Philosoblog

Anything and all things

on fundamental matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind and ethics.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Philosoblog

#1  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 10:53 am

Nothing is going on in this subforum. Without Little Idiot and jamest we got nothing. SO...

I get these thoughts occasionally and I get this insane urge to post some of them. Others might too. This topic is about those thoughts and that insanity. A place where we can start a small discussion or a big one about anything philosophy.

Now I am going to go away and wait for inspiration. I'm reading Alan Watts as a part of this philosophy meetup group I belong to. A thought could come as early as this weekend.
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Philosoblog

#2  Postby jamest » Nov 03, 2017 11:10 am

It appears that you've already posted over 31,000 insane thoughts, so don't hold back. ;)

Where do your thoughts come from, if not from consciousness/you?
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16300
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#3  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 11:14 am

Or sooner! I will posit that Alan Watts, the hippie guru fo the sixties is an atheist and secular Buddhist. I can find nothing in his writing that suggests otherwise.

There is this phrase that UndercoverElephant once spat at me. Psychological Buddhist. A buddhist who does not believe that a spiritual experience is anything to do with the great spiritous expanse outside of the mammal brain. Watt's says of these experiences that they are surely something felt, like the wind or the rain. Something that really happens to us. Nothing there suggests that some electrical connection has been made to the spiritous expanse in the universe or that there is such a thing.

The idea that our 'minds' connect with the great spirit is pretty sad actually. It has us believing that somehow on this spec of planet earth we are really speshul. My little mammal brainstorm is connected in a big way with all that is and in a way that the lowly sodium atom could never be. Some Little Idiots believe that the brainstorm actually creates the sodium atom and the stars and the gas clouds. What hubris.

Watts talks about losing the self by trickery and accident. How the hell can you lose your self by positing that your self is somehow in the image of god?
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#4  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 11:16 am

jamest wrote:It appears that you've already posted over 31,000 insane thoughts, so don't hold back. ;)

Where do your thoughts come from, if not from consciousness/you?


Most of them actually come from my cats. Me consciousness is just a little storm cloud of electrical debris and my cats are always jumping into it.
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#5  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 11:20 am

I was wondering how long it would take to get the c-word going here.
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#6  Postby jamest » Nov 03, 2017 11:27 am

I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16300
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#7  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 11:30 am

jamest wrote:I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).

Get me an exact quote from him and we will take a look at your 'theory'.

I am a 'spiritual person'. Trained by watts and I am a solid atheist. The two things are not mutually exclusive.
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Philosoblog

#8  Postby surreptitious57 » Nov 03, 2017 12:29 pm

The older I get the less think I know and that does not bother me at all. I find it harder to be dogmatic any more
I have managed to convince myself that I am a detached observer looking in from the outside. I have no problem
in being wrong about everything. I am not interested in ego. Only interested in knowledge even though I actually
know nothing. I routinely talk about death because I am no longer afraid of it as any such fear is simply irrational
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 8686

Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#9  Postby The_Metatron » Nov 03, 2017 3:33 pm

SpeedOfSound wrote:
jamest wrote:I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).

Get me an exact quote from him and we will take a look at your 'theory'.

I am a 'spiritual person'. Trained by watts and I am a solid atheist. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

I am curious what that means to you, “spiritual person”.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk
My new website is up. Who wants to be a contributor?

I AM Skepdickus!

https://www.skepdick.us/blog/
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 19561
Age: 54
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#10  Postby jamest » Nov 03, 2017 3:41 pm

SpeedOfSound wrote:
jamest wrote:I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).

Get me an exact quote from him and we will take a look at your 'theory'.

I am a 'spiritual person'. Trained by watts and I am a solid atheist. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

Well buddhists aren't really theists and he does refer a lot to Buddhism, so I can see how you might have reached that conclusion; though it does seem to me as though you've cherry-picked his ideas in orer to get there. I've seen quite a lot of the those youtube clips of his and he makes references to all of the religions, not least 'God'. Of course, it's not easy from memory to refer to exact moments of particular clips and provide exact statements to unhinge you, so for the moment I'll pass on your challenge.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16300
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#11  Postby jamest » Nov 03, 2017 3:44 pm

The_Metatron wrote:
SpeedOfSound wrote:
jamest wrote:I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).

Get me an exact quote from him and we will take a look at your 'theory'.

I am a 'spiritual person'. Trained by watts and I am a solid atheist. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

I am curious what that means to you, “spiritual person”.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk

I think it's a reference to someone who regularly thinks about stuff/experience in order to 'grow' as an individual. They don't necessarily have to be a theist.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16300
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#12  Postby SafeAsMilk » Nov 03, 2017 4:03 pm

Well that's about as wibbly a definition as you can get. Can apply to literally every human being on the planet.

