Thoughts

[hikersong]

Because looking at god is much better than looking at a magazine.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are no guarantees that the god you are "looking" at is going to be attractive to anyone else. There are some pretty unattractive sounding Gods around. Many of them I would happily substitute for a back issue of National Geographic.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Think about the experience you get from reading a magazine.. why do you do it? To gain a mild form of entertainment?

It depends on the magazine and the circumstances. It could be to find relief from boredom while waiting around. It could be, in the case of New Scientist, to use my mind and expand my horizons.

I disagree, incidentally, that peace is the most satisfying thing in life. Peace is nothing without joy. Even the satisfaction of mental curiosity -- of using one's mind -- is better.

God is far beyond that sort of satisfaction, but to experience it you need to recognize there is no physical pleasure that can compare to the experience of reality.

I'm not a hedonist looking for the highest satisfaction.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[sidhe]

Think about the experience you get from reading a magazine.. why do you do it? To gain a mild form of entertainment? God is far beyond that sort of satisfaction, but to experience it you need to recognize there is no physical pleasure that can compare to the experience of reality.

I read a magazine, generally, for educational purposes.

And physical pleasure is real. So is metaphysical/spiritual pleasure. Make no difference between one thing and its opposite. Monism ftw.

 

[Eudaimonist]

And physical pleasure is real. So is metaphysical/spiritual pleasure. Make no difference between one thing and its opposite.

And even if it were the case that one sort of pleasure was "better" in some sense than another, that would be not be reason not to have some of both. (Sorry for the double negative. )


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[sidhe]

And even if it were the case that one sort of pleasure was "better" in some sense than another, that would be not be reason not to have some of both. (Sorry for the double negative. )


eudaimonia,

Mark

Or, for another metaphor, how can you appreciate the sweet unless you've tasted the bitter?

 

[Eudaimonist]

Anyway, I very much doubt that activity is the enemy of life. Life itself is an activity, and stillness is like death... or sleep.

I'm not saying that it is wrong to be mentally still at times. Meditation has its benefits. But stillness is not a great ideal as a model for the good life. Mental activity is part of the richness of life too.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[hikersong]

Anyway, I very much doubt that activity is the enemy of life. Life itself is an activity, and stillness is like death... or sleep.

I'm not saying that it is wrong to be mentally still at times. Meditation has its benefits. But stillness is not a great ideal as a model for the good life. Mental activity is part of the richness of life too.

 

[Wicked Willow]

To be fair to Pure, I think what he was actually trying to describe was the New Age-y version of Buddhist mindfulness: an invitation to foster a sense of focused awareness, a clear perception of the present moment - as opposed to the rush of "normal" life, where I-pods not only drone out everything else, but also stand in the way of any social interaction.

Of course, it has been delivered in a fashion that follows the popular New Age logic of "self=ego=bad", which is an oversimplification.

My favourite mindfulness exercise is... eating an orange. No, really, you should try it!

 

[sidhe]

To be fair to Pure, I think what he was actually trying to describe was the New Age-y version of Buddhist mindfulness: an invitation to foster a sense of focused awareness, a clear perception of the present moment - as opposed to the rush of "normal" life, where I-pods not only drone out everything else, but also stand in the way of any social interaction.

Of course, it has been delivered in a fashion that follows the popular New Age logic of "self=ego=bad", which is an oversimplification.

My favourite mindfulness exercise is... eating an orange. No, really, you should try it!

I just like eating as a mindfulness exercise. I just had a pesto-prosciutto-mozzarella panini with a cup of crab bisque for lunch. Every bite was marvelous!

 

[hikersong]

My favourite mindfulness exercise is... eating an orange. No, really, you should try it!

Speaking of oranges, my younger boys have discovered a particularly annoying one that you would really want to get your stomach juices working on (you never meet people like this...especially not on forums ) :

YouTube - The Annoying Orange

There...don't you feel more peaceful now?

 

[Chesterton]

I just like eating as a mindfulness exercise. I just had a pesto-prosciutto-mozzarella panini with a cup of crab bisque for lunch. Every bite was marvelous!

But the marvelous-ness is gone forever now, right? I think what Pure is saying is that carpe diem is impossible and foolish; like trying to catch the wind. If that's what he's saying, I agree. You can enjoy a moment, but you can never have it. But peace of mind is possible, because it transcends moments.

 

[sidhe]

But the marvelous-ness is gone forever now, right? I think what Pure is saying is that carpe diem is impossible and foolish; like trying to catch the wind. If that's what he's saying, I agree. You can enjoy a moment, but you can never have it. But peace of mind is possible, because it transcends moments.

But it's not gone forever, because by being mindful during the process I can recall the experience. Memory is a powerful device.

By contrast, if the same sandwich was eaten without mindfulness or awareness of the experience, the moment is fleeting.

 

[hikersong]

B I think what Pure is saying is that carpe diem is impossible and foolish; like trying to catch the wind. If that's what he's saying, I agree. You can enjoy a moment, but you can never have it.

I've never understood Carpe Diem to mean that you can literally capture the moment. Simply that each moment is new and to be marvelled at. New opportunities to truly live arrive daily. It is speaking about an attitude of mind.

At least that's my take.

 

[jpcedotal]

hmmmm....dualism means the evil and good are equal and each side thinks itself is "good" and the other is "evil"....right?

 

[sidhe]

hmmmm....dualism means the evil and good are equal and each side thinks itself is "good" and the other is "evil"....right?

Not necessarily. "Dualism" is simply the division of things into two respective categories, "good" and "evil," "matter" and "spirit," "of divinity" and "of anti-divinity," with the understanding that there is no mixing or gray area between the two. They aren't necessarily equal, though it is generally assumed that each side sees itself as the "correct" side...though that may not even be the case.

 

[Eudaimonist]

To be fair to Pure, I think what he was actually trying to describe was the New Age-y version of Buddhist mindfulness: an invitation to foster a sense of focused awareness, a clear perception of the present moment

I'm familiar with mindfulness, and you are right that it may be a garbled presentation of that idea.

But perhaps I shouldn't comment, because I examined Zen Buddhism at one point and rejected it for its attitude towards "small mind". For me, a proper mindfulness requires a full mind -- literally a mind that is "full" of purposeful activity either enjoying that orange, reading a magazine... or deep in concentration inventing the Warp Drive. Basically, what Mihaly Csíkszentmihályi calls Flow.

Even meditating under a tree requires a full attention and engagement with that activity, even if externally it may appear to be no activity at all.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Wicked Willow]

But the marvelous-ness is gone forever now, right? I think what Pure is saying is that carpe diem is impossible and foolish; like trying to catch the wind. If that's what he's saying, I agree. You can enjoy a moment, but you can never have it. But peace of mind is possible, because it transcends moments.

Even moments transcend moments if you are in the right frame of mind. It just won't happen when you're gobbling down your fast food while hurrying to your next meeting and trying to remember what you were supposed to pick up at the supermarket after work.

Part of the problem is perceiving time in a strictly linear fashion, of course, basically always hurrying from a "has-been" towards a "not yet", and never actually stopping to be in the "NOW".

 

[Pure760]

Most of you have misunderstood, this isnt about magazines! Finding god is well worth while for anyone, the problem is you think you know whats best for you.. Its like being in a video game or dream and wholeheartedly believing that it is real. To the mind of god choosing to experience this over him is rediculous, to him that would never be an option.

 

[Pure760]

oversimplification.

The very root, that is why it is so easily overlooked and difficult to attain. In reality its not difficult at all but we are now comfortable with difficulty.

 

[hikersong]

Most of you have misunderstood, this isnt about magazines!

Really?