


I spent years with Eastern masters and Eastern sources. There is not a single Eastern source you can access that isn't the equivalent of what a 12 year old using Google couldn't find.


I trained under one of the foremost experts in the world...

I can perform no such miracles.

All I can do is eat when hungry, and sleep when tired.

You?

Someday, all of your foremost masters and academia will turn to dust. Then what will you do?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Well, I'll tell you what: If you don't stop labeling me a racist

I never once labeled you a racist, and specifically distinguished between you and what you intend to communicate vs. what is entailed by what you say:

You continue to pretend that your knowledge of Eastern wisdom is something other than that a 12 year old could obtain with a few hours on the internet AND that this knowledge can inform you as to what I have studied, and I will continue to point out the elitist, racists, bigotry that your posts entail (even if you do not intend them to).

I will be forced to report your unfounded accusations to administration

The statements you have made, the descriptions of Eastern philosophies, notions, practices, etc., have a long history of Western racist cultural elitism and colonialism whether you intend this or are even aware of it. In fact, a great part of the problem is that because you haven't studied any on it you aren't aware that you are not, in fact, representing Eastern traditions at all but the constructions of a "mystic East" made out of centuries of Western racism, cultural elitism, and colonialism:

"The peoples and cultures of Asia have also been the objects of political and economic domination, and of arrogant, racist opprobrium in the West. The story of the relationship between the Western colonial powers and the nations of the East is not only one of enlightened intellectual and cultural exploration, but is often a shameful one of colonial exploitation and expropriation...Moreover, recent postcolonial studies have drawn attention to the way in which oppressive and racist attitudes not only are to be found in the historical reality of empire, but also have become firmly inscribed in Western discourse at many levels...Even where the conscious intentions and attitudes of Westerners have appeared most benign and reverential towards the East, it is difficult to escape the suspicion that the ‘Light of Asia’ has been exploited for Western purposes with as much ruthlessness as more tangible substances. There are those who would argue that, even where Western interests have been hallmarked with the purest of scientific intentions, Asian philosophical and religious ideas have been commodified and expropriated in ways that reflect and reinforce the more overt manifestations of imperialist expansion. Some would go so far as to claim that the relationship between West and East in the modern period, however spiritual and lofty it may appear, must necessarily be understood in the final analysis as ‘a relationship of power, domination, of varying degrees of complex hegemony’"

Clarke, J. J. (2002). Oriental enlightenment: The encounter between Asian and Western thought. Routledge.


The problem isn't that you haven't had any training or that your knowledge comes from youtube and google searches. It's that you
1) have defined what mystics are and what mysticism is based on this knowledge
2) Characterize Eastern practices and thought in fundamentally in accurate ways by emphasizing notions projected onto Eastern traditions by Westerners and ignoring (and lacking) that which traditionally defined such traditions:
"The inapplicability of Western notions of religion to the traditions of Asia has not only led to piecemeal errors of labeling, identification and classification, to conceptual confusion and to some name-calling. It is also responsible for something more extraordinary: the creation of so-called religions...Thus there arises a host of religions: Vedic, Brahmanical, Hindu, Buddhist, Bon-po, Tantric, Taoist, Confucian, Shinto, etc. In Asia, such groupings are not only uninteresting and uninformative, but tinged with the unreal. What counts instead are ancestors and teachers—hence lineages, traditions, affiliations, cults, eligibility, and initiation—concepts with ritual rather than truth-functional overtones."
Staal, F. (1996). Ritual and mantras: Rules without meaning. Motilal Banarsidass Publ..
3) Your claims don't simply inaccurately characterize the traditions you describe or "the East" to which you refer, they do so in ways that have deep roots in colonialism, cultural appropriation, racism, and even fascism:

Goodrick-Clarke, N. (2000). Hitler's Priestess: Savitri Devi, the Hindu-Aryan, Myth and Neo-Nazism. NYU Press.


"the Bhagavad Gita turns to the metaphysical foundations of all happening and these foundations are Brahman and god. Assigning such non-Western notions as “elite religious warriors” an epistemological function of knowing the enemy, Hauer and Nietzsche not only intended to destroy “womanish” Christianity so that a new knowledge might emerge but they were instrumental in creating that new knowledge. We know it as Nazism"
Poewe, K. (2006). New religions and the Nazis. Psychology Press.


