Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

newolder wrote:LI, It is a known fact you have not shown ‘undivided awareness’ exists beyond your language logic.

And I don't claim to have done so, yet, because the first step is to show the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts. The first step, even if shown would not show the concept 'undivided awareness' represents anything.

I think I have made that clear enough.

I think we can agree that a meaningless concept does not contradict any known facts, but that really doesn't help you.

If you agree the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts, then I would have to demonstrate that it is a concept with meaning, which would be a different and subsequent task, of course.

BWE wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

And I don't claim to have done so, yet, because the first step is to show the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts. The first step, even if shown would not show the concept 'undivided awareness' represents anything.

I think I have made that clear enough.

I think we can agree that a meaningless concept does not contradict any known facts, but that really doesn't help you.

If you agree the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts, then I would have to demonstrate that it is a concept with meaning, which would be a different and subsequent task, of course.

For me, that is the only part that matters. I'm totally happy to accept whatever propositions you want to make in order to get to the part where it has meaning.

BWE wrote:Can you just give me a preview?

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:
(which isnt what undivided awareness is, its not the sum of all individuals)

Can you get past what it isn't to
say what it is?

It is absolute reality, I said that already, many times.
We all know (rough versions of) the story, no need to start right at the beginning, lets cut to the chase. If mentalism has it wrong about reality, mentalism is just another S' system like any other.

But I am on a mission to establish that mentalism is the metaphysical system not a metaphysical system, and this is the very first step.

The whole story involves metaphysics and going beyond metaphysics to applying the conclusions to activity and merging the metaphysics (thought) with mysticism (feeling) and activity (action) in a synthesis greater than the sum of the parts. I spelled that out too in the overview. If we finish the course we will end with 'insight into reality', which I say is a latent capacity we can deliberately activate, but again, I have said that already.

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

newolder wrote:LI, It is a known fact you have not shown ‘undivided awareness’ exists beyond your language logic.

And I don't claim to have done so, yet, because the first step is to show the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts. The first step, even if shown would not show the concept 'undivided awareness' represents anything.

I think I have made that clear enough.

I think we can agree that a meaningless concept does not contradict any known facts, but that really doesn't help you.

If you agree the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts, then I would have to demonstrate that it is a concept with meaning, which would be a different and subsequent task, of course.

Arnold Layne wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:
(which isnt what undivided awareness is, its not the sum of all individuals)

Can you get past what it isn't to
say what it is?

It is absolute reality, I said that already, many times.
We all know (rough versions of) the story, no need to start right at the beginning, lets cut to the chase. If mentalism has it wrong about reality, mentalism is just another S' system like any other.

But I am on a mission to establish that mentalism is the metaphysical system not a metaphysical system, and this is the very first step.

The whole story involves metaphysics and going beyond metaphysics to applying the conclusions to activity and merging the metaphysics (thought) with mysticism (feeling) and activity (action) in a synthesis greater than the sum of the parts. I spelled that out too in the overview. If we finish the course we will end with 'insight into reality', which I say is a latent capacity we can deliberately activate, but again, I have said that already.

A fly just landed on my screen and shat on this post.

Little Idiot wrote:Well it is all the way back here at post 380 (almost 600 posts back - keeping track of the meta FTW) where you asked these two questions and this line of exchange started.

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:
(which isnt what undivided awareness is, its not the sum of all individuals)

Can you get past what it isn't to
say what it is?

It is absolute reality, I said that already, many times.
We all know (rough versions of) the story, no need to start right at the beginning, lets cut to the chase. If mentalism has it wrong about reality, mentalism is just another S' system like any other.

But I am on a mission to establish that mentalism is the metaphysical system not a metaphysical system, and this is the very first step.

The whole story involves metaphysics and going beyond metaphysics to applying the conclusions to activity and merging the metaphysics (thought) with mysticism (feeling) and activity (action) in a synthesis greater than the sum of the parts. I spelled that out too in the overview. If we finish the course we will end with 'insight into reality', which I say is a latent capacity we can deliberately activate, but again, I have said that already.

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

And I don't claim to have done so, yet, because the first step is to show the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts. The first step, even if shown would not show the concept 'undivided awareness' represents anything.

I think I have made that clear enough.

I think we can agree that a meaningless concept does not contradict any known facts, but that really doesn't help you.

If you agree the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts, then I would have to demonstrate that it is a concept with meaning, which would be a different and subsequent task, of course.

How can anyone agree anything about a meaningless concept?
Stop this nonsense!

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:Well it is all the way back here at post 380 (almost 600 posts back - keeping track of the meta FTW) where you asked these two questions and this line of exchange started.

380 isn't even your post!

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:
I think we can agree that a meaningless concept does not contradict any known facts, but that really doesn't help you.

If you agree the concept 'undivided awareness' doesn't contradict any known facts, then I would have to demonstrate that it is a concept with meaning, which would be a different and subsequent task, of course.

How can anyone agree anything about a meaningless concept?
Stop this nonsense!

Nobody is agreeing about a meaningless concept. You may think it is meaningless, but that does not mean it is a meaningless concept.

What we are agreeing about is does it or does it not contradict any known facts.
If you want to say 'no and it doesn't matter because it is meaningless', then I will accept the no and endeavor to establish a meaning for the term.
If you say it does contradict known facts I ask which ones and why?