I find the term usually gets trotted out to pacify theists without having to overtly agree with anything they're saying.
Yes, a mighty hot dog is our Lord!
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 10834
Age: 37
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#13  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 5:16 pm

The_Metatron wrote:
SpeedOfSound wrote:
jamest wrote:I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).

Get me an exact quote from him and we will take a look at your 'theory'.

I am a 'spiritual person'. Trained by watts and I am a solid atheist. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

I am curious what that means to you, “spiritual person”.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk

It was in response to a reference to Watts as a 'spiritual person'. I would never call myself that without reason. In a recent essay by Watts he made it clear why he wouldn't call himself that either.

I say things like Watts does in his videos and writings when discussing life and life problems. I try and find a more global view of our lives than that which you get from talking about your 'self' or your 'mind'. Now if you read just a tiny bit of science you will quickly understand what the problem is with all of this reference to a 'self' that we are obsessed with. Analytically it fails to obtain.

Another element of my Watts-bred spirituality is that I am obsessed with life's details. The more shit I notice around me and in me the happier I am. I wallow in sensation and conceptual scientific detail like a pig in mud. Drop me a little acid or mushrooms and all the better. I practice presence in my life, as a spiritual practice, by immersing myself in sensory input of all kinds. When I am troubled I go into the woods and 'feel' and repeatedly tell my think-brain to fuck off. I solve a surprising number of emotional and mental health issues by simply not thinking about them.

To summarize, jamest saw somehting in Watt's that prompted him to the label 'spiritual person'. I needed to point out, and he just agreed with me above, that this does not have anything to do with a 'spiritual belief'.

Thanks for asking! :thumbup:
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#14  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 5:26 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:Well that's about as wibbly a definition as you can get. Can apply to literally every human being on the planet.

I find the term usually gets trotted out to pacify theists without having to overtly agree with anything they're saying.

It pretty much does apply to everyone by degree. That's the beauty of it. That is also why these fucking religious idiots are so dangerous. They take something all too human, something everyone can relate to, but hardly anyone can put into words, and they splatter ti with dogma-shit until it fleshes out to full-blown belief in one kind or another of bullshit. Cults and churches are born of this.

So what I did was to go learn a fuck-ton of various science fact and I fleshed out a deep belief in spirituality from a purely material world-view. I am really happy about this world-view I carry about. Best thing ever is that it never starts to shake and totter when I read some new thing about the physical basis of 'mind'. How wonderful it is to walk in the modern world fully vested in current fact and still reap all that feel-goodness from religion. I reap, or rather rape religion! Suck the sap right out of it and leave it's burned out shell of believicles like a dead rodent, still twitching in the toilet bowl. Then we flush.
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#15  Postby SpeedOfSound » Nov 03, 2017 5:28 pm

jamest wrote:
SpeedOfSound wrote:
jamest wrote:I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).

Get me an exact quote from him and we will take a look at your 'theory'.

I am a 'spiritual person'. Trained by watts and I am a solid atheist. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

Well buddhists aren't really theists and he does refer a lot to Buddhism, so I can see how you might have reached that conclusion; though it does seem to me as though you've cherry-picked his ideas in orer to get there. I've seen quite a lot of the those youtube clips of his and he makes references to all of the religions, not least 'God'. Of course, it's not easy from memory to refer to exact moments of particular clips and provide exact statements to unhinge you, so for the moment I'll pass on your challenge.


Watts makes it very clear that all religion is about something that is all too human. He uses all sorts of christian myth and metaphor to make the point that it is deeply human psychology. If you read further you will catch him laughing his ass off at some of this.
"Daddy, why did god make YEC's?"
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 31964
Age: 66
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Philosoblog

#16  Postby The_Metatron » Nov 03, 2017 5:49 pm

SpeedOfSound wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
SpeedOfSound wrote:
jamest wrote:I've been listening to many of Watts' ideas on youtube this year (I watched two sessions yesterday, as it happens). I'm no expert, but he's undoubtedly a theist of sorts, certainly a spiritual person. So, cease with that particular insanity (that he's an atheist).

Get me an exact quote from him and we will take a look at your 'theory'.

I am a 'spiritual person'. Trained by watts and I am a solid atheist. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

I am curious what that means to you, “spiritual person”.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk

It was in response to a reference to Watts as a 'spiritual person'. I would never call myself that without reason. In a recent essay by Watts he made it clear why he wouldn't call himself that either.

