Societal Change. A perspective from Tao De Ching

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
21

tentative

Yes. You are saying things similar to what Berkeley and so on have said- what everyone was saying in those days.  That's fine- but they were saying it about regular-old material reality.  What you and I agreed a moment ago to be objective- the observable. 

Here again, this doesn't seem to have exclusively to do with the transcendant- in fact, it looks as though you are specifically referring to the material world here.  Maybe I don't understand your position as well as I had thought. 

 Can you give me an example of something that you think can be objectively known? One thing I'm fairly certain of, is that you've agreed that [i]some things [/i] are objective, but I'm not at all clear which things.

No, actually I don't think it does at all.  If transcendent matters are objective but unknowable, then one needs an explanation (or at least a model) for how something objective can be unknowable- for on the surface, that seems unlikely to me at least.  
 If transcendant matters are truly subjective in themselves (have no fixed 'way they are',) then you don't have that problem- the transcendant is unknowable because you can't know something about which there are no facts.  But, there are other difficulties, which I tried to address in a previous thread in that case- firstly, is the idea of something with no particular 'way it is' even coherent, and second, what reason do we have to suppose there is such a thing?
22

Hi Nick,

You really know how to make friends, don’t you! But seeking conflict in this way at all costs doesn’t do what I wrote credit. Only in an afterthought you seem to address my meaning. I was saying that the condition around the Sage may be is uproar, but the Sage himself does not react to this, but remains (in himself) in the cosmic balance. This is because of the unity of the Sage with tao or the One, and the fact that this unity is the only source of peace.

Of course the message, when it is not hidden amongst sentimental gestures, is dynamic and dramatic. The idea of the Messiah bringing peace pretends that there is no need for a time of readjustment – something that is always painful. The movement of the “Way” brought about a sudden animosity where peace was expected. Christ does bring peace but not as the world gives. The force of compromise with evil was what he confronted in the Temple court, and was duly executed for it. It became apparent to his followers that this struggle had not ended.

The triumph of the cross, however, was not a victory of the sword, but quite the opposite. There was the inevitably division in families and in communities. It was no peace at any price and the Cross is the answer to the offer of compromise in world dominion. But it is dominion that we are speaking out against here too, only that we have moved on in history to find that the message of Christ is not exclusive to a particular church or creed, but that it finds its equal in many teachings, each of them corrupted in a similar way to Christianity.

Therefore, this attempt at peace is less concerned with emotionality, as with finding a means by which communication can bring forth this common wisdom.

Shalom

23

Hi Ucc,

I see what you’re getting at. Let me try again. Let’s agree that the material world has objective attributes. This isn’t to say that our constructs or models of the material world haven’t a strong element of subjectivity, but for the sake of keeping it simple for a moment. When I hit myself in the head with a hammer, I know objective reality. :stuck_out_tongue:

Actually, I mixed peas and carrots in an attempt to accomodate the possibility of an objective transcendent realm for the purpose of discussion. I have no model that would include metaphysical objectivity, but ever the agnostic, I simply cannot know and to rule out such a possibility is just as much an error as saying that there definitely is metaphysical objectivity.

This is true inside a logical construct, and definitely colors my pov, but there is a question (for me) behind this. It revolves around the limits of mind. Too few ever consider the question of the possibility of reality beyond the capacity of mind. Our ego wants us to believe that we can know EVERYTHING. I don’t believe that. Our powers of cognition aren’t quite as far reaching as many would like to believe. If one has read the dreaming butterfly question, it seems to put a proper perspective on the limitations of mind.

That said, we aren’t just a cognition machine. We also experience the affective world as well. As I said earlier, I have had those spiritual experiences that suggest something beyond cognition, and I’m convinced that those experiences were real, but have I proof to present you? No.
If I told you I had been abducted by a UFO and you could tell that I was utterly convinced of that, would you automatically start looking at the sky or would you reserve judgement wanting a bit more proof? That is the state of the metaphysical. We are more than capable of seeing patterns of order in the manifest or “objective” world that suggest “something”, but what that something may or may not be isn’t provable, no matter how strong our personal experience has been.

I can’t speak for others, but this is the core of my agnosticism. I refuse to take the foolish position of saying this is, or this is not, when I have no way to verify my position to you, or to myself for that matter.

Perhaps I’m selling myself and others short. Perhaps our minds are capable of discerning and knowing EVERYTHING. I just don’t get a sense of that, and so all my “not knowing”, all of my talk of the ineffable, my refusal to accept others knowing for me, comes from this apriori assumption that reality is beyond our cognitive powers and any suggestion of knowing that which is transcendent is nothing more than ego talk.