It is one thing to claim that your personal knowledge or path leads you to believe particular things. It is another to continue the alienation of 'the mystical Orient" by an implicit racism:

"Today, there are perhaps two powerful images in contemporary Western characterizations of Eastern religiosity. One is the continually enduring notion of the 'mystical East' - a powerful image precisely because for some it represents what is most disturbing and outdated about Eastern culture, whilst for others it represents the magic, the mystery and the sense of the spiritual which they perceive to be lacking in modem Western culture"

King, R. (2002). Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and" The Mystic East". Routledge.

I have never, ever made anything even remotely close to a racist comment about anyone or anything from the East, or anywhere for that matter.

When you make sweeping statements about not one but numerous cultures somehow encapsulated in terms/expressions like "Eastern x" or "of the East" or make claims about the traditions, thought, and culture of peoples that are rooted in a racist, elitist, Western colonialism, it's racist even when you don't intend it to be. It's an enduring Orientalism schema that isn't just inaccurate but is now marketed:
Carrette, J., & King, R. (2004). Selling spirituality: The silent takeover of religion. Routledge.

I don't know where you are getting your information

From studying history and the history of colonialism, Western appropriation, Orientalism, etc.

You keep telling me about your so-called extensive training, but have never demonstrated even a whiff of real spiritual understanding.

I don't claim to. My claim is that your mischaracterizations not of your mystical experiences or practices but how you describe mysticism in general as well as cultures and cultural traditions, practices, etc. aren't just inaccurate but are implicitly racist, stereotyped, and seriously problematic.

You even admitted you reached an impasse with your QiGong instructor, who, BTW, I have never once denigrated in the very least.

He wasn't a "Qigong instructor" as I've told you multiple times. The fact that he's one of the world's experts on qigong doesn't change the fact that his knowledge of Eastern medicine, qigong, etc., are extensions of his martial arts training and mastery. You trivialize him every time you refer to him as a "Qigong instructor".

I have never pretended to anything.

You have defined religion, mysticism, and science in sweeping generalizations just as you have cultural practices and traditions. And your generalizations are usually completely unfounded and are always inaccurate.

As for having studying under a master, I have had a master second to none teaching me, who has never spoken a single word to me.

Great. Then stop mischaracterizing practices and traditions in ways that are rooted in cultural elitism and racism.

do you have anything of any real substance to contribute to the discussion

I have. I have described quantum mechanics and pointed out numerous errors. I have no illusions that you will change your views, and have let inaccurate post follow inaccurate post as it's pointless to continually point out why, where, and how you are wrong. Your continuation of a centuries old "romantic racism" towards the "mystic East", however, is not something I am prepared to let slide because you are not trying to be racist nor are you aware of how you even could be. That's the problem.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It is not external to anything. 'outside the box' does not mean 'external'; it means beyond your indoctrinated viewpoint. Are you aware that Science is an indoctrinated viewpoint, and that the view I have been suggesting to you is unsullied by any kind of religious, social, or scientific indoctrination whatsoever? Instead of making an attempt to uncover this viewpoint, you characteristically leap for a demand for 'evidence', as if you were the District Attorney. This is not about the District Attorney; it is about seeing things as they are. You don't need a secondary reference in order to see things as they are. When you see things as they are, you see both the foreground and the background together as a single reality. While there is nothing wrong with facts, they need to be interpreted via understanding. Science can't produce that. It only gives us factual knowledge. It gives us all the facts, but tells us nothing about the background to the facts.

The bottom line is that there is nothing to compel you to go taste the peanut butter. You can partake of it or just move on. Either way is just fine. The peanut butter will continue to flow regardless. No one is compelled to prove that it is a reality. Why should they, when the source of the flowing peanut butter is within your own being? If you want proof, go taste.




