Philosophy - Theosophy.Net2024-03-28T14:59:50Zhttps://theosophy.net/forum/categories/philosophy-1/listForCategory?categoryId=3055387%3ACategory%3A39&feed=yes&xn_auth=noThe Thinker of Thy Thoughtstag:theosophy.net,2014-03-06:3055387:Topic:1352312014-03-06T15:27:28.822ZSeth Edwardshttps://theosophy.net/profile/SethEdwards
<p>The Seer of thy sight thou shalt not see; the Hearer of thy ear thou shalt not hear; the Thinker of thy thoughts thou shall not think; the Knower of thy knowledge thou shalt not know- this is thy Real Self, all-pervading, everything besides is but mortal.</p>
<p style="text-align: right;">-Brhadaranyakopanishad</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">What could be more pertinent than understanding that all-pervading Something alluded to in the quote? What could be a matter of more consequence?…</p>
<p>The Seer of thy sight thou shalt not see; the Hearer of thy ear thou shalt not hear; the Thinker of thy thoughts thou shall not think; the Knower of thy knowledge thou shalt not know- this is thy Real Self, all-pervading, everything besides is but mortal.</p>
<p style="text-align: right;">-Brhadaranyakopanishad</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">What could be more pertinent than understanding that all-pervading Something alluded to in the quote? What could be a matter of more consequence? Basic necessities aside, what could have a greater impact on our quality of life? It seem so clear to me that all of our problems stem from ignorance of what that Something is. Is this wishful thinking on my part, or is it routed in reality?</p> Naive or Logical?tag:theosophy.net,2014-02-09:3055387:Topic:1347322014-02-09T14:07:50.271ZSeth Edwardshttps://theosophy.net/profile/SethEdwards
<p>I like my view of humanity, even if most will think me naive for it. I think its logical. <br></br><br></br>In my eyes, everyone is simply doing the best they can with the information they possess. Those who make “evil” or “wrong” decisions either don't understand what they're doing, don't see how much they hurt themselves by hurting others, or don't yet grasp how infinitely more rewarding and satisfying it is to<span class="text_exposed_show"> do the right thing over the wrong. But in time, they'll…</span></p>
<p>I like my view of humanity, even if most will think me naive for it. I think its logical. <br/><br/>In my eyes, everyone is simply doing the best they can with the information they possess. Those who make “evil” or “wrong” decisions either don't understand what they're doing, don't see how much they hurt themselves by hurting others, or don't yet grasp how infinitely more rewarding and satisfying it is to<span class="text_exposed_show"> do the right thing over the wrong. But in time, they'll figure it out. Experience will show we are not punished for our actions, but by them. Its all just a matter of having the right knowledge on hand at the right moment. And if we are all simply doing the best we can with the information we possess, how can we blame another for something they just don't know?</span></p> Meta-Informationtag:theosophy.net,2014-01-12:3055387:Topic:1326032014-01-12T07:11:54.782ZDavid Allenhttps://theosophy.net/profile/DavidAllen
<p>Information on information, something I have been trying to think about for some time now. I have run into some really interesting concepts. I will attempt to describe some of it and see what anyone else has to say.</p>
<p><br></br> Informational Structures<br></br> Everything that exist can be looked at as an informational structure, a string or chain of information put together in a specific way that results in that specific thing. A change in the string of information changes the result and you…</p>
<p>Information on information, something I have been trying to think about for some time now. I have run into some really interesting concepts. I will attempt to describe some of it and see what anyone else has to say.</p>
<p><br/> Informational Structures<br/> Everything that exist can be looked at as an informational structure, a string or chain of information put together in a specific way that results in that specific thing. A change in the string of information changes the result and you end up with a different specific thing. The closer to the start of the string of information change occurs, the bigger the change in the result.<br/> If everything can indeed be seen as an informational structure, then where does the information come from? My line of thought is this. If the universe can be looked at as an informational structure, then the information must have existed before the universe.<br/> Wouldn’t that make information a constant within the universe. We may be able to rearrange the information to get different results, but can we “create” or bring new information into the universe? My assumption to this point is that we cannot.<br/> Science tells us that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted. Is it the underlying information that cannot be created or destroyed? It seems pretty clear to me that the arrangement of the underlying information is how the energy is converted.<br/> I hope that is enough to get a discussion going.</p> Spirituality Undefinedtag:theosophy.net,2013-12-07:3055387:Topic:1322102013-12-07T07:21:37.460ZPuzzleSolverhttps://theosophy.net/profile/PuzzleSolver
<p>Does spirituality have a definition? </p>
<p>I don't think at this point in time it actually does (not anything set in stone anyway).</p>
<p>Why is that? There are so many theories that bring up what it 'could be' but not often do we understand what it actually is. Is this because spirituality is entirely subjective? Does spirituality have to do with religion or the self? Are there levels to spirituality and who defines them?<br></br> Is the monk that spends all his time in prayer more…</p>