24

Hi Bob

I don’t see it as either valuable or necessary to appear wonderful so as to avoid conflict . It may be good for getting laid but not for trying to develop the capacity for “understanding” We must not have to rely on it. The ideas and the reality of the human condition are just too important for that. This lie is fine in the sand box where babies are playing nice but the sadness of the human condition and the horrors it inevitably leads to are not all that wonderful so may require something a bit more genuine than dreaming and playing nice in the sand box. If I am not “shocking” it is just the same ol same ol.

Everything is in cosmic balance. The most horrible war is in cosmic balance and true justice. It is karmic. Everything is connected and one result leads to another in the direction of cosmic balance but never gets there. It is the intent and nature of the interaction of universal laws necessary to keep the universe going… Both the sage and the turtle are part of the ever changing movement towards cosmic balance.

I believe that conscious man, a true sage, has a high degree of inner unity: “I am” It is this that allows him to witness these, for us, just, but horrors of cosmic balance. This is why Jesus taught to forgive them for they know not what they do. Due to karmic conditions of balance we live in a madhouse that by established cosmic balance minus some powerful shock, will remain as it is. It can only be escaped from through the conscious experience of it for what it is and an individual becomes more than a turtle and serves a conscious purpose worthy of the name Man… But before the inner peace is possible, one must go through their personal Armageddon. How many are willing? La la land and the status quo maintained by adjusting in blindness to the madhouse and its cycles that give the illusion of progress and this sleep appears more satisfying.

Yes dear woman you understood to the degree of actually having the courage to live your life in accordance with this truth and experienced hell. For whatever it is worth, on your birthday Feb. 3rd, I will always send appreciative thoughts in your direction.

If you recall Jesus taught this to Peter

The meaning of the cross IMO is re-birth. Any attempts to make it secondary to a secular goal, regardless of how well intentioned, destroys its essential meaning and value for humanity.

The only common wisdom of meaningful value would be for humanity to collectively see its nothingness and what is lost by denying the reality of the human condition. It is not possible for humanity, especially now, for karmic reasons. The possibilities lie with individuals who can begin to become conscious of it and are willing to see and experience hell… Hopefully, there will be a sufficient hidden minority having the need and will to become conscious to some degree. I believe their mediating karmic influence will be essential in the future for our survival as a species. But the “Great Beast” is strong in its denial against such an influence. Who knows how it will turn out.

25

Nick, with this attitude and this kind of rhetoric, I cannot consider you a serious partner in discussion. You have either never learnt to be civil, or you are so disdainful that you discard it. So forget it. As often as I have tried to start conversations with you, your need to be “shocking” just gets in the way, so that you can’t even complete sentences without playing the same old game over and over. You are just not worth my time.

Shalom

26

Quite true Bob. I’ve learned the value and importance of honesty and the removal of rose colored glasses. The sad part is that we’ve allowed ourselves and our sensibilities to degenerate to such a degree that just normal concern for the realities of the human condition are considered shocking. It is not PC to open your eyes to the obvious but rather just concern yourself with selective morality. It is easier to say “wonderful” things back and forth. That may be your way. Real people share truths. They are not tied to political correctness and “wonderful” thoughts so as not to become upset by the reality of the human condition…

27

Nick, It is true that real people share truths - their own, and not just a collection of quotes. You love to talk of PC attitudes and all your obvious disdain for those who rebuff you as being lost in la la land.

For some reason, you have decided that anyone who disagrees with you is only interested in ‘wonderfulness’ talk, and you make your pronouncements without the slightest idea of anyone’s experiences other than your own. You, and your VAST experience is the only determining factor in your judgement of others. You have no idea of honesty other than your own. If anyone is wearing rose colored glasses, it is you. You talk boldly of the reality of the human condition, as if you really know. I, and many others have seen “human reality” up close and personal. I’ve seen hell and I have no illusions. Bob deals with the darker side of “human reality” on a day to day basis. Your pompous knowing for everone but yourself is obvious. You ring hollow, Nick.

28

JT

There is an essential psychology that you cannot sneak around. You said to Ned

To which I responded:

Of course I knew that would never happen nor should it on a board with this intent. However the point is that you defend your right to be annoyed or insulted. Bob just defends his right to be annoyed or insulted… Why do you think the traditions speak of the value of not allowing yourself to wallow in insult? It is because it holds you back. On my path it is said that the cause of insult is in me and I can never blame someone else. I know this to be true.

Topics like the antichrist have been watered down to nothing. People think that the teaching of the antichrist is nasty. It isn’t and speaks of world peace and the like but everything is on an earthly level satisfying the needs of the "Great Beast"of Revelations to further its hold on Man. It denies the message of the Christ which is re-birth. This is what I was trying to communicate to Bob. A person can have all the good intentions in the world and from a Christian perspective, be supporting the antichrist teachings. Of course it is rough to take but a person that cares will do so even at the expense of our own vanity. Tough to take ideas must be pondered rather than discarded in fits of emotion. As time goes by the potency of the Christian message is gradually lost and then it becomes completely secular denying man his lawful possibilities until the next descent from above. This is rough stuff and cannot be treated as cutsey pooh.