Well, of course, it's only a metaphor, and metaphors have limitations. But the point here is that Tao is indefinable and unknowable only to the rational mind, but is accessible via the intuitive mind. So the metaphor is that, like the logical mind being able to see and experience the Sun directly, the intuitive mind can likewise see and experience Tao directly. We are using perceptual understanding of something to point to reality that is beyond the perceptual mind. What 'backs it up' is the experience itself, just as what backs up the existence of the Sun is your direct experience of it. You don't require some other evidence to demonstrate its validity.

I have reached my limit on this. There is no debate to be had here on the existence of the Tao or other such things. My position is that there is no reason to believe in such things and you have only furthered that. However the one thing I cannot excuse is your continual incorect statements about how science is somehow a sullied and biased viewpoint and somehow your own mesh of beliefs and ideas are somehow not.

Understand this. Your viwepoint is based on nothing but anecdotes and possibly some mental trips. It also has absolutly nothing to do with QM. Make sure to knwo that.

You really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really really aren't getting this, and that is because THERE IS NOTHING TO GET, NOR IS THERE IS NOTHING TO DEFEND, and there is nothing to defend because the Tao does not take up a position of contention; there is nothing to 'get' because you've already got it, or rather, IT (the Tao) has YOU.

Get it?

Yes. You claim there is something. Present no evidence. Feel no evidence is necessary and then when I dont' accept that as a viable position you get into a hissy and start throwing out accusations that I'm in some sort of biased closed state of mind that invalidates me from understanding some mystical mumbo jumbo that you feel should be inherent and then go further to claim that I don't understand it or find it a paradox.

Yeah I got it.

No. The Tao is the universe itself, either of which are Everything in existence, which includes space.

The sea is a metaphor for the background to the manifested universe. It is not 'in' anything, because the background is Absolute.



Tao and universe are synonymous, and neither are contained within anything else, because there is no 'something else' to the universe, the universe being Everything that exists. It is The Absolute, and as Absolute, there is no 'other' to which it can be compared.

Those 'bags' are a problem of your rational mind. There are no such bags, because there is no inside or outside.

Look at it this way:

you see the hedge against the hills;
you see the hills against the sky;
but you see the sky against Consciousness.

See? no bags.

Let me correct you on a few things. We aren't on the canvas of the universe. We litterally are the universe.

So if you say the Tao and the Universe are interchangable then why do you need the concept of the 'tao to begin with ?

What if you had a clue? For example, what if, when you awoke from the 3rd to the 4th level, you remembered what you were doing before you fell asleep and began to dream this dream you are now dreaming, which you firmly believe to be reality? What if you remembered that you decided to get involved in the drama of the world, but forgot that you had done so, and became so transfixed by the drama and the role you decided to play, that you came to think it real, rather than the fiction it actually is; that the world you immersed yourself into as the actor was just a set of props against which you are now acting out the drama as an atheist?; that you wondered at one point what it might be like to completely forget that you were God, and to even deny your true nature to the hilt, using every tool of Reason and Logic as any good atheist might to prove you don't really exist? Now, would'nt that add some spice to the situation, to the dream, when upon awakening, to your own surprise, you find that you really really really ARE that which you could not possibly be? That would be quite devilish, I think.

BTW, all of the different levels of Consciousness are right here, right now. It's a matter of degree.

I see. However I don't see any reason to believe that there are other levels of consciousness in the way you describe. I know there are different levels. For example the level that a Schizo off their meds would be different than what I am right now. Or an elderly patient with dementia, or a small child, or an infant. However no reason emerges to think that there is more in some special way.

What if I told you that you were delusional? What if I told you that everythin was in your head? And I gave you a pill that brought you out of this level of conciousness and brought you up to non-delusional level? And then you remebered being this way but then saw it as delusional? What would you say?

I'm not saying you are delusional but this example is more or less the exact same thing that you are presenting. Though if I "chose" to be in this world I think I would have made myself 6ft 6, rich and famous.

 

[godnotgod]

I never once labeled you a racist....

In effect, that is what you are saying.

....however, is not something I am prepared to let slide because you are not trying to be racist nor are you aware of how you even could be. That's the problem.

I think it's called 'internet stalking'. Just cut it out.