I say things like Watts does in his videos and writings when discussing life and life problems. I try and find a more global view of our lives than that which you get from talking about your 'self' or your 'mind'. Now if you read just a tiny bit of science you will quickly understand what the problem is with all of this reference to a 'self' that we are obsessed with. Analytically it fails to obtain.

Another element of my Watts-bred spirituality is that I am obsessed with life's details. The more shit I notice around me and in me the happier I am. I wallow in sensation and conceptual scientific detail like a pig in mud. Drop me a little acid or mushrooms and all the better. I practice presence in my life, as a spiritual practice, by immersing myself in sensory input of all kinds. When I am troubled I go into the woods and 'feel' and repeatedly tell my think-brain to fuck off. I solve a surprising number of emotional and mental health issues by simply not thinking about them.

To summarize, jamest saw somehting in Watt's that prompted him to the label 'spiritual person'. I needed to point out, and he just agreed with me above, that this does not have anything to do with a 'spiritual belief'.

Thanks for asking! :thumbup:

Thanks for clarifying.

I didn’t think it a particularly good word choice, based on the root of the word. But, I offer no better.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk
My new website is up. Who wants to be a contributor?

I AM Skepdickus!

https://www.skepdick.us/blog/
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 19561
Age: 54
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#17  Postby jamest » Nov 03, 2017 6:15 pm

jamest wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
I am curious what that means to you, “spiritual person”.


I think it's a reference to someone who regularly thinks about stuff/experience in order to 'grow' as an individual. They don't necessarily have to be a theist.

...
SafeAsMilk wrote:Well that's about as wibbly a definition as you can get. Can apply to literally every human being on the planet.

Really? You think that nearly everyone on the planet regularly contemplates life with the purpose of finding inner peace etc.?
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16300
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#18  Postby SafeAsMilk » Nov 03, 2017 6:47 pm

jamest wrote:
jamest wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
I am curious what that means to you, “spiritual person”.


I think it's a reference to someone who regularly thinks about stuff/experience in order to 'grow' as an individual. They don't necessarily have to be a theist.

...
SafeAsMilk wrote:Well that's about as wibbly a definition as you can get. Can apply to literally every human being on the planet.

Really? You think that nearly everyone on the planet regularly contemplates life with the purpose of finding inner peace etc.?

You didn't say "with the purpose of finding inner peace", you said "in order to 'grow' as an individual" which yes, I think pretty much everyone does. I challenge you to find someone that says they don't.
Yes, a mighty hot dog is our Lord!
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 10834
Age: 37
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#19  Postby jamest » Nov 03, 2017 7:41 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:
jamest wrote:
Really? You think that nearly everyone on the planet regularly contemplates life with the purpose of finding inner peace etc.?

You didn't say "with the purpose of finding inner peace", you said "in order to 'grow' as an individual" which yes, I think pretty much everyone does. I challenge you to find someone that says they don't.

Well, to grow as a person surely encapsulates a search for general inner peace, which is no easy task - forcing as it does the seeker thereof to address their fears and anger and any other negative emotions which might be stunting their inner-growth.

One key word I used was 'regularly' and though I'll grant that most people sometimes have pondered life's deeper questions (or have occasionally read books from such authors as Watts - or even philosophy books) with a view to finding a more rewarding perspective, I don't think that most of us do this much of the time (which isn't to say that you personally don't).

In my experience most people are too deeply involved with the intricacies of their everyday material lives : work and/or studies; chores; kids; bills; repairs; entertainment; relationships; sex; sleep; physical exercise - few probably even have the time to do so. Even if they do, they'll use that time to organise and/or worry about said lives instead of seeking to forge a better perspective/attitude in the face of it all.

So, no, in my experience most people are not spiritual wrt the aforementioned informal definition.
Last edited by jamest on Nov 03, 2017 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
They came, they saw, they concurred.
User avatar
jamest
 
Posts: 16300
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Philosoblog

#20  Postby Thommo » Nov 03, 2017 7:56 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:
jamest wrote:
jamest wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
I am curious what that means to you, “spiritual person”.


I think it's a reference to someone who regularly thinks about stuff/experience in order to 'grow' as an individual. They don't necessarily have to be a theist.

...
SafeAsMilk wrote:Well that's about as wibbly a definition as you can get. Can apply to literally every human being on the planet.

Really? You think that nearly everyone on the planet regularly contemplates life with the purpose of finding inner peace etc.?

You didn't say "with the purpose of finding inner peace", you said "in order to 'grow' as an individual" which yes, I think pretty much everyone does. I challenge you to find someone that says they don't.


Good luck.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 21939

Print view this post

Next

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 2 guests