<p>Does spirituality have a definition? </p>
<p>I don't think at this point in time it actually does (not anything set in stone anyway).</p>
<p>Why is that? There are so many theories that bring up what it 'could be' but not often do we understand what it actually is. Is this because spirituality is entirely subjective? Does spirituality have to do with religion or the self? Are there levels to spirituality and who defines them?<br/> Is the monk that spends all his time in prayer more spiritual than the man or woman who acts and stays within his moral beliefs and understanding of self? Is the man or woman who meditates a spiritual person, what about the church goer that holds strict code to dogmas or memes? What of the person without spirituality, are they still spiritual in a sense of ignoring it's possibilities?</p>
<p>Can spirituality be defined by what a person does or what a person is or is it something bigger than the person and their mind?</p>
<p>I'm sure everyone can come up with an opinion on what spirituality is... some don't know what it is and can only express a feeling, some can't put 'spirituality' into words either, it's just something they know.</p>
<p>Here's a disturbing find... I typed "<a href="https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS560US560&espv=210&es_sm=122&q=what+is+spirituality&oq=what+is+spi&gs_l=serp.3.0.0i67j0l9.43899.45506.0.46598.11.10.0.1.1.1.125.1013.6j4.10.0....0...1c.1.32.serp..1.10.905.LRFVW5DgN5o" target="_blank">What is spirituality</a>" into Google search, and the top definition that came up was from Princeton's definition: "<span>spirituality: property or income owned by a church"... interesting</span></p>
<p><span>I like what commentary Dr. Colliford had to say, that "<span>It is not ideal to consider sprituality</span><span> as a thing, an object. It does not have the nature</span><span> of a specimen that can be dissected and analysed. Spirituality is better thought of as a boundary-less dimension of human experience. As such, it must be admitted, it is not open to the normal methodologies of scientific investigation. It cannot completely be defined. It cannot be pinned down. So... What are we to do?"</span></span></p>
<p><span><span>No need for a response if it's difficult to articulate, but it's always worth a really good think session.</span></span></p>
<p><strong>I'm sure it's easier to accumulate thoughts of what isn't spirituality..</strong></p>
<p><strong>but what is spirituality to you?</strong></p> Are the facts relevent to the truth or vice versa?tag:theosophy.net,2013-10-02:3055387:Topic:1305432013-10-02T21:39:19.612ZPaul lee Jameshttps://theosophy.net/profile/PaulleeJames
<p>The first question to this statement is"what's truth"? Then there's the opinion which might be true and them again not true. How can one be a fence rider all the time? Either it's true or not, by the facts, but lawyers and judges make mistakes to. The words observation and experience come to mind. The older I get the more I believe these two words. A theory or hypothesus is both observational and a scientific method to finding a fact that fits the truth or vice versa.</p>
<p></p>
<p>"The sun…</p>
<p>The first question to this statement is"what's truth"? Then there's the opinion which might be true and them again not true. How can one be a fence rider all the time? Either it's true or not, by the facts, but lawyers and judges make mistakes to. The words observation and experience come to mind. The older I get the more I believe these two words. A theory or hypothesus is both observational and a scientific method to finding a fact that fits the truth or vice versa.</p>
<p></p>
<p>"The sun is yellow except to a color blined person". If a person is deaf, why am I talking to them? Why did I just stuff myself after I said I would not over eat? Is the question relevent to the answer or vice versa? Paul</p> Philosophy the number one discipline.tag:theosophy.net,2013-10-01:3055387:Topic:1304662013-10-01T08:09:33.423ZPaul lee Jameshttps://theosophy.net/profile/PaulleeJames
<p><strong>Philosophy to me is the general knowledge of all the disciplines known. There has to be a starting place to introduce the beginning of anything, that will bring us knowledge and philosophy. The the general description of the first knowledge is broken down into sub units like psychology and anthropology and the like. But philosophy seems to have a human point of view without esortoric knowledge. </strong></p>
<p><strong>There are mysteries in and of all disciplines and knowledge. One…</strong></p>
<p><strong>Philosophy to me is the general knowledge of all the disciplines known. There has to be a starting place to introduce the beginning of anything, that will bring us knowledge and philosophy. The the general description of the first knowledge is broken down into sub units like psychology and anthropology and the like. But philosophy seems to have a human point of view without esortoric knowledge. </strong></p>
<p><strong>There are mysteries in and of all disciplines and knowledge. One has to start somewhere and it seems philosophy is it. Philosophy is like the <strong>infinite </strong>universe and is filled with mysteries to be discovered. But after a while studying can be tendious and questions evolve more and more. I wonder if our questions deter us from the original thought we had leading us to invalid questions? </strong></p>
<p><strong>Be it science or whatever. Where does knowledge begin, with our interest and curiosity. If knowledge is the building blocks of the future would'nt it be more practical to learn how to structure the original question to be understood without questions first? Does our opinion cause us to invalidate our methods of inquiry in the first place?</strong></p>