You don't know what you're talking about. What I post has nothing to do with race. It has to do with the spiritual experience, which is transcendent of race and history. But you don't know that because you're tethered to your learning and credentials, neither of which have anything to do with the spiritual experience.

 

[godnotgod]

We aren't on the canvas of the universe. We litterally are the universe.

Finally! An intelligent statement! If we are the universe, then Quantum behavior is within us as well as inherent in the universe outside our beings. If we are the universe, then the universe is conscious, and consciousness is then non-local.

So if you say the Tao and the Universe are interchangable then why do you need the concept of the 'tao to begin with ?

Firstly, the Tao is not a concept.

Secondly, what Science says the universe is and what it actually is are two very, very, very different things. Taoism expresses the very nature of the universe by speaking directly and intimately to our own true nature, which is Tao within; Science tells us how the universe works in a mechanistic manner. It sees the universe as object apart from observer, and as you now readily admit, 'we literally are the universe', so that can't be true, now, can it?

You can't get the music by dismantling the piano!

'You are not just the drop in the ocean, you are the Mighty Ocean itself'.
Rumi

 

[godnotgod]

I see. However I don't see any reason to believe that there are other levels of consciousness in the way you describe. I know there are different levels. For example the level that a Schizo off their meds would be different than what I am right now. Or an elderly patient with dementia, or a small child, or an infant. However no reason emerges to think that there is more in some special way.

That's just it: there is no 'special way'. In fact, the consciousness of the ordinary man, or man on the Third Level, of Waking Sleep, is a special way, in that it is altered consciousness. Awakened consciousness is not altered; it is our Original Mind, as Buddha calls it. This kind of consciousness is undiferrentiated, ungrown, unborn, undying. It allows us to see things as they actually are, and not as an altered state dictates them to be. Certainly you have learned a bit of this via Quantum Mechanics, wherein it has demonstrated how classic logic and physics cannot apply to the Quantum world. It requires a new way of thinking, which essentially overturns and/or transforms the old paradigm. That is exactly the case with Awakened Consciousness, but not in the same way.

You are able to detect schizophrenia and dementia by comparison with what you might call a healthy state of mind. Likewise, you can detect an altered state of consciousness that operates on the Third Level by the constant presence of our Original Mind. Throughout history, a pattern has emerged wherein man comes to a point of dissatisfaction with life on the Third Level, and something prompts him to seek another, more satisfying existence. What prompts this is Original Mind, though one is not aware of this, because it is subtle. And so we say:

'That which you are seeking is causing you to seek'.

What if I told you that you were delusional? What if I told you that everythin was in your head? And I gave you a pill that brought you out of this level of conciousness and brought you up to non-delusional level? And then you remebered being this way but then saw it as delusional? What would you say?

I'm not saying you are delusional but this example is more or less the exact same thing that you are presenting. Though if I "chose" to be in this world I think I would have made myself 6ft 6, rich and famous.

Unless, of course, you had chosen '6ft 6, rich and famous' in a former existence, and are now done with that scenario, having tucked all that it implies under your belt.

Delusion is a result of thought. Where there is no thought, there can be no delusion. Awakened consciousness is without thought. It is not a belief, because belief also requires thought. Delusion says: 'I see a snake writhing at the side of the road'. Awakened consciousness says: 'What I thought to be a snake only a moment ago is actually a rope moving in the wind at the side of the road.' Delusion is about thinking that reality is a way which it is not. Awakened consciousness is seeing things as they actually are, without thought.

The ongoing state of the world is testimony to the fact that the majority of mankind lives in a state of delusional thought on the Third Level of Waking Sleep. He is driven by Power, Sensation, and Security, in varying combinations, all of which result in dissatisfaction, because they are empty goals. But in their pursuit, in their wake, misery and death ensue, as the effects of religious persecution, for one, have shown.

But it is a mistake to attempt an escape from delusion. To do so only creates more negative repercussions. It is interesting to note that Shunryu Suzuki, founder of the San Francisco Zen Center, tells his students to begin their practice right in the middle of their delusion.