These ideas cannot be discussed in a PC manner. They need hard truth. For those that insist on their right of insult, it is better to just avoid these things but real conversation knows how to profit from the awareness of its existence of these attachments to insult and hold on people including all of us…

I’m not defending nasty ridicule which serves no purpose and which I’ve spoken against but I am defending honesty and defy either of you to show where this has not been the case with me. I believe all the points I’ve expressed. If it is not considered wonderful enough, so be it but I will continue to be truthful at the expense of being considered horribly politically incorrect. In this day and age it is about time that more begin to feel the value of shared honesty of the human condition rather than imagine ourselves gradually as a species into the gutter.

29

Nick,

Your choice to climb up on the cross has been made. It’s too bad that you cannot see what others are seeing. It isn’t so much about your ideas, because some of them have merit. It is in your absolute conviction that you are right and no one else could possibly see the truth as you perceive it. It’s all ego, Nick. It isn’t that your understanding is so profound, because it isn’t. That you think that others cannot have experienced their own moment of enlightenment and have found their own way says everything about you and nothing about them. But of course, you will deny this as well, and so the ego goes round and around…

You’re locked into a pattern of alienation because you refuse to allow any point of view but your own. I’m truly sorry. It is sad.

30

JT

I express the logic of them as I understand it and invite others to give their opinion. I am not dogmatically locked into a position. However, it is natural for a man to desire to understand. The need for the experience of meaning is essential for certain people and is the backbone of religion.

If one does not feel they are on the right path, then what is the sense of it? So of course I have my beliefs. But, as is said on my path, if you don’t have a critical mind you are not welcome here. There are enough slaves in the world. It needs some free people.

When have I ever said that people have not experienced their own moments? I just posted about the necessity of discussing with an open mind. Naturally I include me.

I’m pleased to know that you have determined that some of my ideas have merit. Why have I never claimed this expertise in the scope of your beliefs? Ah yes, as has been said to others, they are beyond their depth.

There are many paths that lead to the way but they can very easily be abused and it is nature’s way to struggle against these paths. It is curious that this simple caution can incur such resentment.

31

Only thing I don’t agree with, is the part of “nature’s way”. Perhaps just a word slip, but it seems more likely nature is well enough awares of the path, and the sliding is inherently the human failing.

32

Nature is machine that transforms materiality. Man on earth serves this purpose. Man unlike other oraganic life only part machine. Other part has potential for consciousness.

High quality of materiality necessary food for consciousness to begin to develop. Nature needs same materiality. It exists in other forms of subtle life like rain forests and coral reefs. We kill them off making nature’s job more difficult. Nature now even more compelled to take this subtle fine materiality from us for its purpose which starves our growth leaving it only to exist as imagination.

Nature against the way since it competes with nature for this high degree of fine materiality.

Individual that becomes aware is unimportant to nature. His conscious evolution in fact can in ways become beneficial for nature. So an individual is unimportant to nature. But if mankind became aware the machine would break down. Nature cannot allow it and humanity remains as it is with its primary purpose of feeding the earth and its domain through its life’s processes spanning the distance between dust to dust.

How you think and your lofty thoughts of the way are unimportant to nature. Her concern is for the quality of your shit.

33

There is no “my way”, you misinterpret, and you write as if you are inebriated.

Nature is a collective cognition, of which man once was, but is no longer.

Man is the machine, nature is the power … interdependent, but also, now independent.

The two are quite different.

Tao is not “lofty”, it will take the lowest position possible, so as to escape notice, which is why one must struggle against the complexity of humanity, to find return in the simplicity of the natural.

34

It’s a lost cause. If I respect people enough to be honest with them, they get angry and insulted. My stomach can only take being wonderful for so long and then it needs a break.

So I tried to write in a monotone to get out of the box and as a result I appear drunk. Actually it would be tempting but unfortunately now I only drink lightly. No justice.

I didn’t say “my way”" I meant the way. There are different paths that lead to the “way” that cater to different human types. While nature is mechanical reaction, the way is conscious action. Where nature serves an involutionary purpose, the Way is conscious evolution.

Nature is mechanical. It is a living machine. I agree that Man has dulled his senses and his psych has become so perverted that knowledge of this mechanics is completely distorted. However, man’s potential is consciousness. It is above nature’s cosmological level. Consciousness is natural for the next higher cosmos and man’s conscious potential begins there.

Good for hiding under the bed but not good for man. The struggle isn’t with the quirks of humanity but our attachment to them. You can avoid the effects of attachment by hiding under the bed or by becoming conscious of them and becoming a man. One must choose.

If you see the difference between these two perspectives, you will know what I am referring to.