Little Idiot wrote:What we are agreeing about is does it or does it not contradict any known facts.
If you want to say 'no and it doesn't matter because it is meaningless', then I will accept the no and endeavor to establish a meaning for the term.
If you say it does contradict known facts I ask which ones and why?

Little Idiot wrote:

Arnold Layne wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Can you get past what it isn't to
say what it is?

It is absolute reality, I said that already, many times.
We all know (rough versions of) the story, no need to start right at the beginning, lets cut to the chase. If mentalism has it wrong about reality, mentalism is just another S' system like any other.

But I am on a mission to establish that mentalism is the metaphysical system not a metaphysical system, and this is the very first step.

The whole story involves metaphysics and going beyond metaphysics to applying the conclusions to activity and merging the metaphysics (thought) with mysticism (feeling) and activity (action) in a synthesis greater than the sum of the parts. I spelled that out too in the overview. If we finish the course we will end with 'insight into reality', which I say is a latent capacity we can deliberately activate, but again, I have said that already.

A fly just landed on my screen and shat on this post.

Synchronicity, it must be!

Little Idiot wrote:

BWE wrote:Can you just give me a preview?

I am willing to try.
If you can give me a guide what you want me to attempt to offer, you'll be more likely to get it.
What exactly would you like me to spout about preview? Undivided awareness or the whole show?

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:What we are agreeing about is does it or does it not contradict any known facts.
If you want to say 'no and it doesn't matter because it is meaningless', then I will accept the no and endeavor to establish a meaning for the term.
If you say it does contradict known facts I ask which ones and why?

Go on then. establish the meaning then ask about contradictions.

In the meantime can you tell me if furiously sleeping Colorless green ideas contradict any known facts?

BWE wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

BWE wrote:Can you just give me a preview?

I am willing to try.
If you can give me a guide what you want me to attempt to offer, you'll be more likely to get it.
What exactly would you like me to spout about preview? Undivided awareness or the whole show?

Either is fine but I'd like the whole show.

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:What we are agreeing about is does it or does it not contradict any known facts.
If you want to say 'no and it doesn't matter because it is meaningless', then I will accept the no and endeavor to establish a meaning for the term.
If you say it does contradict known facts I ask which ones and why?

Go on then. establish the meaning then ask about contradictions.

In the meantime can you tell me if furiously sleeping Colorless green ideas contradict any known facts?

Yes, obviously it does, it self-contradicts. For a start green cant be colourless, nor can a colour sleep, nor can any sleeping be furious (- that is 3 contradiction of known facts right there).

As I stated in my original post, in order for a metaphysical concept to be meaningful it should not contradict any known facts. Undivided awareness contradicts only the working assumption that awareness must be divided. It is not known.

Look, its as simple as this, let me try spell it out for you.
Do you know there are any other sentient human observers apart from yourself?
Honest answer has to be; no, not know with certainty. You only know contents of your own awareness with certainty, and others is no more than a very good working assumption.
Therefore, you do not know with certainty that awareness is divided even into different humans.

Arnold Layne wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

Arnold Layne wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

It is absolute reality, I said that already, many times.
We all know (rough versions of) the story, no need to start right at the beginning, lets cut to the chase. If mentalism has it wrong about reality, mentalism is just another S' system like any other.

But I am on a mission to establish that mentalism is the metaphysical system not a metaphysical system, and this is the very first step.

The whole story involves metaphysics and going beyond metaphysics to applying the conclusions to activity and merging the metaphysics (thought) with mysticism (feeling) and activity (action) in a synthesis greater than the sum of the parts. I spelled that out too in the overview. If we finish the course we will end with 'insight into reality', which I say is a latent capacity we can deliberately activate, but again, I have said that already.

A fly just landed on my screen and shat on this post.

Synchronicity, it must be!

Nope, just shit.

Regarding your, does the concept of "undivided awareness contradict anything," I'd say, no, it doesn't. You've defined it so it doesn't, so no surprise there. Mind you, my earlier definition regarding the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't contradict anything either.

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Little Idiot wrote:What we are agreeing about is does it or does it not contradict any known facts.
If you want to say 'no and it doesn't matter because it is meaningless', then I will accept the no and endeavor to establish a meaning for the term.
If you say it does contradict known facts I ask which ones and why?

Go on then. establish the meaning then ask about contradictions.

In the meantime can you tell me if furiously sleeping Colorless green ideas contradict any known facts?

Yes, obviously it does, it self-contradicts. For a start green cant be colourless, nor can a colour sleep, nor can any sleeping be furious (- that is 3 contradiction of known facts right there).

As I stated in my original post, in order for a metaphysical concept to be meaningful it should not contradict any known facts. Undivided awareness contradicts only the working assumption that awareness must be divided. It is not known.

Look, its as simple as this, let me try spell it out for you.
Do you know there are any other sentient human observers apart from yourself?
Honest answer has to be; no, not know with certainty. You only know contents of your own awareness with certainty, and others is no more than a very good working assumption.
Therefore, you do not know with certainty that awareness is divided even into different humans.

You just don' get it. If you have a coloureless green experience your would know!

Colourless green is small potatoes compared to divided undivided awareness, experience without subject and others.

And now you are going for solipsism?