"Nothing we see or hear is perfect, and yet, there, in the midst of all the imperfection, lies Perfect Reality."
Shunryu Suzuki

Awakened Consciousness is not 'in your head'. It is your entire being. The head is now empty of all concept, thought, belief, conjecture, opinion, or any other notion that might create a delusional state. Awakened Consciousness is your default state of awareness, in which you and Tao are one, in which you know that 'you literally are the universe', to borrow a phrase from some unknown sage of eons past.

'Can you, when concentrating your breath,
Make it soft like that of a little child?
Can you wipe and cleanse your vision of the Mystery till all is without blur?'

Tao Te Ching: Chapter 10

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Finally! An intelligent statement! If we are the universe, then Quantum behavior is within us as well as inherent in the universe outside our beings. If we are the universe, then the universe is conscious, and consciousness is then non-local.

Finally? I'll pretend you didn't say that.
Quantum behaviors exist only on the quantum level. We also have macro behaviors that we exist as part of us as well. Our Krebs cycle is working at the speed of light and you don't seem all that impressed by that.

And woah woah woah then. You claim the entire universe is conscious? Evidence, proof or reasoning required. That is a direct scientific claim that needs to be substanciated.

Firstly, the Tao is not a concept.

Secondly, what Science says the universe is and what it actually is are two very, very, very different things. Taoism expresses the very nature of the universe by speaking directly and intimately to our own true nature, which is Tao within; Science tells us how the universe works in a mechanistic manner. It sees the universe as object apart from observer, and as you now readily admit, 'we literally are the universe', so that can't be true, now, can it?

You can't get the music by dismantling the piano!

'You are not just the drop in the ocean, you are the Mighty Ocean itself'.
Rumi

[/quote]
The tao is a concept. Your belief is that this "concept" relates to the real world.

Secondly what your opinion of the universe is and what it actually is are two very very very different things.

And at what point in time did you begin to think science can only look at the universe as something apart from itself? Nothing is further from the truth.

And as far as the piano goes...We can measure the sound. We can watch its function. Study of it in action and movement. Because if there was just the piano there is NO MUSIC. You need someone to play it, you need a medium in which sound can travel. You need people to "hear" the music.

Your analogy fails on several levels.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

That's just it: there is no 'special way'. In fact, the consciousness of the ordinary man, or man on the Third Level, of Waking Sleep, is a special way, in that it is altered consciousness. Awakened consciousness is not altered; it is our Original Mind, as Buddha calls it. This kind of consciousness is undiferrentiated, ungrown, unborn, undying. It allows us to see things as they actually are, and not as an altered state dictates them to be. Certainly you have learned a bit of this via Quantum Mechanics, wherein it has demonstrated how classic logic and physics cannot apply to the Quantum world. It requires a new way of thinking, which essentially overturns and/or transforms the old paradigm. That is exactly the case with Awakened Consciousness, but not in the same way.

You are able to detect schizophrenia and dementia by comparison with what you might call a healthy state of mind. Likewise, you can detect an altered state of consciousness that operates on the Third Level by the constant presence of our Original Mind. Throughout history, a pattern has emerged wherein man comes to a point of dissatisfaction with life on the Third Level, and something prompts him to seek another, more satisfying existence. What prompts this is Original Mind, though one is not aware of this, because it is subtle. And so we say:

'That which you are seeking is causing you to seek'.

How do you know these direct experiences are not simply delusions? And without "thought" you litterally can't "experience" anything.

Unless, of course, you had chosen '6ft 6, rich and famous' in a former existence, and are now done with that scenario, having tucked all that it implies under your belt.

Delusion is a result of thought. Where there is no thought, there can be no delusion. Awakened consciousness is without thought. It is not a belief, because belief also requires thought. Delusion says: 'I see a snake writhing at the side of the road'. Awakened consciousness says: 'What I thought to be a snake only a moment ago is actually a rope moving in the wind at the side of the road.' Delusion is about thinking that reality is a way which it is not. Awakened consciousness is seeing things as they actually are, without thought.