<p><strong>Would'nt it be better to pose several words as tags or pointers to help us design a better way to discover valid facts from invalid facts within the question? For instants, how does the knowledge of Quatum mechanics teach us more or less of what we need to know science wise? What about the humanity aspect of finding the answers to curing all diseases, pollution,wars, instead of asking what is quatum mechanics? </strong></p>
<p><strong>Do these questions lead us toward a answer or away from them? Paul</strong></p> Am I mistaken on judging philosophy?tag:theosophy.net,2013-09-27:3055387:Topic:1305272013-09-27T13:41:38.486ZPaul lee Jameshttps://theosophy.net/profile/PaulleeJames
<p>Am I to believe that philosophy is directed toward humanistic dicipline? Have I misjudged it? In trying to understand the different disciplines in people I seek valid truth from knowledge. Yet esortic subjects have there mysteries.Wisdom which to me means understanding without doubt. Am I wrong in my belief?</p>
<p>Philosophy can be either be a individual belief or a group belief. But a individual belief might split the thoughts of a individual against the group and vice versa. Any…</p>
<p>Am I to believe that philosophy is directed toward humanistic dicipline? Have I misjudged it? In trying to understand the different disciplines in people I seek valid truth from knowledge. Yet esortic subjects have there mysteries.Wisdom which to me means understanding without doubt. Am I wrong in my belief?</p>
<p>Philosophy can be either be a individual belief or a group belief. But a individual belief might split the thoughts of a individual against the group and vice versa. Any discipline can be the same. Can ones opinion drive one away from the group they got there knowledge from?</p>
<p>It would seem I am bringing the word politics into this discussion with a retoric stand. Paul</p> The word perfect.tag:theosophy.net,2013-09-22:3055387:Topic:1302642013-09-22T22:38:56.805ZPaul lee Jameshttps://theosophy.net/profile/PaulleeJames
<p>The word itself must be a misnomer. Find me one person other than God that is perfect and does not make a mistake somehow, just one. But maybe there's hope for a better definition. Like I have overcome my anger, my emotions my wanting to be right (all the time). I bring up the word experience which leads to experiences.</p>
<p>Are we the same person we were ten years ago? Do we somehow change (our mind our ways our thoughts or our actions toward others from bad to good or vice versa? can we…</p>
<p>The word itself must be a misnomer. Find me one person other than God that is perfect and does not make a mistake somehow, just one. But maybe there's hope for a better definition. Like I have overcome my anger, my emotions my wanting to be right (all the time). I bring up the word experience which leads to experiences.</p>
<p>Are we the same person we were ten years ago? Do we somehow change (our mind our ways our thoughts or our actions toward others from bad to good or vice versa? can we learn from them and change for the better? We get aware of these actions then it our place to evaluate them (for the better)? I,ve seen and understand my past and corrected a lots of wrong attitudes because of my age and experiences. </p>
<p>I feel better for it. I was prejudice and bias againts prejudice and bias and injustice, before I heard the other sides story. There also has been a two sided coin, show me a one sided coin? I wonder how different I will think in ten years? Thoughts please? Paul</p> On my argument about free will.tag:theosophy.net,2013-09-11:3055387:Topic:1301162013-09-11T21:03:38.819ZPaul lee Jameshttps://theosophy.net/profile/PaulleeJames
<p><strong>I now believe the words (free will) is a (misnomer) in definition. Both words can be understood morally as opposed to ill-morally. These two words (question immediately the human free will). Humans have restraints within Justice/law/freedom/morals ill-morals/county laws/city laws/state/laws/government laws and world laws. I would suggust to whomever defined these two words would redefine them, but I have no clue how this would be done. Thoughts please. Paul</strong></p>
<p><strong>I now believe the words (free will) is a (misnomer) in definition. Both words can be understood morally as opposed to ill-morally. These two words (question immediately the human free will). Humans have restraints within Justice/law/freedom/morals ill-morals/county laws/city laws/state/laws/government laws and world laws. I would suggust to whomever defined these two words would redefine them, but I have no clue how this would be done. Thoughts please. Paul</strong></p> Free Willtag:theosophy.net,2013-09-06:3055387:Topic:1300202013-09-06T23:27:37.859ZPaul lee Jameshttps://theosophy.net/profile/PaulleeJames
<p>I believe in free will.There are some restraints on the words alone like morality and ill morality plus laws. Like do not walk on the grass sign. If I choose I will.People say we do not have no free will, I will entertain all arguments until I understand others arguments. One only has free will when one recognizes they have it and understand it.</p>
<p>One does not have the right to brake the law, unless justified by the law for whatever reason.How can two words have such impact on people…</p>
<p>I believe in free will.There are some restraints on the words alone like morality and ill morality plus laws. Like do not walk on the grass sign. If I choose I will.People say we do not have no free will, I will entertain all arguments until I understand others arguments. One only has free will when one recognizes they have it and understand it.</p>
<p>One does not have the right to brake the law, unless justified by the law for whatever reason.How can two words have such impact on people who swear we do not have free will within limits? Paul</p>