The ongoing state of the world is testimony to the fact that the majority of mankind lives in a state of delusional thought on the Third Level of Waking Sleep. He is driven by Power, Sensation, and Security, in varying combinations, all of which result in dissatisfaction, because they are empty goals. But in their pursuit, in their wake, misery and death ensue, as the effects of religious persecution, for one, have shown.

But it is a mistake to attempt an escape from delusion. To do so only creates more negative repercussions. It is interesting to note that Shunryu Suzuki, founder of the San Francisco Zen Center, tells his students to begin their practice right in the middle of their delusion.

"Nothing we see or hear is perfect, and yet, there, in the midst of all the imperfection, lies Perfect Reality."
Shunryu Suzuki

Awakened Consciousness is not 'in your head'. It is your entire being. The head is now empty of all concept, thought, belief, conjecture, opinion, or any other notion that might create a delusional state. Awakened Consciousness is your default state of awareness, in which you and Tao are one, in which you know that 'you literally are the universe', to borrow a phrase from some unknown sage of eons past.

'Can you, when concentrating your breath,
Make it soft like that of a little child?
Can you wipe and cleanse your vision of the Mystery till all is without blur?'

Tao Te Ching: Chapter 10

All of what you have been referencing has nothing to do with what you are trying to say.

All of that philosphy from Plato and from Tao Te Ching is not about some otherworldly consciousness that is profound and mystical. Its based in the idea of being able to place yourself in a point of view beyond your "self". Its being able to put yourself in someone else's shoes or eventually be able to put yourself in a priveleged position in which you have no bias.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

In effect, that is what you are saying.

There's a reason we distinguish between implicit attitudes in general and explicit. Intentions and awareness matter.

I think it's called 'internet stalking'. Just cut it out.

This is a forum. When things are posted that I don't agree with I will frequently say so, and I will also often note when I agree with something. You call it what you want and report what you wish. Being totally off-base and completely inaccurately describing quantum mechanics is one thing. Continuing a tradition of cultural elitism, racism, appropriation, etc., is something else. As I said, if you wish to describe your beliefs that's one thing. When you characterize peoples, cultures, traditions, etc., in a manner that reflects a documented tradition of Western biases and romanticized racism, that's no longer being inaccurate or otherwise presenting a personal view of evidence. It's no longer a philosophical issue, a disagreement about evidence or the nature of science, or anything like that. It's implicit racism and if your stereotypes of other peoples, their traditions, and their cultures is ok and it is not ok to ask you to refrain from such characterizations, then I really don't wish to be a member of such a forum in the first place.

You don't know what you're talking about.

I do.

What I post has nothing to do with race.

You have consistently distinguished Eastern from Western in a manner that reflects a Western alienation of the East for various reasons over the past several hundred years. It's not ok.

It has to do with the spiritual experience, which is transcendent of race and history.

"Eastern" isn't a spiritual tradition and neither are other remarks you have made about cultural heritage, cultural traditions, peoples, and distinctions regarding all of these. It's one thin to mock me and trivialize my instructor, as however inaccurate your description of him is or your opinion of me, that's just personal. Orientialism is not. It's continuing a tradition that is racist, colonialist, and a lot of other things that we can simply sum up with "it's wrong and you shouldn't do it".

But you don't know that because you're tethered to your learning and credentials

Whatever. Stop trivializing entire cultures by applying whatever information you were fed from whatever internet sources that feeds your misrepresentation and does so in a manner that has (again) continued to plague cultural relations for several hundred years.

 

[godnotgod]

And as far as the piano goes...We can measure the sound. We can watch its function. Study of it in action and movement. Because if there was just the piano there is NO MUSIC. You need someone to play it, you need a medium in which sound can travel. You need people to "hear" the music.

Your analogy fails on several levels.

But above all, you need consciousness throughout the process, and you especially need consciousness to interpret what is being heard. In like manner, you need consciousness to interpret the facts that science uncovers. Factual knowledge alone does not give you understanding.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

But above all, you need consciousness throughout the process, and you especially need consciousness to interpret what is being heard. In like manner, you need consciousness to interpret the facts that science uncovers. Factual knowledge alone does not give you understanding.

True but this leads me to think that you believe that sentience is somehow a supernatural occurance rather than a scientifically explained one?